Iraq war is costing $100,000 per minute

[SHRED]

----------------

It's worth it...right?
I hear lots of schools are getting painted.

And besides...social spending here, such as Universal Healthcare, would be Socialism, and we can't have that.
-----------------

Iraq war is costing $100,000 per minute
By Mark Mazzetti and Joel Havemann
Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — The White House said Thursday that it plans to ask Congress for an additional $70 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, driving the cost of military operations in the two countries to $120 billion this year, the highest ever.

Most of the new money would pay for the war in Iraq, which has cost an estimated $250 billion since the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

>>> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002780385_spending03.html

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

[NC_Nurse]

1. Gee, ya think

they could stop a few minutes and give me the money? I could really use it! :D

[QueenOfCalifornia]

2. It's not a war, it's an occupation

We need to start using the term OCCUPATION to describe what is going on in Iraq.

The cost of this OCCUPATION is climbing daily... $100,000 a minute does not surprise me. What does surprise me is how that money is being used.

I realize the sarcasm of the school painting comment - it isn't lost to me and I enjoy healthy doses of sarcasm. The terrible thing is, that the sarcasm is true.

There is still very little if any drinkable water in Iraq. The electricity is intermittent. But I don't want to stray too far from your original point... Where's the money???

I will submit one example of the misguided use of our tax dollars.. just one of hundreds of examples:

Food? What about the food problem. Our contractors have forbidden the Iraqi people to use their own seeds to grow their family owned farmed vegetables. Ya gotta ask why a 7th generation farmer in Iraq isn't allowed to use the seeds from generations of family owned crops to reproduce? Why is it that our country is forcing our genetically engineered tomatoes on the Iraqi people?

Iraq's agriculture system is THE OLDEST KNOWN ON THE PLANET. Their farming dates back to 8000 BC. It is where wild wheat was first domesticated. Not just crops of wheat, barely, rye and lentils which began in Iraq but the first domestication of livestock occurred in the "Fertile Crescent." This is despite the harsh climate of that region. Low rainfall and stressed soil conditions only proved to make stronger crops through a natural selection process. Iraq has long been considered a leader in agriculture, setting a world standard for the rest of us to meet.

I find it fascinating that we are meddling in the production of the Iraqi crops and feel a need to control an agricultural system that was, prior to the invasion by the USA, quite successful.

So, we have been successful in destroying one of the most prized pieces of the Iraqi heritage. The ownership of their beloved family crops has been mutilated by some neo-scientific-Frankenstein designed right here in America.

"Since the US-led invasion, Iraq’s agricultural system has been stressed to the breaking point. While 5 million acres of wheat were under cultivation in Iraq before the invasion, only 1 million are being farmed today."

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/iraq122805.cfm

http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_318.shtml

[SHRED]

3. Ouch...

I didn't realize this.
Not too surprised though.

[teryang]

4. Quadrennial Defense Review press conference fails to address

...costs, cost benefit analysis, the deficit, standard audit methods for discontinuing failed policies, or manpower levels. Reporters openly mocked the "let me make this clear from the PR guy" after the brass left the room.

What exactly is the significance of increasing the number of trigger pullers and capability without regard to threats? This is an offensive and belligerent outlook. Threats are not discussed because we are the threat. The condescending view taken toward China as a "regional power" on a list of "challenges" was somewhat comical. It was as if the significance of China as a major rival funded by American corporations and our national debt crisis could be wished away with Pentagon newspeak.

The new standard hasn't changed we can meet the two war challenge "almost simultaneously." No one will notice the change in the new standard because it hasn't changed, it "almost" changed. Since when is toppling regimes a Defense Department military objective?

The second war in the "almost simultaneous" scenario is now a long unconventional conflict that never ends. Who is going to vote for that in Congress? Almost all of them.

The reporter at the end of the question period asked whether this new policy was going to increase deployment demands on troops and how the troops were going to react to these new demands. The admiral made a few boilerplate comments about education and training and getting the most effective force for the (outrageous?) costs and then abruptly terminated the press conference. This was the second critical questioner, apparently it was too much to bear.