It is interesting to read articles on how the Obama administration, despite Egypt's lapse from "democracy", is continuing military aid. On one hand, that could be a good thing if the administration had realized that limited government is more important than exactly who is putting that government into place, and elected to support a republic.
Fat chance, of course. That leads to another question; exactly why have we been providing billions of dollars each year in military aid each year since the 1980s when any invader would either be (a) Israel (which has never fought an unprovoked war) or (b) forced to cross either the Red Sea or hundreds of miles of desert?
I can understand some foreign aid, especially as a "thank you" to Anwar Sadat for his peace treaty with Israel, but quite frankly I'm having trouble understanding why we've been arming a country whose only plausible enemy of note is also one of our allies, while ignoring their very real need for economic development. This is especially the case when I consider that poverty in Egypt might be the most likely driver for a renewed war with Israel.
Great, but. . . . - On the surface, this sounds like a positive development: Carol T. Christ, UC Berkeley’s 11th chancellor and the first woman to lead the nation’s top public...
50 minutes ago