WP: Increase In War Funding Sought (another $70B)

[kskiska]

Bush to Request Another $70 Billion

Tuesday, October 26, 2004; Page A01

The Bush administration intends to seek about $70 billion in emergency funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan early next year, pushing total war costs close to $225 billion since the invasion of Iraq early last year, Pentagon and congressional officials said yesterday.

White House budget office spokesman Chad Kolton emphasized that final decisions on the supplemental spending request will not be made until shortly before the request is sent to Congress. That may not happen until early February, when President Bush submits his budget for fiscal 2006, assuming he wins reelection.

But Pentagon and House Appropriations Committee aides said the Defense Department and military services are scrambling to get their final requests to the White House Office of Management and Budget by mid-November, shortly after the election. The new numbers underscore that the war is going to be far more costly and intense, and last longer, than the administration first suggested.

The Army is expected to request at least an additional $30 billion for combat activity in Iraq, with $6 billion more needed to begin refurbishing equipment that has been worn down or destroyed by unexpectedly intense combat, another Appropriations Committee aide said. The deferral of needed repairs over the past year has added to maintenance costs, which can no longer be delayed, a senior Pentagon official said.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62554-2004Oct25.html

[frank frankly]

1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

couldn't wait until November 3rd, could you, BUSH?

fuck bush. i hate that POS fascist giggling murderer.

[CarolynEC]

2. Didn't JK get ambushed for using the $225 billion figure? n/t

[CookieD]

5. No, he actually got ambushed for using a $200 billion figure. n/t

[CarolynEC]

10. So all the talking heads who wrongly and unfairly jumped on him...

... for "inflating" the figure are going to publicly apologize now, right?

*sound of crickets*

[gottaB]

15. starting with the Washington Post

From their "Debate Referee"

Kerry suggested that the United States has spent $200 billion on Iraq, largely because it supplied the bulk of the troops. That number is an estimate that combines the amount already spent -- about $120 billion -- with money that is expected to be spent in the coming year or requested by the administration.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated in June that the war could cost from $180 billion to almost $400 billion over the next 10 years, under various scenarios.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/0930c_index.html

The CBO estimate is horse puckey, and yet it is used to referee Kerry's claims. Harumph.

Kerry's critics knew that Kerry's "$200 billion" was in the ballpark, and yet they insisted on their cavillations, and gloated when Kerry backed away from his claim. What's that about? Factchecking is too good for these factcheckers. You bring the tar, I'll bring the feathers.

[TexasChick]

28. So true, so true... n/t

[Disturbed]

6. Anybody find the $8 Billion?

Kerry said $200 Billion.

Iraq is a loss.

Just read this entire view of Iraq and it is sad.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1024-02.htm

[luaneryder]

20. But, this morning some Repub

talking head was ambushing the Senator for the alleged cost of his health plan. Repub values-spending billions on war=good, spending anything on health=bad.

[whistle]

3. It will be $400 billion before next year is finished, what absolute....

...stupidity, what a waste of America's treasure and young men and women. For what, nothing but pain and msiery and orphans and disabled human beings. It makes me sick that this president was given a blank check to do this to the country of Iraq and to America, just to feed his own ambitions and pride while making a select few of his dads friends rich.

[MisterP]

17. but think of the profits

*sob* why will nobody think of the profits? *Imelda Marcos tears*
Holy Cow almighty--it might even reach 500B by Dec 05

[UpInArms]

19. looking back at the speeding of their 200 mph train

we can see this mal-administration's empirial plans just were so stupid and dangerous and they "sold" them so well, what with all of the assistance that they got from the mainstream presstitutes.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0110-01.htm

Published on Friday, January 10, 2003 by the Long Island, NY Newsday
Plan: Tap Iraq's Oil
U.S. considers seizing revenues to pay for occupation, source says

by Knut Royce


WASHINGTON - Bush administration officials are seriously considering proposals that the United States tap Iraq's oil to help pay the cost of a military occupation, a move that likely would prove highly inflammatory in an Arab world already suspicious of U.S. motives in Iraq.

Officially, the White House agrees that oil revenue would play an important role during an occupation period, but only for the benefit of Iraqis, according to a National Security Council spokesman.

Yet there are strong advocates inside the administration, including in the White House, for appropriating the oil funds as "spoils of war," according to a source who has been briefed by participants in the dialogue.

"There are people in the White House who take the position that it's all the spoils of war," said the source, who asked not to be further identified. "We take all the oil money until there is a new democratic government ."

...more...

[tridim]

4. It's official.. BushCo wants to lose

I don't blame them, they have to know they're fucked. I'm sure they haven't told Bush yet.

[Journeyman]

12. Yes. Why else would they release this today? . . .

They don't need to submit the numbers to the WH OMB until mid-November, and the 2006 budget wouldn't need to be submitted until February, so why make this public today? Common sense political behavior would suggest they'd want this kept secret as long as possible -- at least until after the election was concluded. So why now, if not to tip the balance against themselves?

[progressivebydesign]

24. Actually, a few months ago it was reported Bush was STALLING this!!

He refused to even ENTERTAIN more money for the troops, until AFTER the election! It pissed off the Pentagon... because the money is sorely needed. That's why they're having to scramble NOW, because they have a deadline. THey wanted the money earlier this year.. but Bush said NO.. not until after the elections. Great way to support the troops! NOT!

[ozymandius]

7. If I may quote a post from Free Republic...

"Has he no idea of the value of money?"

-- when Bush asked for $78 billion in additional funding

[Lorien]

18. It's not "his" money; BushCo is a war profiteering operation

you and I (and yes, this includes Freepers) are stuck with the bill. :grr:

[MrTriumph]

8. Time for TV's debate "Fact checkers" to apologize

Kerry & Edwards had it right. $200 billion was correct after all.

We can sleep soundly knowning all the hate radio show hosts, talking-head cable know-it-alls and oh-so-holier-than-thou newspapers will announce their "fact checkers" were mistaken.

[bluestateguy]

9. At some point the umbilical cord must be cut

Funding for Afghanistan is one thing: that started out as a prudent move that Bush simply screwed up. On the other hand, at some point funding for the war in Iraq simply has to be cut off. Yes, that's right, cut off. When the ATM card doesn't work anymore the Administration will have no choice but to either secure international cooperation and funding or pull out. THAT's supporting the troops.

[Carolab]

11. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Not ONE MORE DIME of our money!!!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[RainDog]

13. Let Halliburton pay for it

they've already scammed us enough.

[Pithy Cherub]

14. When hell freezes over

will * be re-selected. So is Poland opening their Treasury first, lest we forget how mighty and monied our allies are...

[truthisfreedom]

16. and this is the Washington Post, not the New York Times!

let the hand-wringing and back-pedaling begin.

[DeepModem Mom]

21. Page-one article -- more and more billions --

[maddezmom]

22. so Kerry was right all along...cost and troop strength

~snip~
The new funding request, the final amount of which will not be decided until shortly before it is submitted to Congress around February -- provided Bush wins the November 2 presidential election -- would push total war costs close to 225 billion since last year's invasion of Iraq, Pentagon (news - web sites) and congressional officials told the daily.


An unnamed Pentagon official said the final figures could be shaped by the outcome of the presidential election and events in Iraq, adding that if the current troop levels are maintained, the funding request would fall roughly to around 70 billion dollars for the military alone.


Separately, USA Today said Tuesday that Pentagon officials were considering increasing current troop levels in Iraq from 138,000 to 160,000 to help protect international and Iraqi election workers and secure polling locations.
~snip~
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1520&ncid=1520&e=3&u=/afp/20041026/pl_afp/us_iraq_funding_041026152315


Troop numbers would be boosted by delaying the departures of some US troops now in Iraq and accelerating the deployment of others scheduled to go there in 2005, Pentagon officials told the nationally-distributed daily.

[progressivebydesign]

23. I remember this! Bush wanted to wait until AFTER the elections...

.. because it would LOOK BAD!! But the Pentagon, etc., were screaming that we are HARMING the troops by delaying the money!!! Glad this is being reported, but I HOPE they truly report that Bush tried to STALL THEM until after the election!!!

Who REALLY supports the troops? WE DO!!!

[JPZenger]

25. USA Today: 22,000 More U.S. Troops Needed in Iraq

(Shh. Don't tell the voters.)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-10-25-troops-increase_x.htm

"U.S. considers ways to increase troops in Iraq for vote

By Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY

Concerned that they won't get enough new troops from allies to help provide security for Iraqi elections in January, Pentagon officials are considering increasing the current U.S. force by delaying the departures of some U.S. troops now in Iraq and accelerating the deployment of others scheduled to go there next year.

The goal is to temporarily raise the number of U.S. troops in Iraq from the current 138,000 to almost 160,000 to help protect international and Iraqi election workers and secure polling locations. That addition would bring the sustained U.S. troop presence in Iraq to its highest level since President Bush declared an end to major combat operations on May 1, 2003...

Four Defense officials with direct knowledge of troop planning for Iraq discussed what the Pentagon must do to meet the need for more troops at election time. They asked not to be identified because troop matters are highly sensitive and decisions have not yet been finalized... The Pentagon has been unable to persuade allies to send enough new forces, and U.S. commanders have so far been unable to train enough Iraqi troops to fill the gap.

The easiest option, the Defense officials said, is to delay the departure from Iraq of the 1st Cavalry Division, which is set to begin leaving in January. At the same time, the Pentagon would move up the deployment of some elements of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division."

[AIJ Alom]

26. Can Barbara and Jenna volunteer now ? I mean cause we all need to

"sacrifice".

[nolabels]

27. They could never win with ten times that amount people

Them people want their nation(s) back and no amount of anything will change their hearts and minds.

This is prime example:
KURDISTAN
http://www.puk.org/

[crossroads]

31. The excuse for the draft?

Hmmm
:eyes:

[KingChicken]

29. Keep nailing the coffin shut!

Bad news for Bush every day now, it's all going to hell in Iraq, a well trained Monkey could have done a better job. What more needs to happen to get a landslide for Kerry? At this rate I’m afraid that humanity will disintegrate and the world will crash into the sun before Kerry is inaugurated in January. (Only Bush with his drunken politics could single handily destroy civilization)

[Yavin4]

30. What's Cheney's Cut?

Any guesses? 5%? 10%? Iraq has become a bad episode of The Sopranos.

[moggie]

32. Good grief

$70 billion here, $70 billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money! Imagine what you could achieve if you spent that on something worthwhile.

[petepillow]

33. I'm sure someone's posted this already but...

i was just referred to this site by a friend. useful stats in a kerry campaign, no?

http://costofwar.com/

sometimes i feel like we're missing lots of chances to fire meaningful missiles at the bush assministration. then i realize there's so much ammo, so little time...

sigh.