Skip to comments.Report: Bush seeks $70 billion for Iraq, Afghan
Posted on 02/26/2006 10:20:25 AM PST by churchillbuff
Some big bills are about to come due for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and rebuilding along the Gulf Coast.
A Senate G-O-P aide says President Bush is set to request 70 (B) billion dollars in special funding for the two wars.
And the official says Bush will seek another 18 (B) billion dollars for rebuilding in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. That number's in addition to the 85 (B) billion already committed to the Gulf Coast reconstruction.
Bush is the biggest spender in history. Medicaire boondoggle. Iraq boondoggle. Federalizing of education. He spends and spends -- and still the Democrats denounce him. "Moderate" Republicans like Bush never seem to learn that they can spend like Democrats but the liberals will hate them anyway. All they're accomplishing is making life harder for the middle class taxpayers who have to pay the bill.
Yeah but a Democrat would have spent $100 billion! Looks like the WHINE ALL the time, I HATE BUSH choir has SHOWED UP today! We need to support Bush or else the Democrat BOGEYMAN is going to get you! < /MNJohnnie >
I agree. I wonder how much of the money is for Islamic junk like rebuilding the Golden Mosque.
Besides spending billions, Presidente Bush is saddling us taxpayers with additional debt to support, educate and give medical care to millions of illegal aliens who have entered the USA on his watch. Our pockets are being picked at both ends...
Bush's ownership society and reforming the tax code are dead in the water. Gov't continues to become bigger and more unconstitutional.
I agree. I wonder how much of the money is for Islamic junk like rebuilding the Golden Mosque.
Why not a few billion $$ for our own border security and immigration, too impractical and expensive?
Money well spent...
Well you don't want to complain. The article by William F. Buckley dared to bring up some concerns and he's thrown under the bus here to be replaced by 'historian' Vic Hansen as a supposed authority.
You're right though. The spending continues to grow. Eventually it has to top 1 trillion. Will that be the point fiscal 'conservatives' start to complain?
- - - - - - - - - -
Not a dime more until the Iraqis settle down and play nice!
I have a liberal friend who says she feels privileged to pay taxes because the "money is well spent". I stopped trying to point out all the waste, she won't listen. Guess it wouldn't be any use trying with you, either. Just read the news about Iraq. Anyone with an open mind - most recently, Bill Buckley - has to admit the invasion didn't accomplish what we were promised. And it wasn't necessary because Iraq, a fifth world power with no WMDs, was no threat to us.
On the domestic front, Medicaire and Education programs are straight from the Ted Kennedy playbook.
And all this is off budget, so it doesn't get counted in the 400+ billion deficit we run up per year. This war is definitely NOT worth what we are spending for it. If we were at least getting cheap oil, the administration might make a case for this grotesque war expenditure, but it has only served to jack up oil prices by $25/bbl. costing everyone in the nation even more money. It's a true lose-lose situation and conservatives in Congress ought to pull the plug on it.
He was an invasion supporter who didn't predict ANY of the mess we've got now. He's no "authority,"
Chamberlain Buff, Who passed the two largest tax cuts in US History? Once again you are DESPERATELY flailing around for anything to try an justify your idiotic Neo-Isolationist positions. Just how much do you suppose a second 9-11 style attack would cost us? Sorry if the rest of us understand that National Security is THE job of the Feds so it is one of the FEW things they SHOULD be spending money on.
BINGO! It's no coincidence that we've had a 25 percent increase in gasoline prices since the Iraq invasion. Call it the "Iraq war tax." Everybody's paying it, but the media is ignoring the cause. The neocon agenda is saddling us with higher taxes for a needless war. And still there are many people - on this forum in particular - who are cheering, robot-like, as they and their families are being financially squeezed by this insane policy.
Bush deserves some of the blame. He could have vetoed some spending bills to force reductions. The Congress, Republicans and Democrats both resist spending cuts. What every happened to the Balanced Budget Amendment?
