Would it have been better spent on eliminating our need for foreign oil and thereby cutting off the source of funding for the Islamic terrorist?
2007-02-01 11:05:36 · 6 answers · asked by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
You have a very good point, although only the money spent on Iraq was a waste, not the money in Operation Enduring Freedom. We wasted over half a TRILLION dollors in Iraq. We could've reduced our oil dependency (not completely eliminate it) and have the terrorists' entire organization fall to shambles. We would've also reduced our part in the process of global warming.
2007-02-01 12:41:39 · answer #1 · answered by The Riddler 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A large portion has been misused, though much has been done to stop plots in the US. But in Iraq the money has gone to corrupt individuals, and weapons have dissappeared, building projects abandoned.
In the 1970s the Arab league raised the price of oil. So Sadam sold cheaper oil to us. So Sadam made tons of money and then built up Iraq. Then in the gulf war we went to Iraq and destroyed it, blowing up the buildings. Then Sadam was gaming the sanctions and making tons of money and building treasure palaces while his people died of malnutrition, as the imposed sanctions destroyed Iraq. Then thirdly Sadam was acting shify again and we were afraid (Sadam didn't want Iran to know that he didn't yet have nuclear weapons, because he didn't want Iran to be a threat to him, so Sadam was walking a fine line), afraid he might be up to something. So then we went to Iraq and destabalized the country, thus destroying it again.
I wish there could be a prosperous Iraq. But we have so little knowledge of development studies it was so presumptious to think we could destabalize a region and then build it up again. We seem over extended, that emboldens the terrorists. So it seems we have no choice but to try to bolster our position to fight terrorists. And I pray that God keeps the Iranian people safe.
The US needs to be on the side of those who fight against terrorists. Those who are for peace are those who fight terrorists.
2007-02-01 11:59:15 · answer #2 · answered by David L 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Billions for protection is never misuse. However, your suggestion of an alternate energy source being used to frustrate funding for terrorists is very well taken.
2007-02-01 11:49:27 · answer #3 · answered by Bruce 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No - just the billions spent fighting in Iraq.
There's a difference.
2007-02-01 11:49:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I Totally Agree! It's like the Trillions that's have been spent to fight the "War on Drugs". :P
2007-02-01 11:09:03 · answer #5 · answered by M L 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No it helps the economy and lets the terroist know that they are not getting it all their way. It also keeps our population down a bit and thus lets our reources last longer.
2007-02-01 11:20:29 · answer #6 · answered by burning brightly 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