PDA

View Full Version : $300,000,000,000 for War



MetalMilitia
Feb 15th, 2005, 8:31 AM
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_flipping_finger.jpg

That goes out to all the poor, the starving, the sick, and the needy. You can thank Bush later.

Bush Sending $82 Billion Package to Congress (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/breaking_news/10897087.htm)

President Bush was sending Congress on Monday an $82 billion package to fund U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pushing the total for both conflicts to nearly $300 billion.

Lemme type that out for you.

$300,000,000,000 .... A three, followed by 11 zeroes.

How much is that? Start counting one number a second without stopping until you reach 300 billion. You will be able to stop in in about 9000 years. About a billion seconds ago Nixon was getting booted out of office. About a billion minutes ago "Jesus" was alive. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. However, a billion dollars was only a few seconds ago, at the rate Washington spends it.

At 295,465,048 Americans (http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/popclock) that is $1015 (rounded) to every single man woman and child. $1000+ for the needy, $1000+ for the rich, and $1000+ for everyone in-between. On a global scale, there are 6,418,747,364 human beings. (http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/popclockw) Without using funny math - as the Bush administration normally does - that is in fact $46 dollars for every single human being on the globe.

These are the same bastards who lied to invade Iraq despite the fact that there were no al-Qaida/Iraq connections, ties to 911 or WMD. They want more of your money to keep funding war and lies. This is the administration that has so shamelessly exploited the events of Sept. 11, 2001 to kill at least 6 or 7 INNOCENTS per innocent that lost their life that day - and ultimately - they are the administration to blame for the deaths of some 1600+ coalitions troops (http://icasualties.org/oif/)(89% U.S.) (also 10700+ U.S. injuries), and at least 15,654 Confirmed Iraqi CIVILIAN deaths (http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/) - Which by most standards is probably low, since I'm sure the US counts any male 18-36, who happened to be standing in the wrong spot, an "insurgent".

Oil Barons and war profiteeres (http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/12/31_center-corporate-policy_war-profiteers.htm) - that have and will profit from the Iraq war at the expense of the dead - and our childrens, childrens, childrens debt. The estimated population of the United States is 295,465,048 so each citizen's share of this debt is right around $25k / outta the 7+ trillion. Not only that... the National Debt has continued to increase an average of over $1 billion per day since September 30, 2004... We dig our childrens children a hole, and line those guys' pockets!

For those that haven't seen it by now Cost of War website (http://www.costofwar.com). These figures as of today, are right around $155 billion spent. Instead, we could have paid for 20,458,347 children to attend a year of Head Start. Instead, we could have fully funded world-wide AIDS programs for 15 years. Instead, we could have fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for 6 years. Instead, we could have hired 2,676,824 additional public school teachers for one year.
Do you feel much safer now that Osama Bin Laden is in custody.. we've confiscated the WMD's from Iraq... and at the same time made the whole world love us? Whoops... Stop feeding the war machine.

--------------------------------

Other more "human" spending CUT - that pissed me off:

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) has seen its budget cut by a whopping 9%. Other programs dealing with obesity, and disease prevention have likewise been cut. Hmmm... strange, isn't it, that the "compassionate" president can find hundreds of billions with which to slaughter Iraqis and spend on military hardware... (Not to mention the billions in AID to Israel) . Meanwhile here, the "compassion" is so strong he cuts programs that help to keep Americans healthy.

About one-third of the programs being targeted for elimination are in the Education Department, including federal grant programs for local schools in such areas as vocational education, supporting drug-free schools and Even Start, a $225 million literacy program. This coming from the president that says things like "Then you wake up at the high school level and find out that the illiteracy level of our children are appalling." - George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

This isn't a joke. We've spent over $155 billion thus far in Iraq, and they keep requesting billions more... but here at home we have to cut decent health and welfare programs to ease our budget? One of the worst battles to be faced will be payments and other assistance to farmers - which the administration wants to trim by nearly $600 million in 2006 and by $5.7 billion over the next decade. Screw the heartland - Let's fund war!

What do we spend it on instead? Spending on the military, is by far one of the biggest part of all spending, and is on target to rise even higher - nearly 5 percent in 2006 to $420 billion. Don't rub your eyes - $420 BILLION. That figure does not include the $87 billion the administration has said it soon will seek to pay for the costs of continued military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't mean to be rude - but none of that includes the maimed / wounded soldiers that will have to cope over the next 50 years of their lives. Some GIs are routinely charged for their medical care after they get shot up fighting Bush's own personal war.

