I would vote for the 87 Billion

[Zuni]

I would need to see the figures of what it is going to be spent on, and would make sure that money is not being handed over to Halliburton.
But I see it is a Marshall Plan. Iraq desperatly needs investment in infastructure, and unless we want to see it linger on in disrepair and fail in the future, we should invest. I see it as a long term investment.
This kind of investment proved to be of long term value in Western Europe and Japan after WWII, and now those countries are among the most succsessful in the world.
I think the UN should be given far more power in Iraq, and the peace keeping forces should be internationalized. But the 87 Billion would be a crucial jumpstart for Iraq's future. We have taken on a long term commitment, and we need to accept responsibility

I say raise taxes on the filthy rich and let them pay for it. I would take a bunch of money from Halliburton, dick Cheney and the Bush family if I could and use it for schools in Iraq.

But I still support this, like I would have supported the Marshall plan and the reconstruction of Japan after WWII.

[Jack Rabbit]

1. I would, too, but there would be strings attached

1. The UN would be given administrative control of Iraq for an interim period, during which Iraqis hold a constitutional convention and hold free elections without Bushie interference.

2. Contracts awarded by the Bush junta to US multinational corporations for the post-war reconstruction of Iraq must be cancelled; the new Iraqi government will open bids for contracts for the reconstruction of the country.

3. Any sales of public assets in Iraq approved by the quisling IGC are nullified.

4. The US recongizes the International Criminal Court.

5. Bush and his aides resign from office and turn themselves over to an international tribunal in order to be tried for war crimes in Iraq; Bush will admit that the election of 2000 was stolen and that Mr. Gore is the rightful President.

[Deja Q]

2. America needs an infrastructure too - do read this, especially you Rush

Bush*s invasion of Iraq was uncalled for and was based on the motive of revenge by our "honorable and dignified" president.

He* should be impeached for that alone.

He is adding grossly to the national debt, which threatens our economy NOW - let alone how the next generations have to clean up his* filthy mess.

Let alone supporting corporations outsourcing american jobs to foreign countries. In the short term, the CEOs make more $$$. In the long run, it's going to be a catastrophe for our economy. And with Bush insulting the people whose jobs were taken from them to be given to non-US-citizens... There shouldn't be one fucker who supports bushbastard* right now. Not even one. Anybody who does supports the death of America. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts. Rush, you damn well be reading this and get it through your thick skull and lard-soaked belly in order to understand and digest what's going on and what's wrong in America. It's not us. It's you and your ilk. Kindly go away before everything's destroyed.

The UN should pick up its balls and kick the US out of there totally and even kick the US out of the UN totally. The US, over the last 3 years, has shown it wants out of every international treaty and act of good will (yet wants foreign countries to still trade with us, what a nice little double-standard to have...). So let em go out. The world community is larger than us and doesn't have all the trade problems we do. The US would sink very quickly if the rest of the world did the right thing and shunned us. That's what Bush* wants. That's what Bush* should get.

And how dare Bush go to the UN to, asking for help after how he treated them. The UN should help, but as I said keep the US held back by about several thousand miles. The US shouldn't be anywhere near Iraq or anywhere of importance until somebody who gives a damn about more than his corporate special interest groups gets elected.

[AP]

3. You just know that 90% of it is going to be profit for connected corps

and money going into secret accounts to cause instability and black ops around the world.

[Zuni]

4. I think most of it will be spent on Iraq

but I want to have a public audit of all the administrations spending.

[AP]

10. Krugman said that Republicans are already saying that 87 bil is

probably more than needed BECAUSE it includes a lot of money for "consultants" and black ops..."as if that's supposed to reassure us."

[KG]

5. you should be aware that only $20B is for 'rebuilding' iraq

the rest is for strengthing the US military presence in the ME.

no deal, chimpy.

[izzie]

6. Lets trim it down.

Since we have invaded the country we will have to do something.

[Zuni]

7. I can deal with that. 87 Billion is a lot.

I am sure there is a lot of pork barrel stuff in there for Halliburton. Things that aren't needed by our soldiers, and are not needed to repair Iraq should be cut out.
But we do need a major investment.

[KG]

8. how about the other mamber of the 'coalition of the willing'

maybe the could pony up the 87B.

extend iraq unlimited credit, let them rebuild their own country.

[jfxgillis]

9. The only way out for the Dems

is if the Republicans in Congress squeeze the number down. The Dems couldn't squeeze it even if they held the Majority.

Except for the safe-seat lib-lefties, voting against is lose-lose. Look at the stakes for even moderately competitive House seats.

If you vote against and things go badly, suddenly Bush has a convenient scapegoat. If you vote against and things go well, the core argument against Bush's handling of post-Saddam Iraq is dead anyway. If you vote for it, it's not like a Republican challenger is in a position to trash you for that vote even if the district's voters lean against anyway.

The best all-around strategy is to vote for it and blame Bush, which has the inestimable advantage of being TRUE.