🚀 go-pugleaf

In ba.general Disgruntled Customer <nowhere@nowhow.com> wrote:
> Merlin Dorfman <dorfman@green.rahul.net> enscribed:

>>      The US and Israel (and the EU and Australia and Japan and etc.
>> etc. etc.) are not trying to overthrow the Palestinian government,
>> much less to "erase it from the map" in the words of Ahmedinijad,
>> but merely to encourage it to change its policy, specifically its
>> statement that Israel has no right to exist and the entire area
>> should be under Palestinian control.
>>      If you are asking whether I agree that the US should not have
>> invaded Iraq and should not be conducting an embargo against Cuba
>> with the objective of "regime change," yes, I agree with those
>> statements.

> Then do you think Europe, Australia, Japan, etc should stop loaning money to the U.S. (which like Palestine is not self-sufficient and depends on cash infusion from other countries to continue to function) until it changes its policies, regardless of what havoc that wreaks on your life?

     I'm not aware that Europe and Australia are lending money to
the US; it is mostly Japan and China.  Regardless, if any or all of
those countries should decide to stop loaning money to the US, or
stop trade with the US, or militarily embargo the US, well, first,
I would be surprised, and second, on a practical basis, it would do
more harm to those countries than to the US, because the US, despite
your uninformed opinion otherwise, is much more self-sufficient than
they are, e.g., the Chinese and Japanese economies would collapse
without exports to the US, whereas the US would be inconvenienced
without the billions of dollars of imports from China, it would not
collapse.
     I might also point out that there is a difference between
loaning money to the US (not a charity but a business decision that
it is the best use of surplus funds in terms of return, security,
etc.) and giving money to the PA that will never be seen again but
may help prevent (more) chaos in the Middle East.