Printable View
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/14/po...partner=GOOGLEQuote:
WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 — When President Bush informed the nation last Sunday night that remaining in Iraq next year will cost another $87 billion, many of those who will actually pay that bill were unable to watch. They had already been put to bed by their parents.
Whoa! Even accounting for a little exaggeration, this sounds expensive to me.
Can we remain a great power if we spend more money than we make?
:cool:
yeah.. I guess bush is thinking that we'll get that money back after we're in control of the oil. of course that money won't go into "OUR" hands..
Say what ! Declined as much in two years as the total revenue collected in 195 years. I suppose the cost of paying for the power that is demonstrated by the U.S. is an extremlyQuote:
The $8 trillion difference between those numbers has little precedent in American history. The long-term budget forecast has declined as much in the last two years as the total revenue collected by the United States government from 1789 to 1983.
costly excercise.
How much of theto stay in Iraq isQuote:
$4 billion a month
actually used to feed,supply,arm the troops? And how much of this is spent on buying information to be used in this war and the war on terror in general?
Being someone with limited knowledge, if any on American policies, I could only imagine at the amount of money that hasQuote:
"There's no question that annual federal deficits have been the only effective check on Congressional spending in the modern era"
been spent to enable the U.S. to become thethat it is.Quote:
great power
Wheels within wheels and all the double deals.
I do think that the U.S. has to be seen as the freedom provider for all oppressed and not so
fortunate people in the world, but it should also maintain a high standard of support and resources for its own people. I also think that without the support of certain countries who
should be helping, the American people will have to saccrifice certain benifits that they take
for granted.
I see it as an investment in the future of the survival of the "free" world, which is why so many
more countries should get off their asses and chip in instead of being seen as neutral. The sooner France, Germany, Russia, and all the other potential powers contribute to the ongoing
"war on terror" the sooner things around the world can progress toward a more harmonious
exsistance. The sooner the powers that be rectify the problems between the Israilies and the
Palistinions the better off we will all be. It seems that whatever the israilies do it is somehow
justified. Just another "Munich" list to cross off the names of those written on it. The sooner the U.S. puts pressure on those that can make change there, the better the U.S. will be seen
as a real and fair leader to those that dispise you now.
Anyways just my somewhat erratic point of view. TidaL.
First relise that if we where not so arrogent t obegin with, and admitied that the world comunity mattered we would have t opay this much, add to the fact that we never needed to invade Iraq in the first place and you can start to see wh yI disaprove of thsi president. I wonder how much of this money is going t ohis friends at halaburtan for their help (at least 8bn). Oh and 87 bn is too low it looks like they will ask for more. Isn't it great taht we have a president whos willing to mortage our childrens future for his own power and greed.
Seems that is o.k. for the U.S. government to pick and choose where it will
demonstrate and force its will. Not only has it ignored the Palestine and the
Israil conflict, well it seems like that anyways, it seems to approve of the way
Israil does its business. Why do these polotitions choose to buy votes locally by
hugging and kissing babies and promising the world to their constituates while
disregarding the real votes of the entire world.....? Can the alliance with Israil
be so important that all else is worth the cost that will be paid.....? Are the "mossad"
that good at what they do.....? Maybe they have some sort of leveridge used to
allow their ways. All this is just speculation of course, but what a difference would be
made with the intervention of the U.S. into this ongoing conflict. And i mean a real and
neutral intervention to provide an unbiased resolution and ending to the suffering.
Surely there can be a common ground with which both sides are somewhat satisfied.
The suicide bombers will be a never ending part of this region until both sides agree
and draw a border between them. If Israil thinks it can have it's "Munich" list from the
70's and end this by assasinations it is deluded and way out of date with how human
society works. Hatred is going to be passed down for eternity (on both sides) and i see
this as the catalyst for the current problems faced by those involved. I also see that the
U.S.'s decision to refrain from getting more involved has caused much anger at it and the
reasons behind terroist attacks can mostly be attributed to this. Would'nt it be worth at
least attempting to be seen by non-allied countries as being a leader who can see both
sides of the story and admit and appose to certain acts commited by powers who are allies.?
How long can the superpower procrastinate and just hope and throw endless amounts of
money at this problem thinking that it is a solution.....? What a waste of money, how about
making some tough policy changes instead.
Anyways this is all irrelevent just practising my typing skills, will be able to type 1000 words
a minute long before any real change and progress is made on this matter :mad:
TidaL.....
sorry tidal can't agree with you on that one, localaly is where leaders should and must be picked, I don't see palistine or even new zeland russing t ohelp out the US with its problems.
The total so far is $166 billion. $166!!!, however that isn't enuff. The president needs another $87 billion for who knows what. Body armor for troops? Upgrade equipment? Foreign troops? Wait, wasn't that what the first $166 billion was for? How the hell dose that kind of money just run out? That brings our total to $253 billion!! What do we have to show for it? Fewer jobs. A weaker economy. More corrosion of the American people's trust. What happened to those WMD? Bin Ladden? Saddam? Why should we pay $253 BILLION dollars to rebuild Iraq? We have controll of the oil but that isn't enuff. They want to controll their entire country. Surely the Iraqi people don't think we're just going to rebuild their country for free. They will have freedom and democracy.. with our exceptions. Instead of blowing all this money on the military the president should be foucusing on what's most important. The citizens of America. So much for balanceing the budget, huh Mr. Bush?