• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iraq war costs U.S. more than $2 trillion: study

ecofarm said:
That speculation doesn't have anything to do with my question.

Obama has more deaths in Afghan than Bush... whose war is it?
Click to expand...

When it comes right down to it, does it really matter who history will say the war belongs to? Isn't it more important to focus on how we get out of it, how we strengthen a relationship with middle eastern cultures, and where we go next with this issue of terrorism?

It seems to me focusing on who's to blame, and how much it cost, is really just a distraction from the larger diplomatic issues that are not being addressed. I'm not a fan of President Bush or President Obama on this issue, but what I do want to know, is how we bring out troops home and how we do that successfuly in the long term.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
We stayed there under obama correct? Obama called it the good war correct? More lives were lost and more money was spent in Afghan under obama than under Bush so your entire OP is destroyed on that base alone. Isn't Randi about to start, maybe you should run along and listen to more of her vile dribble.
Click to expand...
So now, since Obama is president, you all are huge fans of "cut and run"?


Sheesh. And people wonder why no one takes the Right serious anymore.
 
WWGWD said:
When it comes right down to it, does it really matter who history will say the war belongs to?
Click to expand...

Well, then why are you arguing about that? You brought it up. I'm just pointing out that Obama caused more deaths in Afghan than Bush. That's a fact (not speculation about what could or might have been) - deal with it.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
I really dont even know what Al Queda is. Perhaps it is propagandized soldiers trained through capture in secret detention facilities all headed by the CIA? Or is it some super sect of cult like pissed off arab civilians? What the heck is Al Queda?
Click to expand...
Who knows for sure, but they got the blame for 911. And, IIRC, it was Obama's pursuit of Osama Bin Lafden into Afghanistan that led to the death of Al Queda's leader.

Bush could't even do that--kill OBL. He was too busy starting a needless war which cost us trillions.
 
ecofarm said:
That speculation doesn't have anything to do with my question.

Obama has more deaths in Afghan than Bush... whose war is it?
Click to expand...

America's. It was a war started by Bush that America saw as justified, unlike Iraq. That Obama today must still prosecute it is a testament to Bush's mismanagement of it.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
I bet not even half of that actually went to effort. Probably scooped up by politicians and their cohorts. To their friends in the private war market at incredibly inflated costs most likely.
Click to expand...

"No bid contracts".
 
What's the matter, calamity, you can't deal with facts? I heard that was a Republican problem.


Who knows for sure, but they got the blame for 911.
Click to expand...

Ahhh.... Trutherism surfaces! Now I see the problem.
 
calamity said:
Bush and his supporters had to start a war with a country that never did us any harm.
Click to expand...

I think it's time to give another history lesson to you people who keep insisting that George W. Bush started the war in Iraq.

The fact of the matter is that he did not start the war, he inherited an ongoing war.

Here's proof.

COALITION FORCES STRIKE RADAR SYSTEM AND AAA SITE January 20, 2001 -- In response to Iraqi violations of anti-aircraft artillery and surface to air missile fire today, Operation SOUTHERN WATCH aircraft used precision-guided weapons to strike radar systems and anti-aircraft artillery sites today in southern Iraq at approximately 8:15 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

COALITION AIRCRAFT STRIKE AAA SITES January 15, 2001 -- In response to recent Iraqi anti-aircraft artillery fire, Operation SOUTHERN WATCH aircraft used precision-guided weapons to strike anti-aircraft artillery sites today in southern Iraq at approximately 6:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

COALITION AIRCRAFT STRIKE AAA SITES January 1, 2001 -- In response to recent Iraqi violations of United Nations Security Council Resolutions and international demarches, Operation SOUTHERN WATCH aircraft used precision-guided weapons to strike a radar system today in southern Iraq at approximately 5:15 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

COALITION AIRCRAFT STRIKE AAA SITES January 1, 2001 -- In response to recent Iraqi violations of United Nations Security Council Resolutions and international demarches, Operation SOUTHERN WATCH aircraft used precision-guided weapons to strike a radar system today in southern Iraq at approximately 12:15 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Click to expand...

Source

Note that one of these airstrikes occured on January 20, 2001 at 8:15 AM. Just hours before GWB was sworn into office. That is conclusive proof that the war was ongoing when he took office.
 
ecofarm said:
Well, then why are you arguing about that? You brought it up. I'm just pointing out that Obama caused more deaths in Afghan than Bush. That's a fact (not speculation about what could or might have been) - deal with it.
Click to expand...

What did I bring up? lol. I saw your post pushing for a demand of who's war it is, and wondered why you thought it mattered. I get the point you made, and don't dispute it entirely. I would say you are not taking into account troop levels, and mission intensity, but again I find placing blame a little irrelevant. I don't think I placed blame anywhere, if I did, I'd love to know where I did that, because I did not intend to.
 
