$100 Billion Per Year!

True I combined the two but lowballed to be nice. $90b for Iraq and another $20b for Afghanistan. Obviously my numbers are more accurate.


your numbers are wrong. theres a little thing called google where you can pretty easily verify any fact. you might want to try it it's the neweest up and coming thing on something called the 'internet'.

here'sa quote from wash post

"The $130 billion in war funds that are part of the fiscal 2010 budget request includes $65 billion for Afghanistan operations and $61 billion for Iraq. For 2009, $87 billion was requested for Iraq and $47 billion for Afghanistan."

youre fuzzy math is normal for pols, but youre in the private sector so you should be a little more accurate wiht your math.

heres the linkn

Pentagon Budget Devotes More To Afghanistan War Than to Iraq - washingtonpost.com
 
you might want to try it it's the neweest up and coming thing on something called the 'internet'.


Yeh, the internet. It's a toss-up sometimes as to whether the best thing Al Gore has done to date is to invent the internet or save the planet.
 
your numbers are wrong. theres a little thing called google where you can pretty easily verify any fact. you might want to try it it's the neweest up and coming thing on something called the 'internet'.

here'sa quote from wash post

"The $130 billion in war funds that are part of the fiscal 2010 budget request includes $65 billion for Afghanistan operations and $61 billion for Iraq. For 2009, $87 billion was requested for Iraq and $47 billion for Afghanistan."

youre fuzzy math is normal for pols, but youre in the private sector so you should be a little more accurate wiht your math.

heres the linkn

Pentagon Budget Devotes More To Afghanistan War Than to Iraq - washingtonpost.com

Have fun if you want to nitpick my rough estimation. I never said which years I referenced. Its inconsequential to the point being made.

In ABOUT a year we'll pass $1,000,000,000,000 in war spending. Does that really sit well with a fiscal conservative?
 
The fact that we've spent ridiculous money in wars has absolutely no relevance to your point that we should spend that much on Health Care for all. Furthermore, if the liberals are dead set on spending insane money in health care reform it should absolutely not involve a government run alternative. When has government run any program efficiently? Your point is not only illogical but it's also spoken like a true liberal who hasn't thought through his next uneducated remark that us conservatives are just war mongering fools. At this point I Just want to see the country not go BK in the next 5 years. What chapter is that to file for a government?? Guess we should ask China how that would work...
 
Have fun if you want to nitpick my rough estimation. I never said which years I referenced. Its inconsequential to the point being made.

In ABOUT a year we'll pass $1,000,000,000,000 in war spending. Does that really sit well with a fiscal conservative?


i'd rather spend a trillion on spreading democracy, KILLING our enemies adn toppling dictators, than spend a trillion keeping people dependent on gov't handouts.

besides, who's running up the war tab now? the guy you voted for to end the war is doubling (almost tripling) the scope and cost of the afghan war.

your response is such a classic ostrich response.

whatever you do, don't let the facts get in the way of your beliefs.

mayb the ostrich shold be the mascot for your political party.

karen w.
 
I'm not talking about the cost of health care reform.

That's right, we can spend a $100 billion per year to kill people in Iraq but we can't spend that much to save lives in our United States.

Not supporting war is unpatriotic.

Supporting universal health care is communist.

We already spend over $100 billion a year on health care. Its called medicare and medicaid.
 
Back
Top