But isn't that the case here? US didn't expect anything in return other than side effects of Europe being stronger (which was an advantage for them as well).
to enforce future battlefield so war could potentially be fought only far, far away and enemy would weaken itself, and US would benefit in similar fashion as from WWII... I am sure there were many aspects considered for Marshall plan, some could probably be called altruistic, but many could be called selfish.
>some could probably be called altruistic, but many could be called selfish
This is a zero-sum mentality in a sense. There are deals that benefit both sides, so there is no sense in selfish/altruistic dichotomy. One can be both "selfish" and "good" by pursuing positive-sum deals.
