Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Not sure where to throw this, so here it goes in US. I find this funny in an odd way.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/06/...e=mostpop_story

"We're being taken for fools by the Iraqi government that continues to take in American money to pay for their reconstruction," Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, told CBS News.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23578542/

"The Iraqis have a budget surplus," said U.S. Comptroller General David Walker. "We have a huge budget deficit. ... One of the questions is who should be paying."

I'd say the US should keep paying for it. Freedom costs a buck-O-five.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/09/iraq.oil/index.html

"This nation's facing record deficits, and the Iraqis have translated their oil revenues into budget surpluses rather than effective services," Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the Democratic chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said Wednesday.

"Under these circumstances and with a strategic risk to our nation and our military readiness, we and the American people must ask: Why should we stay in Iraq in large numbers?"

It's for freedom, stupid!!!!

Thoughts?

Posted
....It's for freedom, stupid!!!!

Thoughts?

We shortened this years ago to a better sound bite....Freedom Ain't Free.

Wasn't free for the U.K. or Europe or Soviet Union either...and it wasn't fee for Japan. Wasn't free for Egypt and Israel. Wasn't free for lotsa places.....Uncle Sam has always paid somebody else's bill.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Some of the problems is that the millions if not billions of money Hussein had, got away from the US by corrupt contractors, government officals of the Iraq gov't and anyone else who took their share. The Iraq gov't should tell GW, its was YOUR idea to come here and destroy our country, YOU fix it!!!!

Posted
Some of the problems is that the millions if not billions of money Hussein had, got away from the US by corrupt contractors, government officals of the Iraq gov't and anyone else who took their share. The Iraq gov't should tell GW, its was YOUR idea to come here and destroy our country, YOU fix it!!!!

Iraq has been broken for a long time...Canada helped to break it.....remember? No, I didn't think so.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
Iraq has been broken for a long time...Canada helped to break it.....remember? No, I didn't think so.

However, it may look like Canada learned the lesson and did not go back for seconds.

BELLY UP BABY !!

Posted

Wasn't so long ago I recall some saying the US went into Iraq to take their oil..how the oil revenues were going to the US.

Well since that has proven to be a load, now some are carping that the US wants Iraq to help foot the bill to stabilize the nation? I guess facts aren't important when it comes to US bashing....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
Wasn't so long ago I recall some saying the US went into Iraq to take their oil..how the oil revenues were going to the US.

Well since that has proven to be a load, now some are carping that the US wants Iraq to help foot the bill to stabilize the nation? I guess facts aren't important when it comes to US bashing....

In perspective, this war with Iraq has cost the US taxpayers over 400 billion, pushing the national debt to a trillion. Along with the military lives that have been lost, along with countless vehicles and equipment destroyed. The US went balls to the wall. Not to mention, that just after Iraq was invaded and the government/military disbanded, the US sent pallets of cold hard cash to Iraq. The intention was to pay the wages of the new Iraqi government. Eventhough the amount that was lost/stolen/missing/unaccounted for is less than the current oil profits. There was no oversight or accountability in that process.

Bremer and his team spent the 20 billion that was already Iraq's from the Oil for Food Programme. We know know about the corruption cases and how that money was handles. Just pissed it away, giving it to the Iraqi people in cash, hoping to intice people to come to their side and not to support terrorism. In the end there was reports that some of this money DID end up in the hands of the terrorists, like Muqtada Sadr.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/feb/08/post1069 Feb 2007.

But in Iraq, the money is long gone; and sadly, many of Iraq's reconstruction projects today lie abandoned and incomplete. In Iraq also, Bremer's political agenda has failed. The Bush administration has discovered that you can't buy democracy. You can't even count on the support of those you have paid when the money runs out.

I think Iraq should keep this money and do with it what they will. The US can cry all they want. But when you bring freedom to a county, you take on large risks. Even if there is a risk of the new Iraqi government the US helped put together, not pitching in.

Posted
I guess facts aren't important when it comes to US bashing....

Or defending them.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
...I think Iraq should keep this money and do with it what they will. The US can cry all they want. But when you bring freedom to a county, you take on large risks. Even if there is a risk of the new Iraqi government the US helped put together, not pitching in.

I agree 100%...the paltry billions are important to Iraq, not the USA. If the Americans want to see this through, they will pay just as they have before from the penniless UK to the Northern Alliance. The American debt is financed partially by other governments who benefit from an uneasy but imposed order, because nobody else will/can do it.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
In perspective, this war with Iraq has cost the US taxpayers over 400 billion, pushing the national debt to a trillion

Where did you come up with those numbers? The US national debt is much higher than a trillion dollars, and is the combined deficits the founding of the country. The US deficits have run from around $140 billion to $500 billion over the last several years. The yearly cost of the war has been around $100 billion.

The US went balls to the wall.

No they didn't. Your revisionist history is amusing. If anything, the US went into Iraq with too small a force, and too cautious of civilian casualties.

In the end there was reports that some of this money DID end up in the hands of the terrorists, like Muqtada Sadr.

You mean this Muqtada Al-Sadr?

Moqtada Packs It In

"Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr plans to announce Friday that he will disarm his Mahdi Army."

I guess because the Iraq war has been won, and Iraq had turned the corner, on it's way to becoming a free and prosperous country, the detractors have no other option than to dig up and disect past mistakes. Well, if it helps those of you sort out your Bush Derangement Syndrome, then more power to you.

Posted

Shady

Where did you come up with those numbers? The US national debt is much higher than a trillion dollars, and is the combined deficits the founding of the country. The US deficits have run from around $140 billion to $500 billion over the last several years. The yearly cost of the war has been around $100 billion.

Sorry for underestimating the national debt. It is much more than I thought it was. Wow.

No they didn't. Your revisionist history is amusing. If anything, the US went into Iraq with too small a force, and too cautious of civilian casualties.

You are right again, it was a half assed invasion. Good job.

You mean this Muqtada Al-Sadr?

I mean people like him, yes indeed.

I guess because the Iraq war has been won, and Iraq had turned the corner, on it's way to becoming a free and prosperous country, the detractors have no other option than to dig up and disect past mistakes. Well, if it helps those of you sort out your Bush Derangement Syndrome, then more power to you.

It is not Buch Derangement Syndrom, because this plan was in the works long before Bush took office. And if you do not learn by those mistakes, then you deserve to have them thrown back in your face. Because you sure would not want to repeat those mistakes ... right?

Posted
No they didn't. Your revisionist history is amusing. If anything, the US went into Iraq with too small a force, and too cautious of civilian casualties.

Agreed, too small by half, but you can never be too cautious about civilian deaths as long as your own troops are not put in danger. Most civilians killed by the US were killed on the onset at great distance....US troops weren't at danger.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,915
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Раймо
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Раймо earned a badge
      First Post
    • Раймо earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • MDP went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • MDP earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • MDP went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...