WWGWD said:
What did I bring up? lol. I saw your post pushing for a demand of who's war it is, and wondered why you thought it mattered. I get the point you made, and don't dispute it entirely. I would say you are not taking into account troop levels, and mission intensity, but again I find placing blame a little irrelevant. I don't think I placed blame anywhere, if I did, I'd love to know where I did that, because I did not intend to.
Click to expand...

Ok, you're a Progressive that doesn't blame Bush.

That's my good laugh for today.
 
ecofarm said:
Ok, you're a Progressive that doesn't blame Bush.

That's my good laugh for today.
Click to expand...

The sum of my views and opinions lean progressive, yes, but that doesn't mean I subscribe to any all progressive doctrine. I have opinions of my own, based my understanding of facts and events. You shouldn't make snap judgments about people, based solely on your stereotypical perspectives on what you think they stand for.

No, I don't blame President Bush for the war in Afghanistan. I blame the al Qaeda operatives who flew planes into the twin towers, and were based out of Afghanistan when they planned it. I dislike that President Bush's administration allowed itself to be distracted by Iraq instead of focusing on the larger issue happening in Afghanistan, but I also dislike President Obama's administration for deciding the best course of action is to have drones blow up anyone we don't like.

This is why I asked, does it really matter who should be to blame for any given war? It's the logistics and how we effectively execute that war, more important?
 
Muhammed said:
I think it's time to give another history lesson to you people who keep insisting that George W. Bush started the war in Iraq.

The fact of the matter is that he did not start the war, he inherited an ongoing war.

Here's proof.



Source

Note that one of these airstrikes occured on January 20, 2001 at 8:15 AM. Just hours before GWB was sworn into office. That is conclusive proof that the war was ongoing when he took office.
Click to expand...
Comparing Clinton's isolated airstrikes in Iraq to what Bush did in 2003 with Operation Desert Freedom or whatever War Mission Accomplished was called is a bit disingenuous. No? It's like saying Lincoln inherited the Civil War because President Buchanan signed the Missouri Compromise.
 
ecofarm said:
That speculation doesn't have anything to do with my question.

Obama has more deaths in Afghan than Bush... whose war is it?
Click to expand...

They are both GWShiiteForBrain's wars until we leave. Even though Obama got OBL The Libyan and Syrian debacles are Obama's wars.
 
calamity said:
Thanks, George.
Click to expand...

be sure to thank the democrats in the senate too. They had control of that branch and could of easily prevented authorizing force.

And please save the bad intelligence bull**** for the shills that buy it. Several conservatives that I respect had the same intelligence and voted no for authorization of force.
 
ARealConservative said:
be sure to thank the democrats in the senate too. They had control of that branch and could of easily prevented authorizing force.

And please save the bad intelligence bull**** for the shills that buy it. Several conservatives that I respect had the same intelligence and voted no for authorization of force.
Click to expand...
Sure. It would have taken gnads, but sure. Of course, after the hard sell on National TV from Bush, Cheney Rummy, Rice and Powell--you know, that whole "mushroom cloud thing--it would have taken real guts for a tree-hugging Democrat to go against the grain. It's still Bush's War though, Bro.
 
calamity said:
Comparing Clinton's isolated airstrikes in Iraq to what Bush did in 2003 with Operation Desert Freedom or whatever War Mission Accomplished was called is a bit disingenuous. No?
Click to expand...
I never made a comparison.

What I did was prove that you were wrong. And showed you conclusive proof that GWB did not start the war in Iraq. It was ongoing long before he ever took office.

Do you have a problem with people educating the DP forum by speaking the truth?
 
calamity said:
Sure. It would have taken gnads, but sure. Of course, after the hard sell on National TV from Bush, Cheney Rummy, Rice and Powell--you know, that whole "mushroom cloud thing--it would have taken real guts for a tree-hugging Democrat to go against the grain. It's still Bush's War though, Bro.
Click to expand...

nope. It was approved overwhelmingly, it was a bi-partisan war.
 
cpwill said:
Actually, you are under-counting the other spending. Because they are applying future obligations to that number. So, for example, Medicare this year didn't cost what we spent - but it cost what we spent plus the increase to our unfunded liability.


If liberals want to start applying Generally Accepted Accounting Principles to government programs to determine total cost, count me in :). Though I think they may not like the results....
Click to expand...


Make all the excuses you want. Nothing changes the fact that we are still paying for a war/wars that were fiascos from the get go.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Which was a bargain compared to the war on drugs and the war on poverty that are still ongoing and adding to our deficit/debt. How do you suggest that we fix that?
Click to expand...

If we got rid of all republicans we could make progress as progressives on the wars on poverty and drugs in this country. Why is it OK with republicans to "Fix" other countries and not their own? They never complain about the ONGOING costs of the war which is the real reason for our predicament.
 
calamity said:
You posted no facts and figures, but Rueters did--$2 Trillion wasted.

Or are you going to argue that there really were WMD, and that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Powell and Rice were telling us the truth?
Click to expand...
What else do they have left? Honestly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom