Not a member? Sign-up today! Sign In
This story has mostly positive ratings. 76 votes / 4 sinks
The 3 Trillion Shopping Spree
Shopping – The occupation of Iraq will cost $3 trillion, America's most expensive conflict since WWII. Can YOU spend that money better? Here's your chance to go on a virtual $3 trillion shopping spree and prove it!
43)
Filter Comments ›
1 - 43 of 43 Comments by 20 members
Add Comment
Instead the neocons want to repeat this mess all over again on an even larger scale in Iran. What really should have been done with the money is a payment on the principal of the national debt. The only problem is it doesn't make sense to pay down debt with borrowed dollars. These people have ruined the future of this country, and for what? An idealogical cause? To prove they have been right all along despite all of the contrary evidence? A vote for McCain this fall is a vote for continuation of these policies.
The libs have listed all kinds of stuff & programs to spend this money that isn't there to begin with. Compliments to V.O.R. for using this nonexistent money to pay down the debt. A bit like dreaming about what you'd do with the money if you won the lottery.
These people may have saved this country.
What contrary evidence? My Monday morning quarterbacking also tells me we should have stayed out of Iraq. But what then would Al Queda and others be up to now if that scenario had happened? You think they would've folded their tents and gone back to the farms?
McCain will protect America and won't take any BS from those who would destroy us.
STOP WITH THIS NONSENSE ALREADY.
I know that by now, even you realize that Al-Qaeda was NOT in Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion.
Why do you keep repeating things that you know are not true?
The very definition of why America is in trouble, her own people! Republicans don't dream, they just borrow the money from China! Dems/"tax and spend" = surplus, Republicans/ "borrow and spend" = massive debt. Pretty simple equation, eh?
When Clinton left office there was a surplus, since that time the National Debt has tripled. Your boy and his administration have failed this country and all you can do is obfuscate. Pathetic, but what else should we expect?
But what then would Al Queda and others be up to now if that scenario had happened? You think they would've folded their tents and gone back to the farms?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually....YES.
IF we had stayed on target (Afghanistan) not only would we have COMPLETELY dismantled al Qaeda, but we surely would have caught OBL by this time AND ALL of his inner circle.
We also would have KEPT al Qaeda from entering Iraq since they would have NEVER gotten any footing.
And perhaps MOST importantly, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis wouldn't have been killed and/or homeless and/or unemployed. While at the same time the US would have been able to spend SOME of that money on highways, bridges, schools.
I can think of A LOT better use of that money AND the interest we are paying since we BORROWED it. The most absurd part of this whole thing is that THIS President not only DOESN'T RAISE TAXES (which has NEVER been done in this countries history in a time of war) the J@CK@$$ LOWERS taxes.
And yet there are STILL people that say he was right to do this and he history will look back at him as the best President ever.
God help us!
"But what then would Al Queda and others be up to now if that scenario had happened?"
That would depend on what type of pressure was actually put on the Taliban and al Queda dont-cha-think? Because they sure a hell were not operating out of Iraq. Nor were they getting any material support from Saddam either.
We didn't need to invade Iraq for our protection. We don't need someone who will follow the Bush Administrations' foolhearty policies in the Whitehouse.
You've got the Iran scenario all screwed up. A 1 week air strike campaign and no ground troops - if it happens. Cripple their nuke program (set it back a few years). Waiting will just eliminate the possibility because then Iran would send nukes to Israel and maybe the U.S.
That's where you (and your political allies) are completely insane! Are you actually saying that Iran will launch nukes on America or Israel! Again, that would be likely suicide for mankind and certainly for Iran. Did you even read my first post?
We do have missile defense capable of knocking down single warheads. We have spent well over a trillion dollars developing this at urging of Reagan. Was this money wasted? If Iran ever seriously threatened to launch we would vanquish them in a matter of minutes. Of course the consequences for the planet itself would be grave.
I don't mean to be insulting but it would seem that if people would just educate themselves, just a little bit, regarding the actual facts we would not be so divided as a nation.
