E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom msnbc.com's Tom Curry: According to NBC's Jim Miklaszewski, the Defense Department puts the cost of the U.S. military operation against Libya’s Gadhafi regime at $550 million through March 28. On a per diem basis, that would average out to about $55 million a day.
Defense Department officials also said that with non-U.S. NATO forces now assuming most of the burden of the Libya mission, the U.S. military cost should be approximately $40 million over the next three weeks. That would equate to less $2 million a day.
Obama has stressed the cost reduction argument in his speeches on Libya, saying Monday night, “Because of this transition to a broader, NATO-based coalition, the risk and cost of this operation -- to our military and to American taxpayers -- will be reduced significantly.”
Obama added that “if we tried to overthrow Qaddafi by force” the dangers to U.S. forces “would be far greater. So would the costs and our share of the responsibility for what comes next. To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq.”
Welcome to the era of what political scientist Michael Mandelbaum calls “the Frugal Superpower.”
How does the cost so far of the Libya intervention compare to the U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq?
According to an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office, the Afghanistan operation in the current fiscal year will cost $110 billion, which would average out to more than $300 million per day.
At the height of the Iraq conflict – at least in terms of cost, if not in terms of intensity of combat – it cost $140 billion in fiscal year 2008. That would equate to about $383 million a day.
CBO cautions that most appropriations for Afghanistan and Iraq and for related activities "appear in the same budget accounts as appropriations for DoD’s other functions," so it's not possible "to determine precisely how much has been spent" on those two wars, but CBO's is probably the best estimate we have.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates testified to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees last month that by the end of calendar year 2011, he expects there to be fewer than 100,000 troops deployed in both Iraq and Afghanistan with “virtually all of those forces in Afghanistan.”
This will allow him to “begin reducing Army active duty end strength by 27,000 and the Marine Corps by somewhere between 15,000 and 20,000,” Gates said. That will mean reduced future payroll, health care, and other costs.
But maintaining 100,000 troops in the field remains a very expensive proposition.
The larger picture is that the Defense Department this fiscal year will spend about $712 billion (or 19 percent of total federal spending), according to the CBO. That works out to about $1.95 billion a day.
If there were no Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the current fiscal year, Pentagon spending would be about 20 percent less – assuming the money now being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan weren’t used for some other military purposes.
Leave a Comment:
Ha,
we knew this one was coming just because the Nasty one asked for it. so predictable
There is only actually 3 or 4. The rest of them Sign in with Different Screen names to make it seem like there are more..
Imagine for a moment if Al Gore had been President in 2001. I remember when he came out against the invasion of Iraq. Certainly, as President, he wouldn't have ordered an action that would ended up costing one trillion dollars, and thousands of lives and tied us up over an entire decade!
How about comparing Libya to the TAX CUT for the rich the Republicans fought tooth and nail for.
Thanks Mr President for spending my tax money on humanitarian effort.
If Al Gore had been allowed the recount in Florida, he would have won the election fair and square. Richard Clarke would have been promoted to the Anti Terrorism Czar post on the Cabinet and Crowley's FBI MEMO would have revealed the 9/11 plot before it happened.
I love the Obama Tax Extentions. I mean Brought to the floor of the House speaker by Nancy Pelosi and to the Floor of the Senate by the Pro tem president Harry Ried. and Signed by None other then Obama. come on How can you be so against what the Democrats gave us.
Wasn't Obama Against them before he was for them..............
SO what old ALGORE up to now? How come he hasn't come out against another war?
Wait I know too busy sunning himself on that lovely estate he bought on the Santa Barbara coast. You all know the one - locates just inches above the water.
Me thinks he knows something about the (non)raising sea levels.
And Pius for the millionth time - those are Obama's tax cuts for the wealthiest 2%. He knows what he's doing, right?
Pius Emeka Nebo
How about comparing Libya to the TAX CUT for the rich the Republicans fought tooth and nail for.
You betcha
Beverly
May be Spanky should tell us his own version of how the super tax cut for the rich from 2001, 2003 & 2010 came to be. Also, how Iraq faux war profited us......hey spanky, you guys also promised endless oil. we're still waiting
Ah Pius I'm guessing you are older than 12, and recall all the way back to 9/11. Had us a little recession back in them olden times.
