a korea-like presence of 55,000 troops would cost aboutt 25 billion a year in a "combat" scenerio similar to the current mission!!!
presisident bush likened america's future in iraq to the peacekeeping role u.s. troops play in south korea, where they have been stationed for some five decades!!!
congress has already appropriated $414 billion for the iraq mission, with another $200 billion to be required additionally
for the budget year beginning oct.1.
the bush administration has been trying to hide the cost of this war every step of the way!!!
"now the president is considering a significant ongoing presence iraq, long after he leaves office"!!!
2007-09-21 14:49:48 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
in the meantime, behind the scenes , afganastan is crap hittin the fan all over again!!!!
2007-09-21 16:25:24 · update #1
I think he meant exist strategy. We will exist there forever.
He not too smart you know............
2007-09-21 14:54:11 · answer #1 · answered by joker 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
No, its not a manner. The Bush administration merits all varieties complaint for spending plenty funds on Iraq that replaced into of no threat in any respect to any united states of america by any ability. All that element allowed the Taliban to regroup in Afghanistan and Pakistan which allowed them to accomplish heinous acts of terrorism. and of direction there is often North Korea, with which the Bush administration engaged diplomatically each and every of the time. Judging from the nuclear try, i think of that son of a lunatic (Jong-Il) has doing not something yet finding out to purchase time; this is for particular. protection tension action must be interior the final motel, and that i think of that element would be exceedingly quickly, perchance even now. shall we are hoping that Obama administration and different international places surely take care of North Korea.
2016-10-19 09:01:09 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's not good on giving up the fight. I think he wants us to win this one. Look what happened when we pulled out of Vietnam just as we were making progress. Millions were slaughtered. I guess he doesn't want that to happen since it would also let Iran take over Iraq and start up the terrorist camps again.
When you think about it, we've still got troops in Japan, Germany, Korea and dozens of other places around the world, so why does everyone get so fixated about keeping troops in Iraq?
Congress can call it quits at any time by voting not to fund the war, but they don't want to be blamed for the slaughter of innocents either.
How about we keep at it til we win? Is winning so bad?
If you're worried about cost, we spend 10 times that on social programs that don't work.
If you're worried about the loss of life, more die in Detroit and Philadelphia each year than Iraq.
2007-09-21 15:03:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I am still waiting for the Democratic exit strategy from Serbia, South Korea, Germany and japan. How much money have we spent in those places in the last 65 years.
2007-09-21 15:44:39 · answer #4 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I believe this is where a lot of the Bush critic's goes haywire, because it will be an humanitarian effort to stay there until stabilization exist, or risk being blamed for a genocide as an aftermath from the US leaving too soon. Which of the above will you want?
2007-09-21 15:04:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I didn't hear you complaining about a continued troop presence in korea before the war in Iraq. Are you sure you really care about that, or do you just want something else to blame on bush?
2007-09-21 15:01:51 · answer #6 · answered by esoteric_knight 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Okay, you have NO idea what actually goes on in the White House. They have reasons for doing what they do. You people try and make it something simple and get pissed. You don't know shyte. There is a reason that things are being done the way they are. They could be for personal gain, they could be for the best of the people of Iraq. We don't know. The people that YOU AND I elected make those choices. We rely on them to understand things that we don't know goes on in this country. God knows what our government does without us knowing.
2007-09-21 15:01:56 · answer #7 · answered by j l 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Oh...were you not briefed on the military strategy?
Perhaps your invitation got lost in the mail, or perhaps you think that all of our military strategies should be broadcast all across the world on the TV.
Its so hilarious when people rant and rave about issues they couldnt POSSIBLY understand.
2007-09-21 14:54:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
You just told his exit stratergy!Leaving office.............and leaving it for the next president to deal with!
2007-09-21 15:43:51 · answer #9 · answered by honestamerican 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush never had a strategy, never mind an 'exit strategy'.
2007-09-21 14:55:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