Money watch: Perhaps U.S. needs a new measuring stick for aid

More than a few people have mentioned the folly of a recent decision to send millions of dollars overseas this week in the face of the looming budget crisis here at home.

This complaint is nothing new. It would not be the first time that the U.S. has offered aid to a nation that was less than a friend, but not quite a sworn enemy.

But today, let's just deal with the fact that we sent money at all -- and ignore the other implications of funding nations that seem less than interested in becoming U.S. allies we can trust.

There is a sequester. It is projected to cut significant military spending.

What is the rationale to sending money to anyone except those in the direst of circumstance?

For generations, the United States has handed out money to foreign governments like there is some free-flowing tap.

It would seem that this would be the perfect time to think first before we write yet another check.

And even if we were not facing a budget debacle, perhaps setting a higher standard for U.S. aid might not be such a bad idea.

Want to blow our citizens up? Spend much of your time calling Americans crooks, imperialists and infidels? OK, look elsewhere for aid.

Seems logical right?

Still need to prove that you are really an ally when it comes to military action and that you are not protecting our enemies while professing your allegiance to the alliance?

We will send the check when you do.

There is nothing wrong with providing aid in whatever form to those who need it.

But it is high time that the U.S. stops taking it on the chin as those who receive it do not live up to their end of the bargain.

This country is not an ATM and it has done its time in helping nations around the world. We should still want to do it, but a little respect should be in order.

Perhaps if it were not so easy to extract money from us, it would be appreciated a little more.

And if they do not like the terms, these nations can simply go look somewhere else.

Seems logical doesn't it?

Perhaps someone could explain it to Washington.

Published in Editorials on March 6, 2013 10:39 AM