Around $255 billion as of last October, according to The Congressional Research Service
I applauded that. But it wasn't enough - taxes are still much higher than before Bush Sr. did away with Reagan's tax cuts. And the Alternative Minimum Tax threatens to wipe it all out anyway. Bottom line: Government needs your money, and your kids' money, and your parents' money. They need it for domestic boondoggles and for a foreign war that was never necessary for US security (in other words, just another government boondoggle).
Wrong again. Try GW Bush.
Think some odd years ahead and see how ridiculous you sound. How does no oil sound? With the chicoms making deals for oil all over the mideast and south America, how long til they really put the sqeeze on us?
Most of us don't care to see our economy tank. Yours will always be the short sighted minority opinion.
"Anyone with an open mind - most recently, Bill Buckley - has to admit the invasion didn't accomplish what we were promised. And it wasn't necessary because Iraq, a fifth world power with no WMDs, was no threat to us."
I agree- part of being a mature adult is being willing to admit you were wrong. I supported this war. I thought it would be a relatively short war, would find WMDs, and would leave us in a stronger position strategically. I was wrong on all counts, as was Bush. At this point, I have a hard time seeing what world anyone who says this war is worth the $500 billion or so it will cost is living in.
You're apparently one of those guys who's fine with writing checks to the federal government, as long as a Republican is in the White House. Me, I prefer doing right by my family rather than shipping my paycheck to the spendthrifts, of either party, in D.C.
The Russians lured us into this war on their terms. While the French, Germans, Russkies, and Arabs delayed U.N. action, all Saddam's WMD's were smuggled into Syria. Spetnatz troops on the ground conducted the most successful ruse in history. With months of delay, our troops only found what the Russians intended for us to find. The MSM has been misled. The White House cannot tell the world what really happened. Diplomacy requires that Russia and the U.S. pretend to be friends. Truth be told, the Russians were playing chess and Bush was playing poker.
O come on already were's this madness going to stop.I
DONT WANT PAY TO FIX THE FREAKING MOSQUE.
This is crazy something has gotta give.
Buy GOLD now.
I hope someday they discover oil in Iraq
Right .... .
If God told him to do it be glad he did no matter how much the cost.. 'you see'...
It's the total cost we 'won't see' that we should be grateful for not having to pay....
Another 09-11 would bury us all and there isn't enough money
in the world to bring us back after...at least not the way we were..
Many of our wealthiest founders died penniless after they freed us...and 'the people' never gave them one nickel for their sacrifices...
And American history classes in public schools never even mention their names...
in the world to bring us back after...at least not the way we were..
That is pure grandstanding bunk, of which you have nothing but conjecture on your side.
Have a question for those in the know. Is this money going to support our troops, or to rebuild their infrastructure, or for the Iraqui people? That would be the big question because we all support the troops obviously but what and how much do we owe the Iraqui people?
Yes, the cost of national defense is an irksome thing. It would be nice if we didn't have enemies in this world, foreign and domestic.
Only if a demorat spends it...repubs get a free pass to bankrupt the nation. Its so much better to get screwed by your "friends" than your enemies, no?
I know that. But try telling that to the glass half full groups. They think Hansen is so knowledgeable, even to the point of visiting Iraq once or twice, that he could run our foreign policy...when in fact none of his comparisons to ancient Greece are even applicable
Issues for Congress
In light of this lack of transparency about funding for war-related activities, Congress may want to examine current reporting requirements.
The Defense Department is currently not required to identify the amount of funds requested or report its plans once funds are appropriated for each of the three missions.
DOD also does not report, by public law, which funds are tapped (from supplementals or regular bills) to meet war expenses.
Starting on October 31, 2005, DOD is required to report the cumulative totals to date for Iraq and Afghanistan but not for enhanced base security.
Given DODs difficulties in tracking and segregating war-related costs, Congress may want to consider having DOD set up separate accounts for warrelated expenses that would build on DFAS tracking categories. DOD is also not required to request all war-related funds on a mission basis.
