Posted on 10/06/2005 12:43:29 AM PDT by FairOpinion
In a move meant to send a message to Uzbekistan, the Senate voted Wednesday to block the payment of $23 million for past use of an air base that the Uzbek government recently said will no longer host U.S. aircraft and troops. The legislation, approved by voice vote, was added to the $440 billion military spending bill for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1.
The House version of the spending bill does not include the prohibition, and lawmakers will have to work out their differences when the meet to write the final bill.
For nearly four years, the base has been an integral part of U.S. combat and humanitarian missions in Afghanistan. But in July, the Uzbek government in July invoked a provision an agreement that requires all U.S. forces to leave the Karshi-Khanabad base, often called K-2, by January.
Many interpreted that decision as payback for U.S. calls for an international investigation of the Uzbek government's response to violence in the city of Andijan last May that left civilians dead. The episode prompted human rights groups and others to criticize Uzbekistan's human rights record.
The Pentagon intended to pay the Uzbek government the money, prompting protests from senators who said it should be given to the Uzbek government only when it shows that it is again willing to work as a U.S. partner.
(Excerpt) Read more at signonsandiego.com ...
This is a bill for PAST use.
What message does this send to other countries, who may consider allowing us to have bases there, if we don't pay them what we owe?
I guess the Senate only has consideration for the terrorists.
Has the Uzbek government lived up to the original agreement ? If not then the payment should be refigured.
What's "the message"? "We don't pay our bills"?
The agreement had a provision, that allowed them to ask us to leave.
I don't like that either, but we still owe them "rent" or whatever for the use until we had to leave.
And the reason they asked us to leave, was that we criticized the Uzbek government, when they suppressed an Islamic revolution, which was trying to take over the country. We should have praised them, instead.
The agreement had a provision, that allowed them to ask us to leave.
I don't like that either, but we still owe them "rent" or whatever for the use until we had to leave.
And the reason they asked us to leave, was that we criticized the Uzbek government, when they suppressed an Islamic revolution, which was trying to take over the country. We should have praised them, instead.
What's "the message"? "We don't pay our bills"?
===
My point exactly.
The message is that it's not a good idea to be friends with us, because we kick our friends in the teeth, and cower in front of our enemies.
I'm just getting used to the media not putting out the full story, double that when it's from the AP.
What don't you like? That the agreement had a provision that allowed them to ask us to leave?
This is the Senate acting like ugly Americans. We used the base. We owe them the rent. This will just play into the hands of American haters. It may also lead the locals to seize US assets as payment for our debt.
Let them get money from their Red Chinese and Iranian friends.
No the message is that it's a really bad idea to turn around and betray the USA and join with our enemies, and if you do, you pretty much better start counting your remaining hours of life.
I voted to pay them before I voted not to pay them. John-I'm a hero-Kerry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.