But Pius my man, Obama is the commander in chief - all wars are at this point his wars. Now he said he'd get us on out of Afghanistan and pull back on Iraq. Sure did say a lot of things, but we have not pulled back in Iraq, and he doubled down on Afghanistan.
He wants to get us some oil via endless wars, fine, but at least get the damn oil. Unless you like paying $4.25 at the pump?
Pius - if the Iraq and Afghanistan suck, and we know Bush sucked then why is Obama doing the best damn Bush imitation EVAH?
Is this the Hope? Cause I ain't seeing any change. Just more of the same - wars in the middle east for oil.
Well, let's see. Hmmm ... I know. Yes.
Following in the footsteps of noted GOP criminal mastermind, Tom Delay ....
"Dancing with the Stars"?
I bet Obama would rock Dancing with the Stars.
But I'd much rather see him on Pros v. Joes.
Of Course I love to see Bill Clinton rockin' the Jersey shore. I think he love him some snookie.
hard to believe that we are having a cost comparison here. If we don't know who the libyan rebels are how can obama give them billions for their numbered accounts?
Maybe the CBO can give us an estimate on this for the next ten years.
Thank you, Tom Curry and Jim Miklaszewski. We appreciate your efforts. Comparatively speaking, Libya is a drop in the bucket. Last week Senator Dick Lugar was concerned about the cost of Libya but the right never expressed concern about the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan--a huge chunk, 19% of the federal budget (minus the drop in the bucket Libya cost added 11 days ago).
You got it Jody, Iowa.....there is absolutely NO comparison.
Libya is days.....NOT years!
Libya is based on fact......NOT lies!
Libya zero deaths or catastrophic injuries.....NOT over 4,500 deaths and 35,000 injured with over 100,000 inocent Iraqis dead and even more displaced.
The pretend deficit hawks are priceless!
"the Defense Department puts the cost of the U.S. military operation against Libya’s Gadhafi regime at $550 million through March 28. On a per diem basis, that would average out to about $55 million a day."
Well, gosh, that can't be right......I mean, a number of posters here swore they had it on good authority (well, from British tabloids, anyway) that it was going to cost $200 million a day just for the President to visit India back in November - without any military action at all. Kind of makes $55 million seem like a bargain, doesn't it?
LOL...lets not forget about the 40 villages Saddam Hussein slammed Chemical Weapons on. While he killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people you stood by idly. Bush Bad, Obama Good. How many protesters died in Libya?
JoAnne, perhaps you could do some math for us.
200 Tomahawks at $1.5 million per =? Now we've been in this war for what, 10 days?
What did you come up with?
By the way, where in Obama's budget, as revised, is the line for Libyan war?
He has revised his budget? How about the dems' budget proposal, been revised yet?
Jesus Christ- they been lobbing 200 Tomahawks a DAY over there?? For 10 DAYS???
DBO...any idea who makes those Tomahawks? Guess they gotta get to work......Jobs?
200 total is enough - there is only like 5 million people in the whole country.
And Chilled - firing off Tomahawks in very un-chill like. So now you are all good with that fascist neo-industrial war complex?
Hey you think the pre-Kock Industries boogey-man Haliburton has any role in the manufacture, design or sale of Tomahawks?
Bev - what does ThinkProgress got on this?
Spanky
....You missed my cynicism....guess it didn't shine through.........but the question stands!
Cynicism- sarcasm, what the hey? The post asked what 200 X $1.5 Million X 10 was. Silly me. Taking posts so literally, and all....
aWWW CHILLED ONE MAN'S CYNICISM IS ANOTHER'S WIT.
rIGHT dbo?
sORRY my billing program requires all caps. Better now.
Does your billing program disable your backspace key? (Sorry, cheap shot from one lousy typist-dude)
It definitely disables Spanky's spellcheck. Although, good job, Spankster on "cynicism."
You must use that word a lot. (I had to look it up.)
Not me AM - I'm an optimist.
good one chilled...
At least we know where obama thinks the jobs are... the military/industrial complex!
GE (?)... bringing good things to life!
Tom Curry: According to NBC's Jim Miklaszewski, the Defense Department puts the cost of the U.S. military operation against Libya’s Gadhafi regime at $550 million through March 28. On a per diem basis, that would average out to about $55 million a day.
Think Progress:
PALIN: Yes, that’s — that’s a good question. And that’s the $600 million dollar-a-day question that is being asked now because that’s the cost incurred by Americans as we support the no-fly zone, which, of course, the no-fly zone, the intervention or enactment is turning into more than that.
