Cost of Iraq

[Jabberwocky]

Worth every penney (and life).

US SPENDING IN IRAQ

Spent & Approved War-Spending - Over $600 billion of US taxpayers' funds. President Bush is expected to request another $140 billion for 2008, which would bring the cumulative total to close to $750 billion.

U.S. Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion, in 2007

U.S. Daily Spending in Iraq - over $200 million, in 2007

Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.

Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings

Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported - $1.4 billion

 

[smurphy]

That's a lot of pork.

 

[Jabberwocky]

yeah, just a little. DTB is more outraged by the 100,000 that goes to Iowa farmers than the 1.4 BILLION in Haliburton overcharges though, because he is a "conservative."

 

[The Sponge]

I'll try this again. Has anyone have any info about where the oil profits are going? Can someone suggest they use this money instead of mine? Smurph could you imagine if this was Clinton abortion? Do you think Weasel and Dogs would have the same stay the course mentality?

 

[The Sponge]

yeah, just a little. DTB is more outraged by the 100,000 that goes to Iowa farmers than the 1.4 BILLION in Haliburton overcharges though, because he is a "conservative."

Jabb that is the game now for these pigeons like Dogs to buy. Every single penny from here on out is now for some reason accountable. They stole like thieves in the night and pissed away so much on this farce of a war but now when a 100 dollars is spent in this country all hell is gonna break loose. these no good picks are so anti american worker its pathetic. You just look at the trade deals they sign, outsourcing tax breaks (ludicrous), Manufacturing jobs just pissed away. These pricks just want to try to break the American family and make it rich or poor. Sadly just like Bin Laden said.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Dead on Sponge. They sold us out and played the "support our troops" patriotic jingo game all the way to the Dubai bank. But we just think that because we are freedom hating, terrorist loving libs.

 

[Chadman]

I'll try this again. Has anyone have any info about where the oil profits are going? Can someone suggest they use this money instead of mine? Smurph could you imagine if this was Clinton abortion? Do you think Weasel and Dogs would have the same stay the course mentality?

Believe the oil profits in large part are going to the international oil companies that "we" had a large part in making a part of the "new government" plan. Of course protecting those company interests are pretty important, too. Some things are really important for the people of Iraq...like international oil companies setting up shop there and taking profits out of the country. Plenty of time to figure out the little things like electricity, water, and um, a government.

 

[shamrock]

Sponge, don't you know anything? The oil is paying for the war effort.

 

[djv]

What oil. Dam pipes get blown up every week. Iraq has never got past 50% out put since we invaded.

 

[JCDunkDogs]

"Modern weapons take food from the hungry and shelter from the homeless." --General Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Our country spends more on defense than all of the other 18 members of NATO, plus China and Russia." --Senator Robert Byrd, WV

"Today, the US spends more on defense than on all other discretionary parts of the federal budget combined...$401.7 billion for 2005." --from the documentary film, "Why We Fight."

 

[gardenweasel]

a bit o.t., but did gwb discover a bunch of democrats in jamaica and the caymans?....i thought he only used hurricanes on his enemies.....

or maybe it`s just black people?...

yeah!!...ole w. the racist will get out the whupping-stick wherever there are uppity negroes in the world!

(the "new weasel" is just tryin` to fit in with my moonbat buds)

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

a good liberal anaylsis--comparing cost of war to virtually anything.

Since there was no boohooing over Afgan--haven't heard any bout cost of Korean War I can only assume its not the cost but this patricular war your at odds with.

Believe it or not--wars can be economically friendly in many aspects.

However your entitlements programs which far out weigh war and are coninueing and escalating--are non economically friendly --unless you can make us believe--penalizing the productive to benefit the dead beats (socialism) has its perks.

If so show me one socialist country that has flourished.:shrug:

 

[Agent 0659]

a good liberal anaylsis--comparing cost of war to virtually anything.:

A good Republican far right whacko with blinders on analysis, comparing number of troop deaths with murder rate in American cities.

 

[Chadman]

a good liberal anaylsis--comparing cost of war to virtually anything.

Since there was no boohooing over Afgan--haven't heard any bout cost of Korean War I can only assume its not the cost but this patricular war your at odds with.

Believe it or not--wars can be economically friendly in many aspects.

However your entitlements programs which far out weigh war and are coninueing and escalating--are non economically friendly --unless you can make us believe--penalizing the productive to benefit the dead beats (socialism) has its perks.

If so show me one socialist country that has flourished.:shrug:

I'd say you're correct when you say that most of us do "only" have a problem with THIS "patricular" war. I think most of us understand the reasoning behind most of the other ones, just not this one. So, kudos for that analysis.

Maybe you can show us how "penalizing the productive" has hurt them over the past few years...considering the ones you are so protective of are making a far larger percentage of the pie than ever before. Seems to me, they are getting along quite nicely in this penalizing system they have to endure...

 

[buddy]

(the "new weasel" is just tryin...

