Agency: Iraq, Afghan wars to top $1 trillion

wow, with a trillion dollars, we could've built a giant impenetrable biodome over the United States with money leftover to feed all the poor and provide all the sick with adequate healthcare. it's too bad we're fighting fake wars. yes- fooled, scammed, slapped in the face we have been. why? because hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars after initial phases, we still haven't A)captured bin laden; B)weakened al qaeda; C)managed to successfully identify a tangible enemy/ fight in the right place. On top of all this (and being completely misled), we're still gettin warnings from ol' Chertoff to BEWARE! cuz al qaeda is still just as strong and could still easily strike. we're being shammed, people. somebody press the power button- quick.

"Conservatives" 1 billion for NATION BUILDING

"Conservatives" 0 for child health care.

The party of me me me me me me me me me me.

Think how much we could have funneled to Abramoff if only earboy had kept his eye on the ball and stayed out of Iraq!

Lovely...

SO WHAT IF WE HAVE SPENT 1 TRILLION DOLLARS ON THE AUGMENTATION OF IRAQ. WE'VE SPENT OVER 100 MILLION ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND THEY CAN'T KEEP OUR NATIONAL SECURITY COMPUTERS SAFE FROM BEING ERASED BY A STAFFER IN EVERY DEPARTMENT INCLUDING THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
"lost emails" "lost, I do not recall buttons"

"MISSION ACCOMPLISH, ALL COMBAT OPERATIONS IN IRAQ ARE OVER AND WE DID IT MEN AND WOMEN."

FIVE YEARS LATER, I SAID FIVE YEARS LATER. WE HAVE AWOL THREE STAR GENERALS REFUSING CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENAS. OUR FORMER 007 DONALD RUMSFELD "can't remember, can't recall" before Congress. Yes, we understand Donald, THE TILLMAN FAMILY DOESN'T HAVE A PIECE OF PAPER, SHRED OF TRUTH TO THEIR CLAIM. BUT THEY REMEMBER THE DAY THEY GOT YOUR LETTER. HOW COME YOU CAN'T. (EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE)

WE DID WIN DID WE NOT. MISSION ACCOMPLISH, THE LAST THROWS.

DIDN'T WE?

As usual with the "Swamp", the reporter censors the partisan origins of this report, and misstates what it says.

If the reporter bothered to read the report, he would have seen very clearly that the scenario under which the CBO estimated costs was not the war itself, but rather a "10 years into the future" fantasy scenario presented to them by Democratic Congressman John Spratt:

"In addition, CBO projected the costs through 2017 of all activities associated with
operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the war on terrorism on the basis of two scenarios provided by Chairman Spratt".

In other words, the CBO spent time and money costing out Democrat fantasies rather than anything that might actually happen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Defeatocrats and their media allies are getting increasingly desperate.

Bruce,
When are you and your RNC buddies going to sign up for this great "success story" that is Iraq that you support?

Talk is cheap, you Republican wonks!

Good...LET'S Spend More!!
We spent 7 trillion on the "war on poverty" and all L.B.J's plan has to show for it is, POOR PEOPLE,in America suffer from obesity....
But,[One] trillion is too much to keep us safe and alive???

Paulo

The Bush priorities:

1.Send over one trillion of our tax dollars to Iraq with no accountability.

2.No money for roads and bridges in desperate need of repair in US.

3.Watch American citizens fall into Mississippi river and die.

Still waiting for those oil profits from Iraq to pay for all this.

I'm sure Bruce was defending that brilliant argument five years ago.

With apparently nothing better to do, the Iraqi Parliament just went on vacation. The executive branch, well, might as well do the same. It's not as if it's a functioning government anyway.

The main Sunni Arab political bloc quit the Iraqi cabinet on Wednesday, plunging the government into crisis on a day when suicide bombers killed more than 70 people with massive strikes in the capital.

The Sunni Accordance Front said its five cabinet members and Deputy Prime Minister Salam al-Zobaie would resign from Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government.

"This is probably the most serious political crisis we have faced since the passage of the constitution. If unresolved the implications are grave," the remaining deputy prime minister, Barhim Salih, a Kurd, told Reuters.

Maliki spoke to U.S. President George W. Bush by video link and reassured him "dialogue with our brothers in the Accordance Front will not stop" despite the boycott, Maliki's office said.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said after the call:

"The president emphasized that the Iraqi people and the American people need to see action, not just words ... on the political front," Snow told reporters in Washington.

The Iraqi government said 1,653 civilians were killed in July, a third more than the previous month, despite a fall in the number of deaths among U.S. troops [...]

Those standing down include the ministers of culture, women, planning, and higher education, and the junior foreign affairs minister.

Their withdrawal may have little practical effect on a government already paralyzed by infighting. The Shi'ite bloc of radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr withdrew in April.

But the withdrawal was a blow to reconciliation efforts: luring the large Sunni bloc into government had been hailed as a major achievement when Maliki took power last year.

Stay the course yadda yadda yadda resolve yadda yadda yadda surge! yadda yadda yadda 9/11 yadda yadda yadda September yadda yadda yadda...

Meanwhile, our troops keep on dying.

One] trillion is too much to keep us safe and alive??? Paulo
I LOVE watching you guys quivver and shake in your shoes every time BushCheney or someone in their regime says, "BOO!". It's hysterical. John E., I guess that's part of the answer you're looking for. This bunch of Yee-Haw neo-Texans are SCARED.

First of all Loony Lefties, that alleged tab includes Afghanistan. So, let's see, you Hypocritical Farces are all gung ho for Obama's plan to invade and take over Pakistan, but you're against the removal of the Taliban and thousands of Al Qaeda operatives killed in Afghanistan to date????

Also, that $1 trillion price tag goes to 2017. That's 10 years from now.

So bruce, are we to believe the figures from the architects of this fiasco?

Bush, Cheney, and Wolfy were suggesting the war would pay for itself in Iraqi oil revenue. Then we had Bush's director of OMB, Mitch Daniels, peg the initial cost estimates for the Iraq War at between $50-60 Billion.

BushCo and it's gang of thieves and liars has no credibility here (or anywhere else).

Whinerdice, did you actually say Democratic fantasies? Ha ha ha ha ha. What do you call that trillion dollar neocon fantasy of Iraq becoming a beacon of democracy. What was it?, we'll create a liberal democracy in Iraq and the whole Middle East will follow suit. Nice fantasy...if only.

For those of you who lost track of BushCo's evolving reasons for invading Iraq, here's a refresher from the CAP (In Silicon Valley terms):

Version 1.0 - Saddam Hussein is an imminent threat

Version 1.01 - Saddam Hussein is a gathering threat

Version 1.02 - Saddam Hussein poses a real and dangerous threat

Version 1.1 - The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud

Version 1.2 - We can't afford to wait

Version 1.3 - We never said imminent

Version 1.3.1 - OK, maybe we did say it once or twice

Version 1.4 - We should have been more precise

Version 2.1 - Saddam has weapons of mass destruction

Version 2.2 - Saddam has nuclear weapons

Version 2.3 - Saddam has biological agents he's never accounted for

Version 2.3.1 - The trailers are mobile labs for producing chemical weapons

Version 2.3.2 - Unmanned aircraft are ready to spread Saddam's biological weapons

Version 2.4 - Saddam's going to make more of all these weapons

Version 2.5 - We all know where the weapons are

Version 2.5.1 - Well, Saddam has used weapons of mass destruction

Version 2.5.2 - Iraq is a big country. We'll find the weapons eventually.

Version 2.5.3 - Saddam had weapons of mass destruction programs

Version 2.5.4 - Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction program related activities"

Version 2.5.5 - David Kay? Who's David Kay?

Version 2.6 - It's not about misleading the American people - Saddam Hussein is gone and that's the most important thing

Version 3.0 - We based our statements on our available intelligence

Version 3.1 - Saddam tried to buy uranium ore in Niger

Version 3.1.2 - Well, that was what the British told us

Version 3.1.3 - Did we tell you about Joe Wilson's wife?

Version 3.1.4 - Do you know a good lawyer?

Version 3.2 - The intelligence is absolutely clear

Version 3.2.1 - Intelligence is never 100 percent certain

Version 3.2.2 - We didn't manipulate the intelligence

Version 3.3 - There was no consensus within the intelligence community

Version 3.3.1 - We saw the same intelligence the last Administration did

Version 4.0 - Saddam has long-standing ties to al Qaeda

Version 4.0.1 - You can't distinguish between Saddam and al Qaeda

Version 4.0.2 - There is an al Qaeda terrorist network in Iraq

Version 4.0.3 - Saddam has provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training.

Version 4.0.4 - Saddam will give his weapons to al Qaeda

Version 4.0.5 - Colin Powell: I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection [between al Qaeda and Iraq]

Version 4.0.6 - Vice President Cheney: I still believe there's a connection.

Version 4.0.7 - CIA Director George Tenet: I told Dick not to say that.

Version 5.0 - The UN had 12 years to deal with this

Version 5.1 - We don't trust the UN to handle this

Version 5.1.1 - We don't need the UN's help

Version 5.1.2 - The UN should play a vital, but not central role

Version 5.1.3 - You there, UN, tell Ayatollah Sistani that elections aren't possible

Version 5.1.4 - UN, please oversee the election process

Version 5.1.5 - Pretty please? We'll pay our dues

Version 6.0 - Iraq won't affect our hunt for bin Laden

Version 6.1 - Assets have been moved from Afghanistan to Iraq

Version 6.1.1 - Assets are being returned to Afghanistan

Version 6.2 - We're mounting a spring offensive against bin Laden

Version 6.2.1 - We'll catch bin Laden this year

Version 6.2.2 - We hope to catch bin Laden this year

Version 6.3 - Even if we catch bin Laden, the threat will still exist.

Version 7.0 - We won't need hundreds of thousands of troops - that's wildly off the mark

Version 7.1 - Mission accomplished

Version 7.1.1 - We'll stay as long as needed and not one day more

Version 7.1.2 - The troops will be home in six months

Version 7.1.3 - The Iraqi Army will provide security

Version 7.1.4 - Where's the Iraqi Army?

Version 7.1.5 - We've disbanded the Iraqi Army

Version 7.1.3 - The troops will stay a year and be replaced

Version 7.2 - We're training the Iraqi army - Iraqification will work

Version 7.2.1 - We don't need any more American troops

Version 7.2.2 - Well, maybe we do

Version 7.2.3 - We're keeping 30,000 more troops on active duty than were authorized

Version 7.2.4 - We don't know if this increase in troops is a spike or a plateau

Version 7.2.5 - We're establishing stop loss so troops can't leave

Version 7.2.6 - The Army is planning multi-year rotations

Version 8.0 - Economic advisor Larry Lindsey: The war will cost $200 billion

Version 8.0.1 - President Bush: You're fired!

Version 8.1 - The war will pay for itself very quickly

Version 8.1.1 - Iraqi oil revenue will pay for reconstruction

Version 8.2 - Our allies will help us

Version 8.3 - We'll pay for the war through supplementals

Version 8.3.1 - Congress wouldn't let us put it in the budget

Version 8.3.2 - Can we please have $87 billion?

Version 8.3.3 - Well, we really can't calculate what it will cost…

Version 8.3.4 - Well, maybe we can - $50 billion may be on the low side

Version 8.3.5 - Ask us after November 2…

Version 9.0 - We will be greeted as liberators

Version 9.0.1 - We'll establish democracy in Iraq

Version 9.1 We'll turn this back to the Iraqis quickly

Version 9.1.1 - President Chalabi will be welcomed with open arms

Version 9.1.2 - Well, not so fast - we're prohibiting political parties

Version 9.2 - We have the November 15 agreement - it's unchangeable

Version 9.2.1 - We will appoint a small governing council

Version 9.2.2 - Well, maybe a larger one

Version 9.3 - We don't favor elections

Version 9.3.1 - Caucuses work in Iowa, why not Iraq?

Version 9.3.2 - OK fine, we'll have elections

Version 9.4 - We can't return sovereignty until there is a constitution

Version 9.4.1 - Nevermind, we'll turn over sovereignty first

Version 9.4.2 - We need to return this to the Iraqis - How about June 30?

Version 9.4.3 - We're still focused on elections – the ones on November 2

Version 10.0 - Trust us. We know what we're doing

I think this article sums up the current situation in Iraq pretty well. It also reminded me of an earlier discussion we had about Vietnam, the U.S. winning every major battle yet...

http://www.slate.com/id/2171510/fr/flyout

Good...LET'S Spend More!!
We spent 7 trillion on the "war on poverty" and all L.B.J's plan has to show for it is, POOR PEOPLE,in America suffer from obesity....
But,[One] trillion is too much to keep us safe and alive???

Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | August 1, 2007 7:37 PM

That is the most idiotic comment I have ever read, here or anywhere else. Paulo must be a trust fund baby. No one that stupid and ignorant could possibly be employed. Where do these miscreants come from, and how can they be stopped?

As a kid, I thought $100 was a fortune. Then I couldn't imagine millionaires. Billionaires boggle my mind, so what's the big deal about a trillion dollsrs? I'll start complaining when they want a gazillion.

I wonder if George Bush, our illegal Supreme Court appointed President knows how many zeroes are in a trillion.
Bush is responsible for the diaster Iraq has become and for all of the killed and injured US soldiers. He is also responsible for this administrations inability to capture bin Laden.

dt:

Thanks for the rundown above. while pretty good - it does leave out so many more sins: secretly paying reporters to plant propaganda & lying about it until proven to be lying, spying on Americans &nd lying about that until proven to be lying, AND STILL DOING IT AND STILL LYING! There's still the Pat Tillman cover up, torturing people, holding Americans without charges or trials, keeping their own kids safe and sound here at home while ordering thousands of others to their deaths, $8 billion in cash that fell off the plane in Baghdad in a "payroll error," strong arming a deathly ill former attorney general, last throes, greeted as liberators, flowers and candy, never knew Jack Abramoff, no secret prisions exist, don't thing much about bin Laden but then still relentlessly searching, gay marriage will ruin the world!, uniter not a divider, no child left behind, no politics in firing federal prosecuters, stem cell research is murder but torturing prisoners to death isn't, .... and on their lies go.

Is there a single soul alive other than Paulo - and perhaps John D who otherwise seems much smarter than that - who believes anything at all cheneybush says? Given such a long and consisten string of lies and lying about lies, how could there be any trust left?

Hey .... I've got this land for sale in Florida... No you don't need to see it before you buy it....

dt,

Excellent post, made my morning. What's so amusing is that every new rationale gets the same group of cheerleaders doing the same cheers. And now Obama says we need to go after Pakistan where Al Qaeda's leadership is and we get from the same cowboy chickenhawks a hundred reasons why that won't work. Ironically, these folks use the exact opposite talking points of the ones they use to support the Iraq fiasco, apparently without even a hint of irony.

I wonder if our illegal Supreme Court appointed President knows how many zeroes are in a trillion.
Bush is responsible for the diaster he has created in Iraq and all of the dead and wounded U.S. soldiers. His administration is also responsible for their inability to capture bin Laden and other top al Qaeda leaders, who are residing in Pakistan.

Yes, I wonder what happened to Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz's assurances that Iraqi oil would pay for the reconstruction.

It's not just the numbers, though. It's the CORRUPTION! Billions of dollars have gone missing! And Bechtel and Halliburton aren't completing their projects! Despite being paid! The whole Iraq war--no, the whole War on Terror--is nothing but welfare for the Defense Industry.

A new House bill would enlarge the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, by $47 billion over five years to provide coverage to an additional 5 million children.

Threatening a veto, on this very much needed healthcare program, president Bush just can’t help thinking that the $47 billion to help 5 million children, the future of this country, a huge portion of whom will one day fight to protect this country, would be better spent ($1 Trillion before it actually ends) fighting a losing battle in a country that lies just outside the territory of another country, where the real terrorists are being housed and trained to attack again!

Way to support your own people GB.

Ah, Bryan, the irony is in the Loony Left being hell-bent on invading Pakistan.
Again, you folks whine about a "civil war" in Iraq. What will happen if we invade Pakistan?
You folks whine about Iraq being an illegal war. Well what is attacking and invading an ally, without UN approval?
How will the Arab world react if we also invade Pakistan?
Will our invasion of Pakistan be a recruitment tool for Al Qaeda?
What happens after we invade Pakistan and the Loony Head-chopping Terrorists topple Musharraf?
What will the cost be of our invasion of Pakistan?
How many troops will be needed?
What's the exit plan?
What's the political solution?
What will the world say about us if we invade Pakistan?
Are you folks in favor of invading Pakistan because it is no advocated by a Left-wing politician?
Would you folks be calling the Warmongering Cowboy a war criminal if he was the one who proposed invading Pakistan and not Obama?

Thanks to dt and snalg for reminding all of us what an absolute disaster this admin. has been.

And to think those are the things we actually know about. Imagine all the unknowns and known unknowns and unknown knowns.....

Thanks for the list dt.

Now how about one for Iran:

1.0 Iran actually has a nuclear program. Really. We're not lying this time. No kidding.

1.1 Iran could make nuclear weapons in a few years...and we'll keep threatening to attack them to insure that they do.

2.0 Iran has supplied advanced land mines to insurgents in Iraq. How do we know? The army never lies to the American people. Isn't that right Mr. Tillman?

3.0 An Iran war will be paid for with oil revenues just like the Iraq war...give or take a few trillion.

4.0 The Iranian people will great us as liberators, just like the Iraqis did.

5.0 Regime change in Iran will spread peace and Democracy throughout the middle-east. Pretty soon the whole region would be as peaceful as Iraq is now.

John D,

Just a few points, since you have dilligently ignored every fact and scenario thrown at you. First, I don't clamor about the "legality" of the war in Iraq, ok?

The war in Iraq was DUMB and therefore not in the nation's best interest because, one, the original casus belli was verifiably garbage (WMD, Al Qaeda), two, the secondary goal (democracy) was a neo-Wilsonian so-far-to-the-left-they-think-they're-on-the-right fantasy that even if possible to implement (a highly dubious proposition), would cost more blood and treasure than the likelihood of success would warrant, and three, because we knew without doubt that the people who DID attack us were still alive and well at the Pakistan/ Afghanistan border; therefore shifting focus away from that region would automatically be a boon to the REAL ENEMIES, Al Qaeda. The "loony lefties" are the ones who thought toppling Saddam would mean that the Sunnis and the Shiites would join hands and sing kumbaya. The "loony lefties" are your Big-Government-for-Baghdad party, John.

Pakistan is where Al Qaeda IS RIGHT NOW. This "they didn't attack us" garbage is rather dubious, in light of the fact that THE PEOPLE WHO ATTACKED US ON 9/11 ARE LIVING SAFELY IN PAKISTAN!

So, let me understand what you're saying: we can't attack Pakistan now because they didn't attack us (though they HARBOR the people who DID attack us), but attacking Iraq was ok because... I'm gonna need you to fill in the blanks here because I can't even pretend to try to square your "logic." Probably because your "logic" is 100% partisan, and shifts 180 degrees depending upon the messenger.

Why do you want Al Qaeda to have safe haven in Pakistan? Why are you making excuses for Pervez Musharaf? Why are you a terrorist sympathizer?

John D. you need to ask your hero warmongering cowboy Dubya those same questions about Iraq. I do not believe anybody is hell bent on invading Pakistan.
And since you also advocate attacking Iran. Ask yourself the same questions about Iran.

A quote from a Brent Budowsky article: "Imagine an America that is not all Iraq, all the time, debating timelines and torture, dealing with virtually no other global issue of our age, held hostage by a president who is obsessed with a war without end that he appears driven to continue in perpetuity, while he imprisons a great nation in a political torture chamber that has deformed our democracy and done grave damage to our national interest." ...and imagine an America not misspending a potential trillion dollars