Bush Will Seek $87 Billion for Iraq

Reuters via Washington Post ^ | 9-7-03

[dogbyte12]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush will announce on Sunday night that he plans to ask Congress for $87 billion to fund the U.S. military deployment in Iraq and pay for reconstruction, a Republican source said.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the money would fund U.S. military operations in Iraq and reconstruction over the coming budget year.

The figure includes assistance for Afghanistan. Bush was to make the request in an 8:30 p.m. EDT address to the nation, the source said.

The figure was at the high end of expectations. Some members of Congress said earlier they expected Bush to get what he asked for but wanted him to detail how long U.S. troops would remain in Iraq and outline a strategy for bringing them home. (snip)

[ohioWfan]

I quit watching after halfway through.

Hey, bill......thanks for admitting HERE that you didn't even watch the speech you were slamming on that other thread.......

A little honesty would do you some good, you know........weren't you talking about who is and who is NOT a 'good man?' I guess that doesn't include YOU, eh?

(Of course, you were getting creamed over there because you were spouting nonsense........it's obvious why you came over here to find some 'friends' among the malcontents here......)

[Lib-Lickers 2]

Ya,, they forget there will be no need for economists if there are no economies,,,,

[Conservababe]

I have a question.

We are not loaning Iraq 87 billions dollars. We are allocating from our assets 87 billions dollars.

So, if we are rebuilding Iraq, and not the French or Germans, then who do does the government owe?

[Socratic]

"...will ultimately cost us $250 Billion."

And on one September morning, two years ago, a handfull of mad criminals cost our economy 1 trillion dollars. One trillion = 1,000 billion. So for a war against our enemies and their supporters, it will ultimately cost one-fourth of what happened that day? I'll take it and praise those who give their lives for our liberty and pray for the families who suffer their loss for your's and my sake!

[Hank Rearden]

87 billion or a trillion who cares,, the very survial of our country is at stake

The problem is, this $87B is just the beginning of the big spending spree on "security" - wait until Big Spender Bush comes back next year for another $100B. Then what?

The other problem is that Big Spender Bush won't even consider vetoing the $400 Billion "free" pill spending spree he's got waiting in the wings to buy votes next year from old people.

Under Big Spender Bush, Big Stupid Government just gets bigger, more expensive and more stupid.

[Terp]

To those who are crying about the money the President asked for. I ask what is the alternative? Do you want us to cut and run or what?

[pdjplano]

of course they do, the Dems always cut and run. It is their heritage...

[ScrtAccess]

And how will our budget deficit look if we spend 87 billion AND a few psychos set of a couple nukes in this country? I don't have a short memory, the reality is that stopping terrorism is like spitting in the ocean and expecting it to make a difference.

Spending 87 billion on Iraq will have no affect on the guy that worms his way through the mexican desert, drinking water from the water stations we have graciously placed there, and crossing our border illegally, and doing whatever damage he has come to do.

[lloydx]

"You all are so transparent."

"But, in retrospect, ten 200 megaton nukes would be a lot cheaper."

"Bush probably should have allowed a hit a year here..."

"If we can gather them in one place in mass they make better targets,,, killem all,,,"

I used to think like this, but isn't this the same trap the israelis were drawn in to?

[Hank Rearden]

To those who are crying about the money the President asked for. I ask what is the alternative? Do you want us to cut and run or what?

The alternative is to veto the $400 billion "free" pill plan (that'll end up costing $1,000 billion, at least) and any other dumb damn unconstitutional boondoggle that crosses his desk - to set aside funding for national defense.

Big Spender Bush hasn't vetoed a damn thing. And he won't. Grab your ankles, peasant, and hand over your wallet for the rest of your life.

[Luis Gonzalez]

The cost to New York City alone stands at about $83 billion, and rising.

The way I see it, we take this war to them, fight it on their soil, blow up their cities, destroy their infrastructures.

There's no amount of money that would be too much to avoid a few more 9/11's and a slew of homicide bombers...and no amount of Border Security will completely eliminate the posibility of people coming into the country to hurt us.

I'd rather kill them on their soil, than try to stop them at our borders.

[thtr]

I'll take it and praise those who give their lives for our liberty and pray for the families who suffer their loss for your's and my sake!

I will also “praise those who give their lives for our liberty” but this $87 Billion will not change what happened on 9/11 nor will it prevent it from happening again. That is simply a lie. I would rather spend $87 more on protecting America than wasting it on re-building an Islamic country that will return to the Islamic fold the second our troops leave. Frankly, we demean the honor of those that are willing to sacrifice their lives to protect our freedom by wasting those precious lives on rebuilding Iraq!

[Lib-Lickers 2]

You are right,, then the 87 billion won't be missed anyway but being involved to the hilt in fighting all terrorists we are more likely to keep that from happening,,,

[Luis Gonzalez]

"The alternative is to veto the $400 billion "free" pill plan."

The baby boomers are retiring at an incredible rate, and gaining speed.

This bill will pass because they will elect someone who will pass it for them, Bush vetoes the bill, the Democrat who takes office in 2005 will pass one twice as big.

[thtr]

To those who are crying about the money the President asked for. I ask what is the alternative? Do you want us to cut and run or what?

To those that are crying that we should spend the money Bush asked for and more on Iraq. I ask, do you have the courage of your convictions to call for a tax hike to pay for what you think is so important?

[ohioWfan]

Do you seriously think that an illegal Mexican immigrant crawling across the border is going to terrorize and blow up this country?? Seriously??

It seems like you are confusing the issues a bit there..........but then maybe you already know that.......

[Socratic]

"There's no amount of money that would be too much to avoid a few more 9/11's and a slew of homicide bombers...and no amount of Border Security will completely eliminate the posibility of people coming into the country to hurt us."

I find it amazing that after 9-11-01, there are so many who want to re-adopt the Clinton administration policies which caused so much of all this. If you are attacked and don't fight back, you just invite more of the same and delay the inevitable, which only becomes worse due to inaction.

[BlessingInDisguise]

"Bush asks for money."

What else is new?

[Fred Mertz]

Do you seriously think that an illegal Mexican immigrant crawling across the border is going to terrorize and blow up this country??

He wasn't talking about an Mexican immigrant. He was referring to a porous border. Capiche?

[ScrtAccess]

The illegal mexican immigrant isn't the one that scares me. I haven't been out to that part of the desert so maybe you can enlighten me, is there regulatory signs that say "if you are a terrorist and not a mexican immigrant please do not illegally cross this border"?

If they, the immigrants can cross the border, do you seriously think the terrorists cannot?

I'm not confusing any issue.

What about the story not long ago in the press about a truck crossing the border possibly carrying biological weapons? There was a little fear generated from that.

Sounds like your ignoring the issue.