Bush's $1 Trillion War on Terror: Even Costlier Than Expected

[Crabtownboy]

The news that President Bush's war on terror will soon have cost the U.S. taxpayer $1 trillion — and counting — is unlikely to spread much Christmas cheer in these tough economic times. A trio of recent reports — none by the Bush Administration — suggests that sometime early in the Obama presidency, spending on the wars started since 9/11 will pass the trillion-dollar mark. Even after adjusting for inflation, that's four times more than America spent fighting World War I, and more than 10 times the cost of 1991's Persian Gulf War (90 percent of which was paid for by U.S. allies). The war on terror looks set to surpass the cost the Korean and Vietnam wars combined, to be topped only by World War II's price tag of $3.5 trillion.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868367,00.html

Just think how much good this amount of money could have done if spent inside the USA.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Just think if you put the blame where it belongs, instead of blaming yer favorite whipping boy for every problem the country has.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Just think if you put the blame where it belongs, instead of blaming yer favorite whipping boy for every problem the country has.

Well, if you can show me where it was someone else that got us into this war and has spend us into debt I will blame them. But for the life of me I can't figure out anyone else ... and I didn't write the headline.

Do you mean it was Obama's fault or is it just libreral lies that we have spent this much?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I don't care who wrote it, your post indicates you agree with it.

History will tell you. Bush did not, could not lead this country into war by himself. I think you know that, maybe you don't. But just because you keep yerself ignorant on how the war started doesn't mean I have to let everyone else stay ignorant.

Bush didn't start the war by himself. You should stop trying to say he did. Then perhaps you can get someone to actually talk to you, instead of always having to correct you.

 

[4His_glory]

Just think of all the people who could have died and all the attacks that would have happened on the United States of in this money was not spent fighting terror.

I would rather have an economy in the toilet than living in the constant threat of being blown to pieces like the people of Israel do.

 

[Pastor Larry]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868367,00.html

Just think how much good this amount of money could have done if spent inside the USA.

We already know how much good it would have done. We have spent way more than $1 trillion here and have more problems than before.

The reality is that terrorism won't go away by us spending money at home. And the problems at home won't go away by us spending money at home.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

And Bush needed help in doing this.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And Bush needed help in doing this.

He pushed for it. He used faulty intelligence to sell it. He kept throwing good money after bad. He was/is the president and "The Buck Stops Here." Yes, others helped, but it was, is and always will be his war. Fair or not is a matter of opinion, but that is how history will judge him.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

No, that's how you judge him.

Everyone else used the same intelligence.


Answer me something....who were the members of congress AGAINST going to Iraq ? Can you name them ? Did any democrats, like Al Gore, or Hillary Clinton, or my favorite democrat, Colin Powell try and stop him ? Answer honestly, now.

Then tell me what they've done to stop it, since gaining a majority two years ago ?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Bush didn't start this war by himself, any more than the zero will be able to end it by himself.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Bush didn't start this war by himself, any more than the zero will be able to end it by himself.

Read my other reply ... he did have help. But if he had not introduced the idea and pushed very hard for war we would never have gone to war in Iraq. it is his war and that is the way history will rememberr him and the war. This decision, I believe, was where he and his administration lost it way and the vision they brought to the White House with them. It is a shame for they entered the presidency with some vision and good ideas ... but alas, they turned promise into a lost way and disaster. Sadly the Republican controlled Congress gave no oversight. Rather they simply rubbrer stamped everything he proposed and, as we now see, they have paid a severe price for their own lack of vision.

Pastor Larry, The reality is that terrorism won't go away by us spending money at home. And the problems at home won't go away by us spending money at home.

There was a lady several hundred years ago who presented your idea with the statement, "Let them eat cake." As I remember she ended up loosing her head. Why do you dislike helping or trying to help people so much?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Another wrong statement. I heard Al Gore whining about Sadaam in 1992, saying we had to take him out. Seems like the dems were pushing for this when W was still a baseball guy. Bush introduced nothing, just picked up Clinton's ball & ran. You can't rewrite history just because you hate the guy.


Again, what dems tried to stop him ? And how does he keep getting "his" war funded ? The GOP is the minority now, you know. Seems like if they wanted the war over, it would be.

 

[carpro]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1868367,00.html

Just think how much good this amount of money could have done if spent inside the USA.

Do you have a wife and children, maybe grandchildren?

How much are their lives worth?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Also, how much did Bush say this war would cost ? Got a $ amount ? Were we given a budget ? A prediction ?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Also, how much did Bush say this war would cost ? Got a $ amount ? Were we given a budget ? A prediction ?

The pre-war prediction of the Bush White House was approximately $50 billion. You can easily find this online.

Remember the general who was fired because he predicted the war would cost over 200 billion?

Getting late here in Prague and I'm tired, so I'll check in tomorrow.

 

[KenH]

Also, how much did Bush say this war would cost ? Got a $ amount ? Were we given a budget ? A prediction ?

"President Bush plans to tell congressional leaders on Monday that the war in Iraq will cost about $80 billion, administration officials said, three days after both chambers of Congress passed budget plans and authorized tax cuts without a war-cost estimate from the administration."

- www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/03/23/MN204798.DTL (3/23/03)

 

[Don]

Crab is right, in that this will forever be "Bush's War."

However, someone else brought up an excellent point that Crab and others seem to be overlooking: the Democrats have controlled Congess for how long now? Why aren't they pushing to exercise that balance of power we all learned about in civics class oh-so-many years ago, and represent the will of the people?

Or are they?

 

[KenH]

the Democrats have controlled Congess for how long now?

Two years, but without a filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

"President Bush plans to tell congressional leaders on Monday that the war in Iraq will cost about $80 billion, administration officials said, three days after both chambers of Congress passed budget plans and authorized tax cuts without a war-cost estimate from the administration."

- www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/03/23/MN204798.DTL (3/23/03)

And we're just figuring out it's over budget ? Hmmm.

Still waiting for that list of dems.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Crab is right, in that this will forever be "Bush's War."

Not to everyone. And remember, he didn't write the title.