75 BILLION US DOLLARS

Search
That's what your boy Bush is saying this war will cost assuming it will be over by April !

Then comes humanitarian aid & $$ to patroll Iraq after the war !

All this over a stiffy for Saddam !Saddam must have one nice piece of ass to pay that kinda dough !

--------------------------------

25 to life because you couldn't controll your anger
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
I wonder how much all of Clintons wars cost?

As a matter of fact Clintons peace has cost us a war on terrorism, a aid package to N. Korea that amounts to the most in the world all to have a nuke pointed at our head.
 
that b.j. wasn`t on the cheap...clinton was intelligent.....without having one iota of common sense...
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,497
Tokens
actually, Patriot, I am interested. Do you think all of Clintons wars cost more than 75 billion? I really have no idea.

That said, I can't be held responsible for it, because I wasn't a legal age voter in 1992 or 1996. Bush/Gore was the first election I voted in and I've voted in each since. It's funny, though, I sure was paying taxes when I was 16.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
FSB I could not tell you because money never an issue when it came to Clintons wars.

You see democrats never think of the cost of useless failed social programs..but all of a sudden when our nation security is at risk they are counting every penny.. the hypocracy never ends.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2001
Messages
16,015
Tokens
Patriot, I'm not a democrat - don't you think 65 billion is a little too much? Were we provoked into this war? Was Iraq an imminent threat to the US? I would have rather spent 65 billion on covert operations to kill terrorists throughout the world - like in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Iran and the Philipines.

Bush has gone off the deep end but at this point we have no choice but to get this debacle over.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,497
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>You see democrats never think of the cost of useless failed social programs..but all of a sudden when our nation security is at risk they are counting every penny.. the hypocracy never ends.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think its a matter of perspective. We (and I use the term "we" loosely when equating myself with the Democratic party) tend to think that maybe our national security really isn't all that at risk currently, and certainly not so much from Saddam Hussein.

On the flip side of the coin, conservatives don't percieve the social problems we have in this country as being all that big a deal.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
883
Tokens
I personally don't think you should spare any amount when killing children. I could be wrong.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
552
Tokens
Bush is so dumb. Did he really have to go to war to kill Saddam?? This guy is the dumbest president ever!

----------------------------------------
MY BIGGEST LIES:
1- I love you!
2- The check is in the mail!
3- I wont cum in your mouth!
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
883
Tokens
Bush war budget 'does not add up'

Mark Tran
Tuesday March 25, 2003

As President George Bush today formally asks Congress for $75bn (£48bn) for the war in Iraq, his emergency request has already come under fire.
The proposal includes $63bn for the war itself - enough to keep American troops in Iraq for nearly five months - $8bn for international aid and relief, and $4bn for homeland security.

Of the $63bn for the war effort, $53bn will go towards the deployment of troops, $5bn to replenish weapons and $1.5bn in payments to Pakistan and others, and unspecified classified expenses, most likely for the CIA.

The $8bn for international relief and reconstruction in Iraq is notable in that most of that money is not even meant for Iraq, but for those countries deemed to have been helpful to the US war effort.

Iraq gets $3.5bn ($2.5bn in a relief fund and much of the rest for oil field repair), while the rest goes to Jordan, Israel, Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Colombia and some eastern European countries.

Despite all the headaches it has caused the White House, Turkey is slated to receive $1bn. The US had offered Ankara a $6bn aid package, hoping to win its agreement to station American troops on Turkish soil for a northern front.

Not only did the Turkish parliament reject the US plan, Ankara is also now raising the prospect of deploying its own troops in Kurdish-held areas in northern Iraq, a move bound to inflame Kurdish sentiment and complicate US plans for a post-Saddam Iraq.

The request for additional funds to cover the war in Iraq has already set alarm bells ringing among economists who worry about its impact on the ballooning budget deficit - analysts are warning that America's deficit could break through $400bn this year, once additional war costs are added to the budget.

Few believe that the $74bn Mr Bush has requested will cover the complete costs of the war. Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog organisation, told the Washington Post that the costs of war would exceed $110bn in 2003, assuming the war ends before May, and $550bn over 10 years, a figure in line with other unofficial estimates.

The group calculated that the military has already spent $1bn on cruise missiles, $380m on chemical protective suits and more than $100m on air combat missions.

Administration officials have said that the war would cost less than the 1991 Gulf war, which came to more than $80bn. However, the US paid only $9b on that occasion, as America's allies, notably Saudi Arabia, picked up the rest of the tab in a war that had widespread international support in stark contrast to the present conflict.

As Mr Bush goes to Congress today with his emergency request, Democrats have accused the administration - which steadfastly refused to produce estimates of the war's cost while Congress was considering Mr Bush's budget plan - of failing to come clean on the full costs of the war effort.

"I know people think this will pay for the war," David Obey, a senior House Democrat told the Washington Post. "It most definitely will not. This is, in my view, the first instalment."
 
As long as they don't give the Turks a freakin dime, I say rip open the purse strings. More has been wasted on Turkey's waffling than anywhere else.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,854
Tokens
Who is Mark Tran?

I'm SHOCKED! wow. Say, while you're regurgitating, did you hear that the $20 billion or so seized from the Iraqi gov't is supposedly going to be used against that?

Wow. Gosh. Golly. Not a word about bloated social programs' costs, but you're screaming about defense of the US. Tsk tsk tsk.
icon_rolleyes.gif
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
228
Tokens
And then they have the balls to call themselves "Conservatives" !!! What a joke! Clinton was a conservative...
 

Andersen celebrates his 39-yard NFC Championship w
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
1,789
Tokens
will GW be able to carry the "compassionate conservative" title in 2004 ?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
271
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot:
our nation security is at risk they are counting every penny.. the hypocracy never ends.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

uhhh how is iraq a threat to our national security?
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,299
Tokens
I wonder how much all of Clintons wars cost?

I don't care about clinton. He is gone. A terrible pres. but he's out...We don't have to deal with Clinton's wars at the moment.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,883
Messages
13,574,667
Members
100,881
Latest member
afinaahly
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com