For instance, we are not going to be invaded by an Islamo-Fascist army, no such entity exists.
We DON'T have a reliable anti-missile defense. Iran, if allowed to go on WILL have the capability to get through to Israel. I said maybe as far as the U.S. goes. Maybe we would intercapt a U.S. bound missile (if it isn't on a boat or in a suitcase). Maybe one would get through. Feel lucky? It only takes one. I don't see how we could prove where a missile came from or who launched it until it was too late.
I'm conservative, especially when it comes to spending money. You can't spend it on anything. The money doesn't exist. It is part of the national debt. If 3 trillion did magically appear it should only be rightfully spent to pay down the debt.
If you lived in a village at the time of Ghengis Khan or Atilla the Hun, you would have two basic choices before they came through. One would be to spend all your resources to defend your village, or do nothing except gather together all the valuables and food you could to offer them. The second option would likely have resulted in them taking it all and then killing everyone and burning down your village. The first option may have resulted in the same although you would have a slim chance they would go on to an easier target.
Today the Atillas of the world, if allowed to become powerful, would become a massive threat. The huge financial cost of bringing down the communist empire is an example of this kind of threat being thwarted.
STOP WITH THIS NONSENSE ALREADY
As you well know, the Iraqis DID NOT attack us. Your analogy to Atilla the Hun is just silly.
The 3 trillion dollars that Mr. Bush BORROWED from our children in order to finance the Iraq fiasco could have been borrowed for any of the other uses in the video that might have provided our childern with some value for their money.
LOL
You just continue the rant that libs love. How Much of the Defense budget was spent in upgrading the Equipment that Clinton gave us. Humvees were not armored until this conflict etc. How much is for normal pay and equipment for the military. How much is really just for the effort in Iraq. Keep in mind that would only be extra combat pay, weapons expended and replaced, travel expenses, etc. Somehow I think that 3 trillion is inflated as to just Iraq.
Libs like to lie. The bigger the better.
Um...the majority of that money is actually paying the non-millitary personnel and contract employees. They are making the lion's share of the money. Not repairs and restructure.
If you remember correctly, Bush had some time before we went to war. He had two years as a matter of fact to build up the millitary before he illegally invaded Iraq. He chose not to.
Remember Cheney in 2004 saying that you go to war with the army that you have, not the one that you want. That was while PARENTS of soldiers were paying to armor the cars their kids were driving around. It was parents of soldiers who were sending them body armor.
Get off your high horse. You are the one who is lying.
You are lying to yourself if you think that this war has been anything but a total disaster that we will never recover from.
How much is for normal pay and equipment for the military. How much is really just for the effort in Iraq. Keep in mind that would only be extra combat pay, weapons expended and replaced, travel expenses, etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How much is being paid to KBR..... to FEED the troops because they are in the war zone?....to supply water (which isn't being kept to military standards and making troops sick)?....to do laundry (at $100/bag)?.....to run supply convoys while moving EMPTY trucks since they get paid for EACH truck trip rather then for each job?
How much is being paid to Blackwater (at a rate of $1,000 PER PERSON PER DAY) to "protect" VIPS?
"How Much of the Defense budget was spent in upgrading the Equipment that Clinton gave us."
Clinton reduced the number of troops by the same number that the first Bush reduced them. The technological improvements during Clintons terms were massive and accounted for the immediate military successes in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the military successes in Bosnia and Kosovo where not a single soldier died. Gutted? Not a chance.
As for your claim about the HMMWV not being armored, it is of course false.
After Somalia, the military recognized a need for a more protected HMMWV and developed the M1114, an armored HMMWV to withstand small arms fire. The M1114 has been in limited production since 1996 and had seen limited use in the Balkans before deployment to the Middle East.
In response to the vulnerability of HMMWVs operating in Iraq, "Up-Armor" kits were designed and installed on M998 HMMWVs.
Just goes to show, you can't see beyond the end of your nose.
