Bush to Seek $80B for Iraq, Afghan Wars:($1.5 billion.- Baghdad Embassy)

[clem_c_rock]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050125/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_spending_3

$1.5 billion for a fancy new embassy, 14 bases, 1 giant base in Kuwait, and a permanent middle east microwave communications network.

A show of hands who thinks Iraq isn't a permanent idea?

<snippet>

Adding additional pressure, the Congressional Budget Office (news - web sites) planned to release a semi-annual report on the budget Tuesday that was expected to include a projection of war costs. Last September, the nonpartisan budget office projected the 10-year costs of the wars at $1.4 trillion at current levels of operations, and $1 trillion if the wars were gradually phased down.

Aides said about three-fourths of the $80 billion was expected to be for the Army, which is bearing the brunt of the fighting in Iraq. It also <b>was expected to include money for building a U.S. embassy in Baghdad, which has been estimated to cost $1.5 billion.</b>

</snippet>

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. Dems Need To start Calling A Billion "A Thousand Million"

I don't think joe schmo, or anybody really, understands how much money that really is.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

2. do you mean .......a hundred thousand million?

[karlrschneider]

4. No, a hundred thousand million would be 100 billion.

.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

5. opps in need of a testosterone injection here

:7

[ElsewheresDaughter]

3. How Big is a Billion.....1 billion seconds ago it was 1959, 1 billion.....

How big is a Billion?
A billion seconds ago it was 1959.

A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.

A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.

A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minute at the rate Washington spends it

[Vinnie From Indy]

7. WOW! Great comparisons!

I chuckle when I hear people say the war was a mistake because no weapons were found or that the war is about bringing freedom to the Iraqi people. The ability of the multi-national corporations, many of whom also bring America a good chunk of their daily news, to convince so many people that the Iraq war was either a mistake or justified under the banner of "Marching Freedom" is astonishing.

This war is about money and it is perhaps the largest cash cow ever created by an alliance of coporations and a state in the history of humankind. Mussolini had exactly right when he opined,"fascism should more appropriately be called 'coporatism', for it is the merging of corporations and the state".

[ElsewheresDaughter]

8. sen. byrd: "we have spent $149 per second since Jesus was born on Iraq war

[cliss]

9. I wonder.......

just how big do they believe this "Cash Cow" really is? I know a big factor in marching to war was about the Oil. It's been estimated that Iraq has the world's #2 supply of oil (Saudi Arabia is #1).

I believe I've read around 2.1 trillion bbl under those hot Iraqi sands. And if Peak Oil is true, well....

And I've also read that the oil is fairly close to the surface, and it's the "good" oil; "Light, Sweet" crude (yum, sounds yummy).

But it was not a slam-dunk proposition. I'd venture to say this was a HUGE gamble on their part. I'm sure Cheney knew how much the oil is worth. But think of the obstacles they were facing.

Huge obstacles. They knew there would be an uprising. They know about their tenacity, their ability to fight over long, sustained periods.

I don't really believe they thought there would be "flowers & Candy". I think that was just a ruse they threw to the public to fool them for a while. They never believed that.

They knew it was going to be a battle. An intense struggle. But they had faith in the US military. In our intelligence. In our Staying Power aka the Trough, or the Taxpayer Treasury. They gambled, they tossed the dice and................

THEY LOST. They absolutely lost.

That's the sweat you see on Cheney's forehead if you look closely. Why? What happened? They misjudged. Misjudged what? The cost of the war? No, it's benefited their crony friends. They did really good on that account.

Check what Condi Rice said at the Congressional hearings. She conceded that some "mistakes were made". Not some mistakes. The whole thing was a mistake.

They misjudged the insurgency. They had NO idea they were going to get involved in guerrilla warfare on the streets of Baghdad. They thought it was intrinsic to VietNam. But they never went there. They never suited up, EVER. VietNam was something they never dealt with, since none of them served, so it completely bypassed their attention. A little late.