Already budgeted for Israel is $859 million in economic aid, and $2 billion in military assistance. This about one third of the total of US foreign aid budget for all nations on the American shell out list. It pays for their 'controversial' settlements on the West Bank and finances all the illegal property grabs from Arabs living anywhere they choose. But don't worry, Bush said in the SOTU we're sending $350 million the Palestinians way. Since Carter brokered the peace deal at Camp David between Israel and Egypt in 1977, we have been paying Israel an annual tribute that totals now to roughly $110 billion. Israel with OUR money is now the 17th richest state in the world and that with a population of less than 6 million. Thanks to the generosity of the US Congress and, oh yes, that of the US taxpayers. Do you REALLY know where your tax money is going? Do you know what it's funding?

1. Spending on foreign countries and war.
2. Spending on an ally that most taxpayers know little or nothing about.
3. Slash our own American programs to balance the budget.

Sound good to you? I leave you with some wisdom from the "compassionate" president : "Let me put it to you bluntly. In a changing world, we want more people to have control over your own life." —George W. Bush, Annandale, Va, Aug. 9, 2004

voxpopulisuxx
Feb 15th, 2005, 9:34 AM
Well said metal man!
“I wouldn't trade my living, breathing, beautiful kids for all the praise and popularity in the world. I don't want a graveside military salute, three-cornered flag, or computer-signed condolence card from Donald Rumsfeld, in exchange for the ones I love – they're not for sale”Dr. Teresa Whitehurst


This war while being reletively "cheap" to the reptillian neocon gravediggers.. less than 2000 us dead (at least that what were told) the fact that one soldier died for this travesty is to much to spend...however it this will be the war that causes the US financial collapse that must inevitably come.....you can only print so much money...you can only sell so much debt over seas....these bloody assess are place our children in perpetual financial slavery to china...a viscious totalitarian communist state....China is buying up our debt....

Bigsky770
Feb 15th, 2005, 11:42 PM
Executive Order 13129 of July 4, 1999


Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions
With the Taliban

By the authority vested in me as President by the
Constitution and the laws of the United States of
America, including the International Emergency Economic
Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)("IEEPA"), the
National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and
section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of the United States
of America, find that the actions and policies of the
Taliban in Afghanistan, in allowing territory under its
control in Afghanistan to be used as a safe haven and
base of operations for Usama bin Ladin and the Al-Qaida
organization who have committed and threaten to
continue to commit acts of violence against the United
States and its nationals, constitute an unusual and
extraordinary threat to the national security and
foreign policy of the United States, and hereby declare
a national emergency to deal with that threat.

More at this LINK:
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13129.htm

. . .This, (of course) was before 9/11. Unfortunately, even with all the hard language that Bill Clinton had to offer, I doubt if we really (at that time) THOUGHT of the far-reaching threat that could be initiated and successfully achieved. That was all to change upon 9/11.

. . .This is a PARTIAL listing of the events that have taken place within the last (approx.) month:

Al-Qaeda group claims Philippines blasts
http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0214/philippines.html

Italian female journalist kidnapped in Iraq
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-02/04/content_2548450.htm

Two suicide bombs kill 27; al Qaeda claims both
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=WORLD&oid=68074

Hezbollah Guerrillas Attack Northern Israel Ahead of Mideast Summit
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBXV6WTW4E.html

FBI Looking into Islamic Web Site for Leads to Jersey Slayings
http://www.christianpost.com/article/americas/103/section/fbi.looking.into.islamic.web.site.for.leads.to.jer sey.slayings/1.htm

Al-Qaeda group claims poll attacks
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12100948%255E1702,00.html

Islamic Jihad Claims Gaza Terror Attack
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Car chive%5C200501%5CFOR20050112a.html

. . .And if you thought "Iran" (or) "Syria" may be innocent. . .

Saddam henchman: Iran funding resistance
Head of 'Army of Muhammad' talks of help from Tehran, Syria
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42441

. . .What could they be up to? . . .
Iran Tests Nuclear Trigger Mechanism - Opposition
http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=7529216

. . .Then, there is also the tie inasmuch as Iran has rec'd "Nuclear Tech Assistance" from North Korea; As it is so-well known, (all over the news) there's no need to provide links. Just more shocking to the senses anyway. Yeah, sad truth is, this is WAR.

. . .We COULD "bail" right now, if that was the mindset. But, what's at stake? Would you ENJOY giving up the "freedom of speech" you now so readily enjoy, to be shot (and) stabbed on the street as Theo Van Gogh was upon November 2nd, 2004 in Holland as he was riding his bicycle, this over protests about what he had to say about the treatment of women under "Islam?" We are now engaged in a war, YES, a costly one. But, tell me, Sacrifices of money now/Liberty later?

Your choice. Joe (Bigsky770)

midnightsonblaze
Feb 16th, 2005, 2:09 AM
Sad part of this whole situation is, is that going after the Taliban for harboring Osama was the right thing to do period....the whole sorry thing about this, is that we should have been focusing on Afghanistan and it's surrounding neighbors to topple Al-Queda by arresting or killing their leader......

We should not be in Iraq at all.....the whole point of this 'war on terror' was to catch and/or kill those responsible for the 9/11 attack.....switching our focus onto Iraq was the most idiotic thing to do....WE DO NOT NEED TO BE THERE....WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER GONE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE....

The excuses keep changing daily why we are in Iraq...when, as I said earlier, the whole point was to catch/kill those responsible for 9/11....

Our military has begun to already stretch to the max.....we cannot go into Iran or Syria.....it's the worst strategic thing to do....the US Military would surely fail if we went onto those countries....

Our President is making horrible decisions daily, weather it be Iraq or domestic issues...but you cannot put all the blame on him....look at the damn administration....I swear our President has no mind of his own...the man is too stupid to think for himself or his fellow citizens...

Anyway, sorry for the rant....., but I could go on for a LONG time.....I apologize, I really shouldnt have posted in this topic, but I did....

Take care guys

derangel
Feb 16th, 2005, 2:33 AM
Anyone feel like doing estimates on how long we can continue military action in Afghanistan and Iraq at current spending levels before we go bankrupt? If you can do that, why not take it a step further and calculate the expected increase? Or factor in possible future actions against Iran or North Korea?

So, even if we ended all conflict tomorrow, we'd still be stuck with a massive debt for years on end. And if we keep cutting funding to vital programs, then in 50 years our citizens will only know how to fight, because most of them won't be able to read. Farmers will go completely bust and we'll have to buy all our food from outside sources, which will be very difficult to do since we've accrued this gargantuan national debt. Our only sources of income will include selling military surplus to the highest bidder, renting ourselves out as mercenaries, and whoring out the women. Unless we cling to the nukes we have and threaten other countries with extinction if they don't give us what we want, which is also unlikely to happen because by then most other countries will have nukes of their own. And by that time, do you think America is going to be respected and well-liked enough to warrant any help from outside sources when we're bankrupt and starving? Everyone else will probably think it's funny. And terribly ironic. This isn't a conspiracy theory, just cynical ranting. My bad.

Bigsky770
Feb 16th, 2005, 4:47 AM
. . .Or the greater part of the free world. What's at stake? Howabout a small peak at Al~Queda's plans for the future?

Map of Future Al-Qaeda Operations
By SITE Institute
February 14, 2005

A message posted to a leading al-Qaeda-frequented Jihadist message board on February 12, 2005, purports to answer the questions: “What is the future of al-Qaeda? And what will the upcoming operations be?” In answering these questions the message claims to lay out a future “map of the operations against America and its interests,” with coverage of the following categories:

A big operation inside America: The message states: “Regarding the big operation, God willing, it is going to take place inside the American territory; the date of this operation is approaching, for 3 years and 4 months have gone by since the September 11, 2001 blessed attack. That period gave the American people enough chance [time] to reconsider their position and their way of thinking, but they have not done so; therefore, the future attack is going to be strong and unconventional, in order to cause the largest amount of material and human losses.” The message notes further that Usama bin Laden’s pre-US election statement to the American people was a “warning and an invitation to the American people to change the policy of its Government before pain is inflicted upon them as a result of their silence and their approval of the crimes committed by their Government. This would be the last or penultimate message, after which they will endure the pain that will fall upon them, and they must choose between their lives and the Crusader-Zionist project that will only bring them destruction, poverty, fear and death.”

Targeting America’s allies through assassinations: The message warns: “As for America’s allies, they will be targeted by the assassination of the heads of the regimes, security officers, a number of presidents, and kings; this is in addition to the assassination of security officials such as intelligence officers who will be forming in their country a kind of a mafia….” The further explains that “future assassinations will serve political and strategic goals that aim at striking the American plan, by targeting individuals that America relies on for the success of this plan. The list of targeted regimes includes the regimes of Al-Saud in the Arabian Peninsula, Mubarak in Egypt, and the Jordanian regime, in addition to collaborators of the Americans in Iraq such as al-Rafida [Shiites] and others.” The further points out: “Also, with the targeting of intelligence officers, America will lose an important source of information, in addition to the protection provided by those individuals to its points of interest in the region.”

