Senate approves $94.5 billion emergency bill

Post #259,549 by dmcarls 6/21/06 11:44:26 AM Reply	Senate approves $94.5 billion emergency bill [link\|http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060615/pl_nm/security_congress_funding_dc_4\|http://news.yahoo.co...ress_funding_dc_4] [link\|http://www3.capwiz.com/y/issues/votes/?votenum=171&chamber=S&congress=1092\|http://www3.capwiz.c...r=S&congress=1092] [...] "When Bush signs the legislation into law, $65.8 billion will be rushed to the Pentagon so it can continue combat in the two countries through September. The funding measure cleared the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday. Congress is advancing separate legislation that would add another $50 billion in war funds to keep combat operations running from October through March or so." Passed 98-1. They want this to continue.
Post #259,559 by Simon_Jester 6/21/06 1:36:00 PM Reply	Not really fair.... this will continue - regardless of whether Congress grants funds or not... the generals (and the President) will find a way to keep the troops there. This way at least, the troops continue to get food supplies, ammo, body armor (well, maybe not), etc. I wonder what the total cost of the war is now?
Post #259,561 by drewk 6/21/06 1:44:32 PM Reply	You're counting medical costs, right? Oh, and both direct support and lost future earnings for families of the dead and wounded. And future military expenditures to suppress those who signed up with "the enemy" specifically to oppose this invasion. And increased cost in foreign aid to "persuade" nearby states to allow us to maintain bases of operation. And loss of anticipated savings from base closures that don't happen. And ... And ... And ... === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #259,562 by Simon_Jester 6/21/06 1:49:14 PM 6/21/06 2:06:00 PM Reply	I'm not.... but my recent google search shows analysts who did. They're reporting costs that top [link\|http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1681119,00.html\|2 trillion]. Given current costs of approx 290 billion (not counting our most recent expenditure); it doesn't seem unreasonable to me anymore. Sadly, the highest estimate given on containment is 700 billion. Want a laugh? Look back to the reports that listed war costs at [link\|http://www.iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/2_whitehouse.html\|50 billion....max]. War on the cheap indeed. [link\|http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm\|Some quotes]: Well, the Office of Management and Budget, has come up come up with a number that's something under $50 billion for the cost. How much of that would be the U.S. burden, and how much would be other countries, is an open question. Edited by Simon_Jester June 21, 2006, 02:06:00 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #259,616 by jb4 6/21/06 6:14:46 PM Reply	Seems to me we could buy off all of Iraq for that! And get the oil fields as a throw-in! jb4 "So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't." — Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
Post #259,639 by ben_tilly 6/21/06 8:06:01 PM Reply	We probably could There are about 27 million people in Iraq. GDP/capita is $3400. We're actually spending money there faster than they're producing anything! Cheers, Ben The great masses of people ... will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. -- Adolf Hitler
Post #259,584 by dmcarls 6/21/06 3:41:04 PM Reply	Costs of war, continued >>>And ... And ... And ... [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101242.html\|http://www.washingto...006062101242.html] "BALAD, Iraq -- The U.S. military has begun sending thousands of battered Humvees and other war-torn equipment home as more Iraqi units join the fight against insurgents and American units scheduled for Iraq duty have their orders canceled. In the last four months, the Army has tagged 7,000 Humvees and 17,000 other pieces of equipment to be shipped to the United States to be rebuilt. " [...] "Following the Gulf War in 1991, for example, it took two years for the military to recover its equipment _ after a six-month deployment and a ground campaign lasting roughly 100 hours. And the cost of repairing the equipment once it's back is huge. The backlog already is measured in years and some analysts say the price tag could exceed $50 billion." Drew, that social construct is getting larger! (Just kidding)
Post #259,568 by dmcarls 6/21/06 2:24:30 PM Reply	Re: Not really fair.... >>> regardless of whether Congress grants funds or not <<< Congress and the Senate hold the purse strings. If they can be successfully ignored, then why bother with the November elections? No matter who's in office, if they do something you disagree with, just ignore 'em! I still like to think that money talks...(or the threat of withholding money). Maybe they could attach some strings, who knows? At least it would make the front pages. My 2 cents.
Post #259,572 by drewk 6/21/06 3:00:55 PM Reply	Would take a looooooooong time I still like to think that money talks...(or the threat of withholding money). As someone said to me just the other day, money is a social construct. The government doesn't actually pay their suppliers with anything of intrinsic value. They cause computers to send some electrons to someone else's computers in a way that we collectively agree to pretend represents a transfer of real value. If the companies that supply beans, bullets and band-aids (to steal a phrase) decide to keep sending actual stuff to the troops, with the (so-far) certain knowledge that they'll eventually get one of those electronic transactions in their favor, this can go on indefinitely. The administration is basically saying, "The troops are there, we have to supply them. We've sent the supplies, we have to pay for them." When (I'm guessing) Rove read the part of the Constitution that says (paraphrased), "The president can *send* troops, then *Congress* has to pay to *keep* them there," he interpreted that as, "The president can send troops, then Congress *has to* pay to keep them there." === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]

Welcome to IWETHEY!