$5,000 Per Second Occupation

[molson_golden2002]

Nicholas Kristof:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/opinion/...tml?ref=opinion

 

But if you believe that staying in Iraq does more good than harm, you

must answer the next question: Is that presence so valuable that it

is worth undermining our economy?

 

Granted, the cost estimates are squishy and controversial, partly

because the $12.5 billion a month that we're now paying for Iraq is

only a down payment. We'll still be making disability payments to

Iraq war veterans 50 years from now.

 

Professor Stiglitz calculates in a new book, written with Linda

Bilmes of Harvard University, that the total costs, including the

long-term bills we're incurring, amount to about $25 billion a month.

That's $330 a month for a family of four.

 

A Congressional study by the Joint Economic Committee found that the

sums spent on the Iraq war each day could enroll an additional 58,000

children in Head Start or give Pell Grants to 153,000 students to

attend college. Or if we're sure we want to invest in security, then

a day's Iraq spending would finance another 11,000 border patrol

agents or 9,000 police officers.

 

Imagine the possibilities. We could hire more police and border

patrol agents, expand Head Start and rehabilitate America's image in

the world by underwriting a global drive to slash maternal mortality,

eradicate malaria and deworm every child in Africa.

 

All that would consume less than one month's spending on the Iraq

war.

[VABills]

Nicholas Kristof:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/opinion/...tml?ref=opinion

 

But if you believe that staying in Iraq does more good than harm, you

must answer the next question: Is that presence so valuable that it

is worth undermining our economy?

 

Granted, the cost estimates are squishy and controversial, partly

because the $12.5 billion a month that we're now paying for Iraq is

only a down payment. We'll still be making disability payments to

Iraq war veterans 50 years from now.

 

Professor Stiglitz calculates in a new book, written with Linda

Bilmes of Harvard University, that the total costs, including the

long-term bills we're incurring, amount to about $25 billion a month.

That's $330 a month for a family of four.

 

A Congressional study by the Joint Economic Committee found that the

sums spent on the Iraq war each day could enroll an additional 58,000

children in Head Start or give Pell Grants to 153,000 students to

attend college. Or if we're sure we want to invest in security, then

a day's Iraq spending would finance another 11,000 border patrol

agents or 9,000 police officers.

 

Imagine the possibilities. We could hire more police and border

patrol agents, expand Head Start and rehabilitate America's image in

the world by underwriting a global drive to slash maternal mortality,

eradicate malaria and deworm every child in Africa.

 

All that would consume less than one month's spending on the Iraq

war.

 

 

You see those things I bolded? Those are or's. We cannot do all of them. Pick one? Any one. Which do you choose to ignore. Which is the most important? BTW, you realize this admin is sending a lot more money to Africa for AIDS then the previous. You also realize that the cost of the "Iraq War" includes a large chuck of DOD money that would have been spent on DOD, regardless, and therefore the "cost savings" are not nearly as much as you believe.

 

Of course your little cut and paste doesn't take into account how much more unstable the oil/gas market would be. You don't know what the cost of oil would be if we didn't go. You don't know what Saddam would have done by now. You don't know that he wouldn't have started another war in Iran, and had some WMD's from one side or other that made the markets even more unstable and more costly. You don't know that Iran wouldn't have felt even more pressure to finish a nuke to protect themselves from Saddam who has shown he is willing to gas people.

[Alaska Darin]

Liberals only like failing, expensive, bloated government programs when they get to choose them.

[molson_golden2002]

Liberals only like failing, expensive, bloated government programs when they get to choose them.

Oh ya, Iraq is a liberal program, I forgot

 

Too bad the vast majority of Liberals opposed it

[molson_golden2002]

You see those things I bolded? Those are or's. We cannot do all of them. Pick one? Any one. Which do you choose to ignore. Which is the most important? BTW, you realize this admin is sending a lot more money to Africa for AIDS then the previous. You also realize that the cost of the "Iraq War" includes a large chuck of DOD money that would have been spent on DOD, regardless, and therefore the "cost savings" are not nearly as much as you believe.

 

Of course your little cut and paste doesn't take into account how much more unstable the oil/gas market would be. You don't know what the cost of oil would be if we didn't go. You don't know what Saddam would have done by now. You don't know that he wouldn't have started another war in Iran, and had some WMD's from one side or other that made the markets even more unstable and more costly. You don't know that Iran wouldn't have felt even more pressure to finish a nuke to protect themselves from Saddam who has shown he is willing to gas people.

You do realize that that was only a months worth of the Iraq fiasco?

 

Ya, oil prices are sure grand since we occupied that country! Great point!

[VABills]

You do realize that that was only a months worth of the Iraq fiasco?

 

Ya, oil prices are sure grand since we occupied that country! Great point!

What was oil prices before hand? What has been inflation? How's about comparing apples to apples? Do you know what would have happened, or how much more stable or unstable the area would be if we didn't go? No you don't and neither do I.

[molson_golden2002]

What was oil prices before hand? What has been inflation? How's about comparing apples to apples? Do you know what would have happened, or how much more stable or unstable the area would be if we didn't go? No you don't and neither do I.