It would be useful to know DODs initial plans by mission for Iraq, Afghanistan, enhanced security, or other missions in the global war on terrorism, for all funds appropriated and transferred in order to compare those plans with later obligations and assess the accuracy of DODs forecasts.
Counter Insurgency (or in this case, Counter Terrorism) is a strange bastard style of war. It is not total war but it is also more then the Leftist" Police matter" One of the thing most old Cast Iron Conservatives choose to forget is the political aspect. Iraq was doable. We had the political consensus to do it. So since we needed a kill zone we could suck the terrorists into and we needed to get the American people to support the mission, there was no other choice BUT Iraq.
Want to really blow the Leftists minds? Tell them this. Even if Al Gore won in 2000 and 9-11 happened the USA would STILL be doing the same thing now in Iraq. Iraq was doable militarily and politically. There was no other place for the US to go after Afganistan. Iraq is basically the same deal as the invasion of Italy was in 1943
Here in a nutshell, is the MILTIARY reason for Iraq. The War on Terrorism is different sort of war. In the war on Terrorism, we have a hidden foe, spread out across a geographically diverse area, with covert sources of supply. Since we cannot go everywhere they hide out, in fact often cannot even locate them until the engage us, we need to draw them out of hiding into a kill zone. Iraq is that kill zone. That is the true brilliance of the Iraq strategy. We draw the terrorists out of their world wide hiding places onto a battlefield they have to fight on for political reasons (The "Holy" soil of the Arabian peninsula) where they have to pit their weakest ability (Conventional Military combat power) against our greatest strength (ability to call down unbelievable amounts of firepower) where they will primarily have to fight other forces (the Iraqi Security forces) in a battlefield that is hostile to guerrilla warfare. (Iraqi-mostly open terrain as opposed to guerrilla friendly areas like the mountains of Afghanistan or the jungles of SE Asia).
There are other reasons to do Iraq but that is the MILITARY reason we are in Iraq. We have taken, an maintain the initiative from the Terrorists. They are playing OUR game on ground of OUR choosing.
Problem is Counter Insurgency is SLOW and painful. Often a case of 3 steps forward, two steps back. I often worry that the American people have neither the maturity, nor the intellect" to understand. It's so much easier to spew made for TV slogans like "No Blood for Oil" or "We support the Troops, bring them home" then to actually THINK. Problem is these people have NO desire to co-exist with us. They see all this PC posturing by the Hysteric Left as a sign that we are weak. Since they want us dead, weakness encourages them. They think their "god" will bless them for killing Westerners.
So we can covert to Islam, die or kill them. Iraq is about killing enough of them to make the rest realize we are serious. See in the Arab world the USA is considered a big wimp. We have run away so many times. Lebanon, the Kurds, the Iraqis in 1991, the Iranians, Somalia, Clinton all thru the 1990s etc etc etc. The Jihadists think we will run again. In fact they are counting on it. That way they can run around screaming "We beat the American just like the Russians, come join us in Jihad" and recruit the next round of "holy warriors". Iraq is also a show place where we show the Muslim world that there are a lines they cannot cross. On 9-11 they crossed that line and we can, and will, destroy them for it.
Looks like they need to hire some good government CPA's, an accounting of what the money is allocated for and what it's spent may keep everyone honest.
I've had it with Bush. Glad this is his last few years. Although at the rate he is going, more damage can be done, in particular regarding immigration law. He's a big spending RINO, in reality. My basic instincts to defend him are gone. Even his nominees to the Supreme Court were actually against what he would have really wished to do. He wanted his friend Gonzales on the SC, as well as Harriet Meiers. If it would have been possible to do so politically, he would have.
