To influence the Middle East, why buy influence in Washington, when it's even cheaper to buy it directly in the Middle East?
One of the anomalies of modern history is how cheap it is to buy long term influence in Washington. America is a vastly wealthy country, but only a tiny fraction of its rich men bother to pay for the kind of institutions that can have long term effects on the direction of American policy.
The Exile ran a story pointing out how an ultra-corrupt American politician like Rep. Rep. Duke Cunningham is a penny ante thief, stealing a few million. Rep. Jefferson was found with $90,000 in his freezer. Hoo-boy. In contrast, quite a few Russian politicians, despite a tiny economy to leech from, have ended up with hundreds of millions or even billions.
But you can be a perfectly honest donor and buy influence legitimately by paying for a think tank or a magazine. Public policy intellectuals are cheap. I've visited the offices of the think tank with perhaps the most influence on global events in this decade, and, let me tell you, it looked pretty non-descript compared to the average third tier corporate law firm's office.
But, even leasing wonks to agitate to get the U.S. is to do what you want in the Middle East seems pretty expensive compared to going to the source. Right now, tens of millions of dollars are being spent in Washington to persuade the U.S. into a war with Iran or Syria to deal with the problem that Hezbollah is causing Israel. Such a war would no doubt cost the American taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars, So, the return on investment to the investors would be pretty high.
But the nutty thing is that the annual Iranian subsidy of Hezbollah, which we are constantly told is a world-historical crisis, turns out to be about $100 million.
For 28 years, the U.S. has paid Egypt $2 billion annually not to blunder into another war with Israel. This has been a good deal for all concerned, but it's pretty expensive because it's public. I would imagine you could rent most of the important people in Egypt for a lot less, if you did it surreptitiously with deposits in the right Swiss bank accounts.
Lebanon is a tiny country compared to Egypt with less than $4 million, which is why Iran's $100 million seems so vast to them.
Surely, the friends of Israel could outbid Iran for influence in Lebanon? There's always the problem of making sure the VIPs you buy stay bought, but the people who have the money to spend on this problem are often geniuses at structuring deals, so that doesn't seem insurmountable.
One of the anomalies of modern history is how cheap it is to buy long term influence in Washington. America is a vastly wealthy country, but only a tiny fraction of its rich men bother to pay for the kind of institutions that can have long term effects on the direction of American policy.
The Exile ran a story pointing out how an ultra-corrupt American politician like Rep. Rep. Duke Cunningham is a penny ante thief, stealing a few million. Rep. Jefferson was found with $90,000 in his freezer. Hoo-boy. In contrast, quite a few Russian politicians, despite a tiny economy to leech from, have ended up with hundreds of millions or even billions.
But you can be a perfectly honest donor and buy influence legitimately by paying for a think tank or a magazine. Public policy intellectuals are cheap. I've visited the offices of the think tank with perhaps the most influence on global events in this decade, and, let me tell you, it looked pretty non-descript compared to the average third tier corporate law firm's office.
But, even leasing wonks to agitate to get the U.S. is to do what you want in the Middle East seems pretty expensive compared to going to the source. Right now, tens of millions of dollars are being spent in Washington to persuade the U.S. into a war with Iran or Syria to deal with the problem that Hezbollah is causing Israel. Such a war would no doubt cost the American taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars, So, the return on investment to the investors would be pretty high.
But the nutty thing is that the annual Iranian subsidy of Hezbollah, which we are constantly told is a world-historical crisis, turns out to be about $100 million.
For 28 years, the U.S. has paid Egypt $2 billion annually not to blunder into another war with Israel. This has been a good deal for all concerned, but it's pretty expensive because it's public. I would imagine you could rent most of the important people in Egypt for a lot less, if you did it surreptitiously with deposits in the right Swiss bank accounts.
Lebanon is a tiny country compared to Egypt with less than $4 million, which is why Iran's $100 million seems so vast to them.
Surely, the friends of Israel could outbid Iran for influence in Lebanon? There's always the problem of making sure the VIPs you buy stay bought, but the people who have the money to spend on this problem are often geniuses at structuring deals, so that doesn't seem insurmountable.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated, at whim.