Palestine: Finally, the message turns to “the captured Palestine, in whose name speaks the Bahai Mahmoud Abbas Mirza, who does not even know Sûrah al-Fatiha [Opening verse of the Qur’an] by heart.” The message warns that the Palestinians “must make up their minds and choose between Allâh, His Prophet, Islam, and Palestine, and those criminal traitors, be they Palestinians or Arabs.”

Abbreviated excerpt due to posting limits, entire paper may be retrieved @:
http://www.siteinstitute.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications19805&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

. . .Or, Howabout Africa? . . .

Al-Qaeda's Secret Plan for Africa: Terrorise, Divide, Seize


The Independent (Banjul)
OPINION
January 31, 2005
Posted to the web January 31, 2005
Banjul
The world has heard the sound of the African oil boom. So has al-Qaeda. The continent has more than 75.4 billion barrels of proven reserves, edging toward 10 percent of the world's total. Five large producers - Nigeria, Libya, Algeria, Egypt and Angola -top the list of African oil exporting countries.
Lesser producers, such as Chad, are also in the mix. Sub-Sahara Africa supplies as much oil to the United States as Saudi Arabia. Al-Qaeda sees Africa as a prize well worth going after. It is a graveyard of failed states, of corrupt governments whose power seldom goes much beyond capital city shantytowns and of areas of Muslim radicalism. The problems of the region are opportunities for Al-Qaeda.

At the same time, al-Qaeda strategic moves in Africa serve its larger purpose of attacking Western economies. In 2002, Ubeid al-Qurashi, a pseudonym of an Osama bin Laden lieutenant, wrote an article saying that Western economies cannot stand high oil prices. One way to strike fear into the West, he wrote, is by repeated attacks on oil installations or on tankers. After the attack on the French tanker Limburg, in October 2002, the al-Qaeda political bureau described the attack as not merely an attack on a tanker. Rather, al-Qaeda said, it was an attack against international transport lines and an attack on the West' s commercial lifeline, petroleum.
Terror and attacks on Western economies are one part of al-Qaeda ' s grand plan. A second part counts on the vulnerabilities in the continent that will allow al-Qaeda to establish radical Islamism in one state after another. Nigeria is a case in point. The tenth largest producer in the world, 95 percent of Nigeria's foreign exchange comes from oil. It has close to 25 billion barrels of proven reserves, and major explorations are underway for more.
Nigeria is a tempting target for al-Qaeda. According to Transparency International, Nigeria is the most corrupt state in Africa. It is also a state that has received the attention of Osama bin laden. In a tape broadcast by Al-Jazeera television channel in February 2003, bin Laden urged Muslims to unite and mobilise the Islamic nation to "liberate themselves from unjust regimes". He named Nigeria as one of those nations where Muslims should unite.
Bin Laden's aim almost certainly was to foment civil war in Nigeria between the Muslim north and the largely Christian south. Shari' a, Islamic law, is the law in 12 of 36 states in Nigeria. Federal authorities largely have leaved these 12 states to themselves, almost a de facto division of the country already. Jihadist militants occasionally occupy towns in the north as press gangs, forcing others to join them.

The rest @ this LINK:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200501311197.html

Al-Qaeda linked group kills Briton, Swede in Iraq: website
01-20-2005, 15h13

DUBAI (AFP) - The Al-Qaeda linked Army of Ansar al-Sunna claimed it had murdered a Briton and a Swede in Iraq, in a statement post on an Islamist website.
The Army of Ansar al-Sunna "kidnapped two agents ... working for an intelligence service of the infidel forces in the region of Beiji" and executed them, said the statement, whose authenticity could not be verified.
A British employee of a private security firm was killed Wednesday in an ambush in central Iraq, according to his company.
The man, who was not identified, was killed along with an Iraqi colleague as they travelled in a convoy near a power station complex, while another foreign national was missing, it said.
A US military official said the attack took place south of Beiji, an oil-refining city north of Baghdad.

(Wait a minute! I thought Al~Queda was ONLY in Afghanistan, what happened?)

Story from this LINK:
http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp?id=050120151354.0wo0rtl5.xml

. . .You REALLY didn't believe this war could "just" be tied-up in one, nice-pretty package, replete -w- ribbons-n-bows inside Afghanistan, did you?

