Hacker Read

yyhhsj0521 · 2019-12-09 17:47:12

As long as the US does not pay monetarily for non-American deaths, as cruel as it sounds they are not relevant to the US's budget.

rconti | karma 11874 | avg karma 2.49 · | 2020-02-05 16:40:32+00:00

The US can afford it, too. We choose not to.

FpUser | karma 2811 | avg karma 0.61 · | 2020-05-08 02:12:31+00:00

Don't you worry, the US pays in kind.

bimr | karma 24 | avg karma 0.92 · | 2020-01-08 00:06:31+00:00

It's not for the benefit of the US

dahart | karma 17200 | avg karma 2.75 · | 2022-04-29 14:52:18

That doesn’t help US citizens.

biocomputation | karma 251 | avg karma 0.98 · | 2016-11-12 02:01:37+00:00

Sure, since it isn't going to an American anyway.

thecolorblue | karma 558 | avg karma 2.3 · | 2017-01-29 01:13:32

When people don't visit the US they don't spend their money in the US either.

stoppayingtheir | karma 2 | avg karma 1.0 · | 2022-10-19 07:47:14

The US should not pay their bills: they have plenty of money and don't do their own work. They beat migrant workers (for blasphemy and other illegal oppressive offenses), take their money, jack up the oil price (by as a cartel lowering not price but production rate), and then US soldiers guard their state company's oil fields.

Then: "Thou shalt not blaspheme the false, slaving God."

US/you: Let's provide free military support services to them.

When did they start using noninvasive BCI on US citizens?

If they do not respect the rights of all people - per the UNDHR - they should not receive military support from the US.

reply

FabHK | karma 14253 | avg karma 2.82 · | 2017-04-10 17:45:15

Note that what you're saying is very US-centric, and contingent (not necessary).

ddingus | karma 6068 | avg karma 1.19 · | 2019-11-19 00:59:40+00:00

Yup.

The US system is expensive and increasingly cruel.

I do not expect that state of affairs to endure too much longer.

reply

Bud | karma 9252 | avg karma 2.94 · | 2022-10-02 08:32:13

Huh? The US is not a "special case" in this way.

dhughes | karma 1160 | avg karma 1.34 · | 2012-01-29 17:54:56+00:00

No sir we don't want any money from the other 6.7 billion people outside the USA!

rodgerd | karma 6591 | avg karma 2.05 · | 2013-11-13 18:41:41

Not on US terms, it wouldn't be.

sanxiyn | karma 14687 | avg karma 3.61 · | 2021-01-09 23:36:45+00:00

It's a nice, zero-cost gesture US is unwilling to make.

gruez | karma 34333 | avg karma 2.33 · | 2021-04-13 23:01:49+00:00

It's not obvious? "The needs of america should come first. Don't spend money on those other countries, spend money on the US instead".

ryathal | karma 469 | avg karma 1.22 · | 2020-09-11 13:07:54+00:00

Any plan that relies on the U.S. shelling out unlimited money to other countries isn't a plan.

bdamm | karma 4946 | avg karma 2.29 · | 2014-08-01 23:16:29

While I agree that this strategy might work out well for the US, I'd like to point out that the US doesn't do this for any countries currently.

chrisweekly | karma 7226 | avg karma 2.17 · | 2020-09-08 06:34:34

Your comment is a tangent, but I feel compelled to point out that a US Secretary of State has an obligation to prioritize American lives over those of other countries' citizens.

tsotha | karma 4566 | avg karma 1.52 · | 2013-06-23 01:58:43

There aren't any countries that can afford to not give a shit about the US, but that's not the same thing as saying they need to buckle to every whim in Washington.

petschge | karma 2462 | avg karma 4.12 · | 2020-11-19 18:09:38+00:00

That the US (as of April 2020) does not take any part in.