Rumor has it some were hopin' for a "new and improved weasel", but some say new is still better than old.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

In my opinion, the real cost of the war in Iraq is not only the number of dead and wounded on both sides but, the fact the we have taken our eye off the ball. As we all know, Iraq was a rather secular country and our real battle is with fundamentalist Islamic terrorists (and fundamentalist Christians). While our attention is diverted in this quagmire, I'm waiting for a nuke to go off in Kansas City.

Then Wayne and Gary will blame the liberals for not finishing the job in Iraq. And the corporate press instead of investigating like they should have done prior to Iraq will once again jump on the bandwagon. What the great uniter has done is set us up for the next terror attack to further polarize the radical elements of the east and west. I fear for my kid.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

A good Republican far right whacko with blinders on analysis, comparing number of troop deaths with murder rate in American cities.

---and just what you know about the military?

Like I said countless times before I'll takes my chances in Iraq--over a getto dwellers slum any day of the week.

These troops are volunteers---I know several of you here can't in your wildestest imagination figure why anyone would volunteer and think them to be insane--as the lion told Dorthy--"What they got that I ain't got,________!"

--now a bit from the liberal side--
--Amazing what some find out that actual go there--

Sens. Warner and Levin Travel to Iraq, Praise Surge Results
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293815,00.html

Baird sees need for longer U.S. role in Iraq
http://www.theolympian.com/news/story/192500.html

 

[Happy Hippo]

Believe it or not--wars can be economically friendly in many aspects.

However your entitlements programs which far out weigh war and are coninueing and escalating--are non economically friendly --unless you can make us believe--penalizing the productive to benefit the dead beats (socialism) has its perks.

I find this post rather ironic and comical. How can war be economically friendly when it kills so many people, especially non-volunteering innocent civilians? How is their economic well-being improved?

Yet helping people who have economic hardship through social programs is non-economically friendly. Why would we want to help the poor and sick and downcast - no, they could never do anything to possibly improve our society and be consumers and improve the economy. Penalizing the productive - didn't realize that having a 10,000 square foot house and living a life of luxury and excess, while having to give a little back was such a penalty.

If you have it, you should give it. If you need it, you should take it. People and life should be valued above money in any circumstance.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Hitler believed the Aryan race was superior to all others. He believed the Jews, blacks, eastern Europeans, and all other non-Aryans were the cause of all the world problems and convinced millions to follow him utilizing Christianity, nationalism, etc. Sound familiar?

American Fascists by Christopher Hitchens. A good read. We have God Bless America on our bumper stickers. Why not God Bless Everyone? Once again the great uniter.

Why do we show our tanks, guns and planes shooting the weapons and not their targets like the media did in Viet Nam? Liberal press? I think not Wayne. I call it the corporate press. As Lynn "the Witch" Cheney said "Who wants to see that stuff."

Yeah we don't want to see what our bombs do. Only when then land here will we want to do that. Only when it goes off in New York City, Kansas City or whereever you live will you want to see the results of Bush missing the mark.

HH, Wayne is absolutely correct. War is profitable. Think how much money has been made for American corporations as a result of the invasion, I repeat, invasion of Iraq.

Now think how much money would have been made had Bush done the right thing and not invaded Iraq and spent the money and good will the US had immediately after 9-11 rooting out Al Quida. He wouldn't of had the chest thumping, big boom, shock and awe fireworks display of a big war but he would have made the world safer by getting the terrorists. Would have been substance over form.

Nope. He's created more terrorists and let the real bad guys get away. One thing I've learned after Viet Nam and this debacle, is that it is always about the money. I know alot in the military still support this criminal. It's really hard sometimes to admit a mistake especially if you've been brainwashed into thinking that if you do admit it your a traitor. Thats in the top ten of evil things this administration has done.

Good post HH.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"I find this post rather ironic and comical. How can war be economically friendly when it kills so many people, especially non-volunteering innocent civilians? How is their economic well-being improved?"


HH
I can't ever remember seeing mortality as a factor in equating any economical data--I could be wrong--maybe you could enlighten me.

on civilian casualties--
No one likes them but but they re an unfortunate by product of war.

1st if anyone tried to avoid all civilian casulties --the enemy could assualt the other side carte blanc simply by setting up among clivilians with an invisible shield.
In addition as in many cases they could claim their own casualties were in fact civilians and have the press run with it and whose to know.

now lets get to the meat of the issue--its noble to have sympathy for civilians but not so just for political agenda.

This was demonstrated big time in Viet Nam era where we had same wailing from liberals on civilians casualities during war--but not a peep when the largest massacre of civilians in history came as a consequence of these same people orchestrating our withdrawal.

Now you tell me--if liberals intitiate another retreat and same likely thing accures--are you going to be chastising the liberal element for the deaths that follow as result ?

When your finished pondering that--give us a short dissertation on how civilians casualties in war or worse than civilians deaths via assasination and chemical weapons