Sorry for the reality check, people. This one's for the whole enchilada.

Joe (Bigsky770)

derangel
Feb 16th, 2005, 6:08 AM
One thing that always bothered me about Al-Quaeda's ultimatums: their organization is founded on several principles, not the least of which is a moral and spiritual obligation to kill as many Americans (military or civilian) as possible, yet they say they are giving us a chance to change our policies? Are they saying that we should see the wisdom of killing ourselves, or of simply converting to Islam? Because I'm certain that unless everyone in America either died outright or converted they're going to keep trying to kill us. Between killing and converting they seem to have an obvious preference for killing, rather strange for a "peaceful" religion. And yes, I know that they're a radical extremist offshoot of the Islamic faith, I meant no harm to the millions of good and decent Muslims everywhere.

Bigsky770
Feb 16th, 2005, 12:20 PM
. . .The exception here, is when you add the word "EXTREMIST". That keeps you safe. In my book, a Fundi-Christian-Extremist IS every-bit as bad as a Fundi-Muslim-Extremist, or any religion when taken to it's extreme that causes one to believe that the only individuals deserving to live, enjoy life, prosperity and peace, are those that believe as they do/death and damnation to all others. We've heard this all before. . .

. . .It's not that I am against religion per se'. I am not, being that I am an "Agnostic" myself. (meaning, I believe in a "God"/I just don't KNOW what form that "God" should take, and I am not ready to subscribe to any one of the myriad of religions out there 'cause to me, it seems as if they all end-up somehow in a bend in a wrong direction).

. . .I believe in TOLERANCE of everyone's religion, and believe that everyone should get along. I have NO TOLERANCE for those that tell me I am worthy of death and damnation because I do not believe as they do, (or) call me 'infidel'/'zionist pig' you get the picture.

. . .America was created specifically to ESCAPE religous persecution; to me, this present war seems to all come to the crux of one thing, and strangely enough, it's NOT about oil; for if it were, we could've taken Mexico, South America and Canada long ago, Heh....(sure would've been a hellofalot easier, as well as more profitable!). And yet, this has not happened. Why?

. . .The one's against us in this war would like you to believe it's about oil; Yet, in everyone of their dialogues they finish with the fatal error of emphasis upon "Allah" (and) it's all against the infidels; If we TOMORROW were to satisfy every single issue in the entire world to their satisfaction, it still would not be enough, because we are just infidels meant to burn in the fires for eternity and it is their sworn duty to convert us (or) kill us. Only then, can they be happy. Time and time again they have issued these statements, and somehow I don't understand how it is that people keep missing this picture? and saying we need to "understand" them. We need to "reach-out" to them.
How the hell are you supposed to reach an individual that is trying so awfully hard to kill you, and believes it is their religous duty to do so?

. . .Here I am, now I am the one ranting, Heh. . .Well, I'll close with this. To me, this war is about "Freedom". The kind of freedom Theo Van Gogh believed in. To say what he thought, when he wanted to, wherever. To a Fundi-Muslim-Extremist, it's Allah take all, he'll sort 'em out. . .

Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:

derangel
Feb 16th, 2005, 1:54 PM
My sentiments exactly, Bigsky. Religious fundamentalists are the bane of my existence. You can't reason with them. In their minds, fact and faith are inseparable. Meaning that any fact that is not also faith must (to their thinking) logically be false. Being a fundamentalist seems to involve a lot of yelling, and ignoring what people yell back at you. The Muslim extremists want to kill the infidels and the Christian extremists want to kill everybody else, and there's people like us in the crossfire. I also list myself as agnostic. I'm reluctant to condemn anything, I'd much rather just question everything. Who knew that would piss people off so much? Go figure.

2cool4stats
Feb 21st, 2005, 8:22 AM
I don't understand how it is that people keep missing this picture? and saying we need to "understand" them. We need to "reach-out" to them. How the hell are you supposed to reach an individual that is trying so awfully hard to kill you, and believes it is their religous duty


I see your point -- there are people who explicitly elude the facts by creating pro-terrorist verbal endorsements. Keep in mind however, there are also a lot of people who can see [effortlessly] the contrast between religious extremists and civilized members of the same religion. Failure to see that difference can either be propaganda as well or an inadvertent error of a point expressed.

Kohler
Feb 21st, 2005, 9:48 AM
Wow 300 billion, that is mind blowing. We would have been better off handing 150 billion to Afghanistan to turn in Osama and another 150 billion to Iraq to... I'd say hand over there nukes but...