Notably, Palin also urged President Obama to undertake action to remove Col. Muammar Gaddafi from power — which would presumably cost much more money. “With Gaddafi still in power, if we’re not going to oust him via killing or capturing, then there is no acceptable end state,” Palin said. “Well, if we were going to protect civilians, doesn’t that mean, then, getting rid of the bad guy?”
President Obama explained in his address to the nation last night that action to remove Gaddafi would splinter the current international coalition, which is currently sharing the cost of intervention, and would also likely require the introduction of U.S. ground forces and a lengthy battle. “To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq…That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya,” Obama said. Perhaps Palin’s $600 million per day was a proposed budget for regime change?
Former Bush administration official Dan Senor criticized Palin's Fox News appearance, saying that "I don't think what Governor Palin said is terribly constructive. I don't think what many Republicans leaders have been saying over the last week have been terribly constructive."
Pat, Boston, MA
Notably, Palin also urged President Obama to undertake action to remove Col. Muammar Gaddafi from power — which would presumably cost much more money. "With Gaddafi still in power, if we're not going to oust him via killing or capturing, then there is no acceptable end state," Palin said. "Well, if we were going to protect civilians, doesn't that mean, then, getting rid of the bad guy?"
Notably, Sarah Palin writes tax cut crib notes on hand for Fox interview...but still gets it wrong
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/38729
Chris Wallace cracks up; rightfully so.
Then there's that $35,000 make-up and Sarah-Palin-Toilet-Paper. You betcha!!!
http://www.begum9.com/Sarah-Palin-Toilet-Paper-P11877.aspx
".....Palin said. “Well, if we were going to protect civilians, doesn’t that mean, then, getting rid of the bad guy?”
And to think, THIS is the address to the nation - and the world - that we could have heard last night. A heartbeat away.....
Gheez Bev....
Palin toilet paper!.....what a hoot, for only $7.95 a roll one can wipe their behind with her face!
Too funny!
That 'Palin' toilet paper is EXTREMELY EFFICIENT toilet paper. It takes sh*t off EVERYBODY!
Wow-
What a bargain Libya is in terms of per diem...
Now...on to the substantive merits.
I hope it becomes the first war in our history to be financed completely by bake sales.
anna - you and amyb going to be making whoopie pies to sell?
Coming right up, american. Save some room for love in your tummy. ;-)
will do sweety!
Why not combine cost savings in the military with the Obama administration's other cost saving endeavors?
Instead of missiles, can we drop Chevy Volts on the enemy? They only cost $40K each, and since no one sane would buy this electric toaster, might as well get some use out of them... the battery may blow up at any time, anyway.
just dont Drop then in Extreme High Temperatures or Extreme cold Temperatures. i hear it drains the power from the Batteries. and the Explosive power would be Diminished..
Imagine if we had heeded Jimmy Carter's call to develop alternative energy in 1976. We'd all be zipping around in electric cars, today, heating our homes with solar, and powering our laptops with wind energy. And the last decade, and trillions of dollars, wouldn't have been spent protecting our oil suppy.
I see you're really desperate to divert attention from the fact that the intervention in Libya has saved thousands of lives while what we bought for the trillions spent on Bush's Iraq misadventure was hundreds of thousands of deaths and intense dislike for the US in the Arab world.
Amy B.
But fortunately, Ronnie Raygun came along and saved us from that terrible fate. That and being bossed around by those big bad unions.
Ha Saved 1000s of lives? is that like the Stimulus that supposedly Saved or Created a Million Jobs.........
There is a War going on in Libya. Lots of People are gonna Die.............
This is the liberals war...it's for the children
Amy, noney, what kind of car do you drive?
Volt? Pruis? Leaf?
Come on, tell us you are not one of those do as I say, not as I do types.
Amy what you got? You definitely have solar for your home, right?
And Houston - if the standard is lives saved then you must love Bush for all the lives he saved, right buddy? Just how many lives were saved in Iraq?
And what is you standard? 10 lives saved? 200? 5,000? How much did those lives cost us?
"Imagine if we had heeded Jimmy Carter's call to develop alternative energy in 1976. We'd all be zipping around in electric cars, today, heating our homes with solar, and powering our laptops with wind energy"
Amy, the government cant wave a magic wand and say "alternative energy" , voila. We have to live in the real world. Alternative energy has to be technologically possible and financially feasible. Spain practically went bankrupt with this fantasy.
