Perhaps you could call it America paying their debt to humanity after their actions in the Cold War? *ducks**

If, as conventional wisdom infers, we pay Egypt $2 Billion a year to protect Israel from Egyptian attack, then the money is poorly spent. What sane person would spend money to protect their 180-pound dog from the threat of attack by a chicken? If the chicken were trying to stuff a bomb in the dog’s ear, does the dog need to ask permission to eliminate the recipient of “protection” money? Perhaps the “return on investment” satisfies the bureaucratic professionals at the un-elected government known as the State Department, but IMO, foreign aid should be a reward, not an “entitlement”.

"Perhaps you could call it America paying their debt to humanity after their actions in the Cold War?" Yup, the US is packed full of evil bastards.. it's amazing the world puts up with us ;-) Perhaps the UN should give us the boot.. Then North Korea could have our seat on the Security Council. Maybe if the UK goes with the US, since they are obviously just an evil American Poodle, their seat can go to Syria. Then the world be run by a bunch of countries that are really out to solve the Worlds problems instead of worrying about their own greedy self interest... I mean come on, Russia, China, France, North Korea, Syria.. Wow, a utopian world would be just around the corner.

Congradulations to the UN for being so diplomatic to the point that their diplomacy results in nothing 100% of the time.

Platypus - you are so wrong. From a UN standpoint, if you debate something long enough the problem will resolve itself without the UN actually having to do anything. The UN by that standard has close to 100% success ;-)

I thought those money was to relief human suffering and aid in the development of those countries. If you want to bribe them to hold the US over their own interests you would better open up your wallet some more, don't you think? Or are you mad because they don't sell themselves cheaper? I ask because I fail to see any connection between UN votes and humanitarian aid. Should there be one? /deuce

"I ask because I fail to see any connection between UN votes and humanitarian aid." If it was only humanitarian aid we were talking about, I'd probably agree. But there is a BIG difference between foriegn aid and humanitarian aid. Foreign aid, is when it comes down to it.. is a diplomatic way of saying "bribe". Foreign aid can constitute things like weapons and money that has no stipulations as to how it will be spent. So yeah, if we are bribing.. it would be nice if they stayed bribed ;-)

You do realise that India and the US were not exactly on the best of terms up until the late 90's. AFAIK, its not that most Indians have anything against Americans as such, but the US has always supported Pakistan until recently. And we probably vote the way Russia wants us to as repayment for the assistance they have given us over the years.

"...And we probably vote the way Russia wants us to as repayment for the assistance they have given us over the years" And we probably vote the way Russia wants us to in some cases as repayment.

"If you want to bribe them to hold the US over their own interests you would better open up your wallet some more, don't you think?" First, if they are interested in our money, logically they ought to be interested in what we are interested- mainly, maintaining our economic strength so that the flow of money isn't threatened. This isn't the case, only because we are an economic "commons", a resource available to all, without attendant responsibility on the part of the beneficiaries, and therefore abused. Second, If they are interested in our money, logically, they ought to be interested in maintaining a positive relationship that keeps us in the mood to continue that money. They are not, only because our patience and tolerance has proved near inexhaustible. Beggars, please note, tend to be polite, and they have good reason to be. Rude beggars eventually wear down the patience of the giver. Their behaviour is logical only so long as they don't perceive any real cost to their actions- angering the United States rarely results in corresponding reductions in American money handouts. The two should be linked- just as any person relying on a financial handout from another recognizes intuitively the value of staying on that person's good side. Sadly, this sort of intuition is sadly lacking in most of the world. They set their own ego-satiation and short term ambition above economic logic.