I've lost my faith in Bush on most issues. Social Security, health, education, immigration, deficit spending, campaign finance reform, paying to rebuild Iraq using our money rather than Iraq's oil profits, the Dubai ports deal, etc. etc. etc. The only thing he really has done conservatively is appoint more conservative judges to the bench, and be anti-abortion (without really doing anything). That's not enough for me to offset all of the other negative aspects of his administration. Plus he never has used his veto, except for his threat now to use it to support Dubai's attempt to manage our ports. Homeland security, my tailbone. He had so many big issues he could have used his veto pen on, and this is the issue he draws his line in the sand with?
What a disappointment Bush has become. May we do better with a good really conservative candidate next time around, that's if the Dems don't somehow manage to pull off a win, and unlike some others, I believe, given the right circumstances, they could. There were only a few electoral votes between a Bush presidency and a Kerry one this last time around. People should remember that. Popular vote doesn't count, as we found out the first time around in 2000. Electoral votes do. It's what gave Bush the Presidency both times. The first time by one state's electoral votes (FL), even though allegedly Bush lost the popular vote. The second time around the roles reversed. Bush had the popular vote, but only beat Kerry by a few electoral states. One can never be too secure about political outcomes.
Get ready to be called a xenophobic, racist communist democrat now by some of the so-called conservatives on this board...
Which is a total joke, as I am way to the right of George Bush, but you are correct about the Bushbots, who come out in packs on the hunt.
The real waste of money is social welfare and catering to illegal immigrants. Our military needs all the money it can get.
And let us not forget the segment who are just itching for us to go and invade Iran...
The administration has tipped it's hand. All they have right now is to try and get the american people afraid again... Expect elevated threat announcements come spring...
And other federal agencies and programs are being starved for funds now to pay for the war. NASA is canceling missions to keep shuttle flying and pay for CEV. We are looking at having NO MANNED ACCESS TO SPACE for 5 - 10 years soon.
Those cuts immediately got swallowed up by massive government spending. This is like trying to empty Lake Michigan with a bucket.
I have no objection spending billions on national defense and security. The line in the sand appears when it is spent on Teddy's education plan, housing and "urban" development & heating assistance programs that goes in the pockets of poverty pimps, and highway boondoggles that states should be paying for themselves. In fact states should be stepping up and taking care of all domestic programs, and SS/Medicaid/Medicare should be gradually phased out.
That is what happened.
A SPETZNAZ brigade with chemical troops came in. We saw it. The Israelis saw it. We couldn't do a thing about it. This has been known in official Washington for the past several years. Bush doesn't talk about it because he doesn't want to admit that he got cornholed by Putin.
The Russians snookered us before the war to sanitize their involvement in Saddam's chemical and biowar program. Saddam bought some of their stuff on the black market and the KGB came in and cleaned up. That's what they do. We looked the other way because the Russians took the really lethal stuff back to Russia and put it under Adult Supervision. The Clown Car stuff is buried in Syria.
Unfortunately, the Looneytarians, Neoisolationist Charles Lindbergh types (that would be you, buff), Piltdown Man Brigadiers who thumb through worn-out back-issues of The Spotlight and Daily Kos Democrats believe that Saddam was some sort of misunderstood choirboy who had no WMD. The evidence is, thankfully, coming out to vindicate the President.
Unfortunately, we have a President who doesn't like to rock the diplomatic boat. We also have a White House staff who likes to see their President treated like a pinata by his opponents who peddle the same b.s. that you do.
Grow up. It's a dangerous world filled with genocidal monsters. Try living in it. Or you can keep buying gold and pretending that that will keep the jihadi away.
Be Seeing You,
And the administration's ACTIONS also show it's not true - because they sent military teams to search for WMDs when they got to Bagdhad. Judy Miller was with one of the teams. They even announced at one point that they'd found a "mobile lab" - turned out to be for pharmeceuticals. Anyway, their actions showed that they DIDN't "know" that WMDs had been "taken to Syria."
Also, if the WMDs were shipped out, and "we" knew that - - then it's all the more inexcusable that we sacrificed 2000-plus people to take over Iraq.
"There is no narcotic so intoxicating as the power to spend someone else's money."