You illustrate my point. You wouldn't mind borrowing the 3 trillion (we don't have) for all kinds of BS wasteful, unsuccessful programs.
And you are incapable of understanding the analogy I gave. To you we are secure forever against evil outside forces. Vive United States empire.
But they are spending that 3 trillion dollars right now. It exists as debt. Therefore when we are now paying the interest on that debt from the illegal war, that is real money. When we finally have to pay back that money, it will be real then too.
Understand? That is your kids future that Bush spent to try and make his presidency special.
Your Hun referrence doesn't hold any water in this instance because Iraq and the Iraqi people never attacked our village. Saddam Hussein, as horrible a dictator as he was, was put in place by the US. He was trained by the US. And he never had ties to Al Quaeda.
It was Saudi Arabians in Afghanistan who attacked our village. But we could never attack them. For some reason, the "leader" of this country (Dick Cheney) decided to attack another sovreign nation unprovoked and then topple their government and occupy their country.
All at our expense.
IF (like Ghengis or Atilla) Iraq WERE ON IT'S WAY TO ATTACKING THE US then yes, I would have NEVER complained about this war.
Unfortunately, whether you believe it or NOT, Iraq was NOT on it's way to attack the US, had NO intention of attacking the US and frankly had no MEANS to attack the US.....and this Administration KNEW it and DIDN'T CARE. THIS President was more interested in making Saddam PAY for 'being mean to his Daddy'. THIS President was more interesting in 'one uping' his Dad because his Dad didn't have what it takes to get of Saddam when he had the chance.
Iraq is was not going to attack us. They were just a small part of the "Atilla" forces of the world. Maybe like a rest stop. Certainly you can't say they would have chosen the U.S. over terrorists as their friends and allies.
My point was to illustrate the choices we have. Being nice and friendly could work. Then again it may not. My guess is it wouldn't work against the intransigence of the anti American terrorists.
How about Sadaam's mean-ness to his people and the Kurds. That didn't count?
The American politics and military machine, may have been secretly highjacked. The highjakers are still fighting bandits, if you know what I mean.
The billions are not coming out of their pockets, until the stack market crashes. Then, they probably lose power and will become touchable, to answer for their actions and decisions.
Are you kidding. NORAD would know the origin of that missile as soon as it launched. And the response would be immediate.
And, no, we don't have a reliable defense system for multiple warheads but the test on single warheads have been reasonably successful. Again you miss the point. Iran is not going to launch unless they are threatened with extinction. Only as an absolute last resort. There is no changing the fact that nuclear weapons are purely defensive. Just like a rattlesnake's bite.
Absolutely amazing how much of our wealth Bush and his criminal gang have squandered. The video is a great way for feeble minds to grasp just how large a number 3 trillion is.
BTW folks, trying to reason with the likes of tired and colonoscopy is like trying to reason with the back end of the jacka**.
Add Comment
You must log in first to post a comment. Secure Signin
Not a member? Sign-up today!
Who voted on this story?
getbackerzoo
- TrueProgressive
dexlovex2
sunych
bushiesRbonkers
snowhite12
ilovegossip
zubman
- djn3nunez3
dcsterlin
dadesider
GHOSTWHOWALKS
- scharffman
mpind176
jeepndave
JohnQPublic
AntiNeoCon
Neophile
aust
wonkydonkey
Lifeoflava
berkeley
Dionys
GWHayduke
property
crespi
JessicaLaurie
jovial
I-LoveYou
daducha
hurr1
Dan and Jennifer
- doremeepr11
LudoTony
- quackpot
- sumitsrivastava
Bkumm
engineer
RussianThreats
- V.O.R.
mesodude
- BillSmythe
thinkingserious
fogowar
ChristineSm
iarthritis
walden3
- Anthony83691
GoldMaster
alamala
Who sunk this story?
Related Stories
Vote
About Propeller | Frequently Asked Questions | Help
© 2003-2008 Propeller. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Great Submission, I'd probably buy a hockey franchise and maybe a little world peace.