Obama wants $33 Billion More for Wars + Record $708 Billion in 2011 for DoD

[Joanne98]

2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama is pushing for $33 billion more for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (and likely Yemen and Somalia) in addition to a record request of $708 for the Department of Defense in 2011. While saying that there simply isn’t enough money around to support true health care reform, or to create massive public works projects to stimulate the economy, or to carry out any number of a list of programs for average Americans, Obama favors spending more for wars and the DoD than Bush did.

The AP reports:

The Obama administration plans to ask Congress for an additional $33 billion to fight unpopular wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, on top of a record request for $708 billion for the Defense Department next year, The Associated Press has learned.

…

The extra $33 billion in 2010 would mostly go toward the expansion of the war in Afghanistan. Obama ordered an extra 30,000 troops for that war as part of an overhaul of the war strategy late last year.

The request for that additional funding will be sent to Congress at the same time as the record spending request for next year, making war funding an especially difficult pill for some of Obama’s Democratic allies.

Military officials have suggested that the 2011 request would top $700 billion for the first time…

NOTE too that the above record spending DOES NOT INCLUDE secret, "black budget" money hidden to the public (and most of Congress) and DOES NOT INCLUDE so-called "supplementals" that can reach tens of billions of dollars. It is fairly clear that the $33 billion will not be enough for the escalation of the war in Afghanistan since Obama himself has said every 1,000 new troops costs an extra $1 billion a year. Obama escalated by sending 35,000 more troops to Afghanistan (that’s $35 billion, not $33 billion) PLUS every troop sent has had an additional mercenary troop attached to it in the past. These mercenaries cost even more than regular soldiers, so expect another $35 or so billion more for this later this year.

Obama’s increase in money for wars, weapons and more troops in unpopular wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan (and likely Yemen, Somalia and even Iran) will heighten the gulf between Obama’s rhetoric and his actual deeds. Even some Democrats, like David Obey the powerful head of the House Appropriations Committee, are lukewarm to Obama’s overseas wars and with these increased budget requests, that rift is likely to grow. Expect more tensions between the Blue Dogs and Obama on one side and progressives on the other side.

Essentially America is bankrupt now. Obama still doesn’t get it that more money for guns means less money for butter (and domestic programs)

Continued>>>
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/23713

[ixion]

1. The MIC doesn't care if we're insolvent, as long as those cheques keep rolling in

:argh:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msongs]

3. so which nation is the biggest sponsor of state terrorism these days? nt

[TheWraith]

4. More lying, paranoid horsecrap from FireDogLake.

This "war in Yemen" thing is the biggest pile of nonsense ever to come out of the paranoid nutcase wing of the blogosphere.

[change_notfinetuning]

5. How quaint. They still ask. I thought they just took it. You know, when

Congress winks. (Oh, it's for defense spending? wink/wink Whatever, Mr. Commander-in-Chief. There's more if you need it. wink/wink Surgery to save Jimmy? What do you think we are? Socialists?)

[nightrain]

6. glad to knr. Horrifying. Vietnam deja vu. Obama is getting horrible

advice and is taking it.

This is not what I voted for him for!

The contrast is getting quite stark--unwilling to provide real health CARE for us, but quite willing to persist with killing "over there". Dumb. Short-sighted.

[change_notfinetuning]

7. Guns vs. butter should be replaced in today's economics books/classes with

guns vs. health care (supposedly, just another consumer purchase). I get that it's just a theoretical example, but we can all swing the $2/lb for butter. But the reality of it is that the spending on "guns" is, in large part, why we don't have universal health care. Or is reality only instructional in tempering principles, idealism and expectations?

[bvar22]

8. Obama does "get it".

"Obama still doesn’t get it that more money for guns means less money for butter"

Obama "gets it".
He just doesn't care for "butter".

[FlyByNight]

9. I wonder if the additional money is "revenue neutral"?

I have my doubts.

Heathcare (such as it is) gets diluted to something that barely resembles significant reform and the Pentagon gets practically whatever it wants, whenever it wants. What national debt?

:puke: