The Financial Cost of the Iraq War - A Total DISASTER

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Ethereal, Jun 12, 2019.

  1. rcfoolinca288

    rcfoolinca288 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    Messages:
    14,301
    Likes Received:
    6,629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    1. Not more than the Nazi.
    2. Not more than the commies.

    We aren't the police of the world. By the US getting involved, many more civilians are continuing to die.
     
  2. rcfoolinca288

    rcfoolinca288 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    Messages:
    14,301
    Likes Received:
    6,629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sheesh....many die from tribal warfare in Africa but nobody including you gives a sh!t. Do you think we should be the police of the world? Then let's go into Syria, Yemen, and stay in Afghanistan. Let just send our soldiers everywhere around the globe and let them die.
     
    ronv likes this.
  3. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They volunteered for it.
     
  4. rcfoolinca288

    rcfoolinca288 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    Messages:
    14,301
    Likes Received:
    6,629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They volunteered to DEFEND our nation. Not being used as political pawns for stupid endless regime changes or to die in somebody else war. My requirement for the dumb ass politicians - For every war they start, they have to be sure they are leading the charge and that one if not all of their family members enlist and be put on the front line. We'll see how much fake bravado they have.
     
    redeemer216 likes this.
  5. TedintheShed

    TedintheShed Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,301
    Likes Received:
    1,983
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess 'Mericai the World Police now. Not surprised, our dollar is backed by the military.

    I just wonder about all of the other atrocities that supporters of wars choose to ignore...
     
    rcfoolinca288 likes this.
  6. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    can you read?

    At the time he was executed, the Nazis and the most murderous of the communists were NO LONGER ALIVE!!!

    Read for crying out loud.
     
    garyd likes this.
  7. opion8d

    opion8d Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    4,631
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Very funny.
     
  8. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,540
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well least some tried to spin it, you on the other hand went full "Failure" :)
     
  9. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Obama did not create the 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit - it was handed to him by Bush. You been drinking too much of that propaganda koolaid.
     
  10. opion8d

    opion8d Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    4,631
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What was the cost of winning World War Two? Give me a complete breakdown please.
     
  11. doombug

    doombug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    56,871
    Likes Received:
    22,778
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The war was not expensive. The occupation and nation building was expensive. Why is there such a need to rebuild these countries? How about we bomb them back into the stone age and leave. That would be much cheaper.
     
  12. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,540
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And now you deflect, typical clueless response to a very straight forward question.. Don't feel bad none of the leftist can actually break down where the eight trillion went, and your answer was exactly what they all use "He saved the Economy" ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯
     
  13. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,540
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Does the below add up to eight trillion under leftist arithmaTRICKS ;)
    [​IMG]
     
  14. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,571
    Likes Received:
    16,658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Please note the tin foil complete covers his ears making him utterly immune to reality. And unable to see anything outside the tunnel directly in front of his eyes. I wonder if he is a truther as well? Oh and for what it is worth and please note 70 to 80% of the cost of every war we've ever been in is the salaries and food the combatants would have been eating whether they were here or overseas along with some of the maintenance costs.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
    Dayton3 and ButterBalls like this.
  15. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Arguably yes. But Colin Powell articulated the idea of "you break it you buy it". The notion being that the U.S. could never get the international community to tolerate its military interventions unless it made an effort to restore what was destroyed in the first place.
     
  16. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The first problem with your claim is that the 2009 deficit is not Obama.
    Don’t Blame Obama for Bush’s 2009 Deficit
    https://www.cato.org/blog/dont-blame-obama-bushs-2009-deficit

    Not that this is from the CATO institute - hardly a bastion of liberal thought. I can't stand Obama but that does not mean I am going to make up nonsense and pretend that nonsense is true. One can not be blamed for thinking what you do given the number of Red pundits that were lying their faces off and or engaging in complete falsehood and/or disingenuous mischaracterization.

    Fiscal 2009 starts in October 2008 - which is why that fiscal year is attributed to Bush.