Seemed pretty stable until we blew everything up

[VABills]

Seemed pretty stable until we blew everything up

What are the facts? What was prices before hand? What has inflation been? How much of the cost of your gas is due to increased taxes, transportation addon fees that your local and state government have added? What is the "real" increase equal?

[Alaska Darin]

Oh ya, Iraq is a liberal program, I forgot

Again, you simply don't get it. When you cede such tremendous power and wealth to the very few, you shouldn't be at all surprised when they misuse it. Learn the definition of the word "consequences", which is a big reason why the Founders were against the large Federal establishment that you and the rest of your ignorant ilk covet so much.

Too bad the vast majority of Liberals opposed it

Vast? In the Senate, only 42% of liberals voted against the Resolution (which, dolt, means that 58% voted FOR the resolution. That's not even a majority, much less a vast one). In the house, Liberals voted 126-81 against. This means that percentage wise, across Congress it was about an even split.

[Alaska Darin]

Seemed pretty stable until we blew everything up

Iraq is a tiny blip on the radar as far as oil prices go. But don't let your oversimplification of such a complex issue get in the way of reality.

[Sirius99]

You also realize that the cost of the "Iraq War" includes a large chuck of DOD money that would have been spent on DOD, regardless, and therefore the "cost savings" are not nearly as much as you believe.

 

True. We had approximately 60000 troops in the area for Operation Southern Watch et. al., and I've never seen those accounted for in the "cost" of the war. Still expensive no doubt, but it would be nice to see a breakout including estimates of what we would have spent anyway, which is the only way to see what the decision to invade has truly cost.

[RkFast]

Iraq is a tiny blip on the radar as far as oil prices go. But don't let your oversimplification of such a complex issue get in the way of reality.

 

And when did oil prices REALLY make the huge leap? I remember some chick dancing in the Gulf that had something to do with it.

[Sirius99]

Iraq is a tiny blip on the radar as far as oil prices go. But don't let your oversimplification of such a complex issue get in the way of reality.

 

Darin, Darin, where are your math skills? Don't you know it's quite easy to see that blowing up a coutry that provides less than 5% of our crude oil has directly resulted in the increase in oil prices by 250% over the last five years? Maybe you need a refesher course on "new math".

[DC Tom]

Darin, Darin, where are your math skills? Don't you know it's quite easy to see that blowing up a coutry that provides less than 5% of our crude oil has directly resulted in the increase in oil prices by 250% over the last five years? Maybe you need a refesher course on "new math".

 

I could (and would, in fact) argue that the deficit spending on the Iraq occupation has no small contribution to the falling dollar...and hence, the Iraq war does in fact contribute significantly to oil prices.

 

But given all the OTHER wasteful deficit spending this government indulges, I have a hard time taking that excuse too seriously.

[Sirius99]

I could (and would, in fact) argue that the deficit spending on the Iraq occupation has no small contribution to the falling dollar...and hence, the Iraq war does in fact contribute significantly to oil prices.

 

Interesting point, but I'd have to see the detailed numbers before I could agree or disagree.

 

But given all the OTHER wasteful deficit spending this government indulges, I have a hard time taking that excuse too seriously.

 

Well, government spending = wasteful is a tautology, no?

[GG]

I could (and would, in fact) argue that the deficit spending on the Iraq occupation has no small contribution to the falling dollar...and hence, the Iraq war does in fact contribute significantly to oil prices.

 

I'd disagree with that. My bias is that US military spending props up the dollar. My guess it's the longer term concern of retirement & healthcare entitlements, coupled with low savings rates.

[molson_golden2002]

1) Again, you simply don't get it. When you cede such tremendous power and wealth to the very few, you shouldn't be at all surprised when they misuse it. Learn the definition of the word "consequences", which is a big reason why the Founders were against the large Federal establishment that you and the rest of your ignorant ilk covet so much.

 

2) Vast? In the Senate, only 42% of liberals voted against the Resolution (which, dolt, means that 58% voted FOR the resolution. That's not even a majority, much less a vast one). In the house, Liberals voted 126-81 against. This means that percentage wise, across Congress it was about an even split.

1) Wow, just wow. I was under the impression the founders lived in the pre-industrial world of the 18th century. I'm not surprised they had different views about the world. You do realize things have changed in the world a tad bit since 1789, don't you?

 

2) This is beyond stupid. Are you actually saying that a handful of politicians in the Senate represent Liberal opion across the country? You are completely out of touch with reality

[molson_golden2002]

Iraq is a tiny blip on the radar as far as oil prices go. But don't let your oversimplification of such a complex issue get in the way of reality.

I agree with you, thanks for backing up my point of view

[molson_golden2002]

I'd disagree with that. My bias is that US military spending props up the dollar. My guess it's the longer term concern of retirement & healthcare entitlements, coupled with low savings rates.

[Peter]

From a strictly paleo conservative view of this, we are not getting a sufficient return on our investment.

 

I would have preferred keeping the focus on OBL, spending the $5B per year that we had been on the Iraq no fly zone, and saving the rest to keep the tax cuts in place.

 

Unfortunately, now that we opened up Pandora's box, we have no choice but to try to create some stability in Iraq. W's decision to invade Iraq and the ensuing mismanagement of the war has created a real Hobson's choice.