I get it, wait, I don’t

I saw today that Senator Marco Rubio said that Rand Paul’s bill calling for a cessation of aid to Pakiston, Libya, and Egypt doesn’t make sense because we can’t lump all those countries together. We ought to keep sending some of them aid, so this bill should be voted down. We shouldn’t lump countries together. Rubio makes some sense, and he’s joined by Senator McCain in saying this isn’t a good bill.
I get it.
Wait, I don’t. Perhaps I don’t understand politics, or large scale government, or perhaps much of anything, but how does voting to cut off aid to these countries preclude either of these gentleman from introducing a new bill to give them back aid?
I like both Senator McCain and Senator Rubio. I like what they have to say often, but I find myself concerned here that they are unwilling to send a message to these countries and then based on the individual merits, vote for aid individually to each country. I think this is a mistake by both of them.
Right now, the latest numbers for 2012 show:

• Egypt - $1.5b
• Libya - $5.7mm
• Pakistan - $3.1b

Meanwhile, we voted to not spend $1B on veterans benefits because, well, we want to be fiscally responsible and reduce the deficit.
I get it.
Wait, I don’t. We want to reduce the deficit, an admirable decision in my opinion, but at the expense of veterans benefits not three countries that haven’t exactly been on the side of the US.
I know the GOP doesn’t like the veterans bill and wants changes. I think the Dems are wrong to not consider amendments or work out changes to the bill that can limit the addition it adds to the debt, but I also don’t understand voting to continue aid to foreign nations while not helping our soldiers.
I can make this reduce the deficit. Fuck those three countries and spend $1b on our veterans. We can then take the other $4.6+b and not spend it.