    That spending - which was that proposed by Bush when he tabled the 2009 Budget in Feb 2008 - was for 3.1 Trillion on estimated revenue of 2.7 Trillion = 400 Billion deficit. And that spending was what was set in place prior to Obama walking into the White house.

    As it turned out - revenue dropped to 2.1 Trillion due to the crash = not 400 Billion but 1 Trillion = "not attributable in any way to Obama".
    The other 400 Billion in deficit was for the stimulus spending - again due to the crash. 250 Billion under TARP - enacted under Bush and another 150 Billion in stimulus spending enacted "bipartisan" under Obama.

    So stop with this nonsense of trying to pin the 2009 deficit on Obama.

    It is also disingenuous to blame Obama completely for his first fiscal year = 2010. Revenue did not magically recover and the expenses of running the nation did not decrease. It was in mid 2009 that the financial crisis had fully erupted. (right when the 2010 budget planning is occurring). The idea that Obama would magically reduce spending by 1.4 Trillion in one year - especially given the conditions - is preposterous nonsense on steroids. It is completely disingenuous mindlessness.

    Any idiot can keep the Gov't working and stimulate the economy by increasing deficits ( Trump for example). What is difficult is keeping the ship afloat while "decreasing deficits".

    Does this mean that later on in Obama's 2 terms he can not be blamed - absolutely not. Blaming Obama for the deficits in the first few fiscal years is disingenuous nonsense spouted by those who are completely ignorant and devoid of any understanding of reality.
     
    ronv likes this.
  17. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Which Iraq War? When we were pro or anti Saddam?

    What a ****ing joke.
     
  18. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,697
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We installed Saddam into power in Iraq to be a check against both Iran and fundamentalist Islamic regimes.

    We provided Kuwait with slant drilling technology so they could drill into Saddams fields.

    We told Saddam that we wouldn't get involved if he invaded Kuwait, then we sanctioned and attacked him for it.

    The problems in the ME involving Iraq are the direct result of our meddling and backstabbing.

    We claim to be trying to fix it, but seldom do we do anything that conceivably could have that effect. Our foreign policy administrators
    and executors are either incompetent or corrupt or both. We made the mess, and we need to admit that we can't fix it and get out.
     
    AltLightPride likes this.
  19. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The U.S. was never actually "pro Saddam". At best the U.S. considered Iraq a useful tool to use against the Iranians. We never provided them much in the way of weapons or anything like that.
     
  20. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    1) We did not put Saddam Hussein into power.

    2) Big deal. Slant drilling hardly justifies a war.

    3) Again. Did not justify a war. And the U.S. never told Saddam the U.S. wouldn't get involved. Just that the U.S. took no position on his dispute with Kuwait. Which we didn't.
     
  21. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,571
    Likes Received:
    16,658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry no we did not install Saddam. Saddam is what is normal fare in most of the middle east when left to it's own devices, you are thinking of the shah of Iran.
     
    Dayton3 likes this.
  22. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its flag was British, but its ownership, construction, management, etc., was shared by American and British interests. And the evidence strongly suggests that Lusitania was being used in furtherance of British war efforts inside a declared war zone.

    Uh, yeah. It's basic history that South and North Korean forces were conducting small-scale military operations across the 38th parallel prior to the outbreak of large scale hostilities. It was a pretty regular occurrence on both sides. The autocratic South Korean head of state publicly boasted that South Korean forces would eventually re-unify North and South Korea through military force. The idea that South Korean forces were these innocent little angels minding their own business when the evil North Korean hordes invaded them is pure nonsense and propaganda.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Intentionally destroying another country's economy absolutely does "justify" a war.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
  23. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,310
    Likes Received:
    6,670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Need evidence from an unbiased source for the article above.
     
  24. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The CIA helped put Saddam into power and then keep him power. It's not even debatable.

    [​IMG]

    Saddam was a CIA asset from the very beginning.
     
  25. Ethereal

    Ethereal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40,617
    Likes Received:
    5,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no such thing as an "unbiased" source. The source I provided is Bruce Cummings, a professor of history from the University of Chicago. Here is a link to his book: LINK

    The passage I quoted is on pages six and seven.
     

Share This Page