Right now, as we speak, their fingers are shaking at the thought of losing THEIR BIG GAMBLE. They're desperately trying to salvage what's left and see this thing through. It still won't work, though.

I could have told them, just by turning my Magic 8-Ball upside down.

"Says No"

[Vinnie From Indy]

10. The oil was certainly a factor

But i think it was only a factor because they learned from the Vietnam experience that if they are going to go to war for a prolonged period to steal tax payer dollars through Govt. contracts why not invade a country that has something else they can steal in addition. Call it their "added value" war plan if you will. Rumsfeld and Cheney were on the scene during Vietnam and they learned two things very well. One, control the media. Walter Cronkite and TET killed their plans to continue the war in Vietnam during which they and their friends could steal billions more dollars. Two, invade a country that has something worthwhile to steal like Iraq and it's oil.

These guys are covered on both sides of the equation. They have also undoubtedly calculated the chances of their ever being brought to account as nil.

[clem_c_rock]

12. Exactly - US troops are fast becoming guardians of oil

http://www.safehaven.com/article-2102.htm

http://www.rupe-india.org/34/military.html

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=1888

[clem_c_rock]

13. But - will they give up and admit a mistake - NO!!! In fact....

Quite the opposite. Here we have the quaint idea of never giving up:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20050128.htmf

Can you imagine how the US economy, teetering as it is, is going to pay for an additional 25,000 troops added each year!!??

My theories:

1. More troops and a draft will finally bury the iraqi uprising for
good in a massive collective punishment effort. After the people
are completely subdued, the low hanging fruit of the Iraqi oil
fields they so desperatetly
saught will finally be theirs and they can MAYBE use the revenues
to keep the economy afloat.

2. The sudden push for privatisation of S-Security is a desperate
attempt by the Bush administration to ignite the stock market
and stave off an impeding economic disaster and hide the fact
of how much money the Bush administration has REALLY stolen
from the social security reserves.

Just some theories. Any thoughts?

[cliss]

14. Interesting. My thoughts:

On #1: I believe they will probably try this. In their Dark Ages feudal mentality, they believe they can crush the opposition by bringing in more and more troops. They may even try some "mini nukes" and wipe out entire villages or small cities. They will probably subdue the population for a while, but it will seep out in other places. Because there is always another village. With more kinsmen seeking revenge.

The reason I believe they will fail is:
1) the taxi meter is always ticking. As we fiddle, Rome is burning. We're currently spending $2,000,000,000.00 per week in Iraq (that's Billion). It's simply impossible to keep this up, and they know it. There are some threads which show how much our current deficit is, and it just took my breath away. I could feel my head spinning.......$427 billion + the war in Iraq.

It's not sustainable over the long haul. The Iraqis are very, very patient. They don't have a huge military budget that's running out. They get backing from other muslim countries, mainly Saudi Arabia with endless deep pockets.

The revenue from the Iraqi oil is a dream. It simply cannot cover the expenses of the war. It's not enough. Plus, they don't want to pump out very much. They want to sit on it so that when the rest of the world is desperate, they've got the Goods.

2. Interesting. I never thought of that. Maybe you could post a thread on this subject. There are some really clever people here at the DU.

[clem_c_rock]

16. The thing that scares me is

The fact that economic issues seem to not even register in the PNAC mindset. These guys will argue that millitary spending is only a tiny percentage of the GDP so we can spend infinitely.

These folks live in a different reality that any of us. I'm convinced of this more every day.

[clem_c_rock]

11. All I know is that's a pretty darn nice embassy

And I wonder what the pricetag for the next highest priced US embassy is?

Get ready to hear people squawking that most of the cost is going to be security. Blah, Blah, Blah.

[indepat]

6. $1+ trillion: man that's a lot of bang for so few bucks

[BrightKnight]

15. He needs to find the $9 billion that he "lost" first. - n/t.