Carter did waste billions on phony ripoff 'solar panels" and 'electric cars" ...but he was just warming us up for the big green ripoffs of Obama and the crony capitalists like GE, and Government Motors.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you don't have an electric commuter car, no license to drive. Easy.
Steve-505729
Do you always try changing the subject when you're losing an argument to another subject (where you're ALSO losing the argument?) There was no reason not to take Gaddafi's threats to exterminate all the "rats" seriously. As the president said, Gaddafi killed 1,000 people in a single day to crush a previous uprising.
As for the stimulus, the unemployment rate is going down, as much as you hate that fact. And the stock market started going up a few months after Obama was in office after taking over from Bush, whose corporate cronies pushed the economy off the cliff. My 401K liked that quite a bit.
BTW: I always wonder why right wing whackadoodles never seem to have any savings accounts. The way they glorify capitalism, you'd think they'd all be cheering the stock market's recovery.
Good news for Amy - they are proposing to ban all cars in European cities by 2050.
Best plan ever!
And where'd Amy go? Gosh I hope she's not responding because she drives a Ford Expedition or a Hummer.
[Hey Drive By - Hummers are great, right?]
Spanky
Somewhere between NEGATIVE 100,000 and NEGATIVE one million.
Houston..
Where did i change the Subject. We have no proof that 1000s of lives were going to be lost just Opins like yours that cliam it was going to happen............ but hey spin however you want.. The only thing the no Fly Zone has Stopped is an Attack . We dont and will Never know how many lives would have been lost, we dont know how many of those people would have just Retreatred to the border like so many other Citizens of Libya
So to say it saved 1000s of lives is Disengenious at best. but hey it makes a good talking point just like Saved jobs. Something we can never prove but keep saying it
Crap Houston are you the guy who comes up with the jobs lost/jobs saved?
Or is it just that difficult for you to see we got us a Bush lite?
Or you just that big of a war hawk?
Steve-505729
Any reasonable person could see that thousands of lives would be lost when Gaddafi took over Benghazi and started killing the rebels and their families. Of course, you're not a reasonable person, so you wouldn't see it unless it was a Republican president who ordered the intervention.
And you KNOW you'd be attacking Obama for doing nothing he if had failed to act and the killing started. Don't you?
Spanky-
Crap Spanky. Are you won of those foolish whackadoodles who's too foolish to establish any kind of savings account, and so hasn't noticed the remarkable recovery of the stock market since Obama's been in office?
Oh no Houston - in that regard I am just to opposite. I duly noted and have done nicely from the recent gains. I have also benefited from Obama's tax "cuts."
But I have recently pulled out to the stock market. I got a bad feeling.
Now maybe it'll keep going up. I can always re-invest. But I do pretty good on diversification.
How about you Houston, you all good and diversified?
"[Hey Drive By - Hummers are great, right?]' Yes- they epiomize the term we applied to a favored activity of Bill Clinton and Monica. Quite a fitting name for their product chosen by American General, actually.
Houston,
keep convincing yourself of that. I mean after all it gives you and your kind a bit of defence for Obama.
Spanky-
Golly, it must have hurt for you to admit that.
Pretty much. Yes.
Steve-505729
I notice you didn't answer my question as to whether you would be attacking Obama if he had not acted and a massacre of civilians had occurred. You keep dodging and weaving.
I don't know about Amy, but I do have some fluorescent bulbs in my office. They work fine, and even if Michelle Bachman successfully vindicates my right to choose my own lightbulbs, I would still choose those.
Don't you just hate how anti choice some of your liberal brethren are?
They are against choice in :
1. toilets;
2. light bulbs;
c. cars with huge nads.
Why doesn't a women have the right to choose to hauler her low flow toilet and incandescent light bulbs in the back of her Camero SS on the way home form the Home Depot that is 50 miles down the road?
Why ANNA M?
And quit playing all coy DBO - you love hummers just as much as the next guy.
Beats me, Spankster. Beats me.
All I know is that Michelle Bachman is always there for me.
I hear you. I used to feel the same about my girl Pelosi, but she done took away my Happy Meal toy.
Ehy did she do that AM?
Houston,
They Ceased to be Civilians when they picked up Weapons, Those that didnt want a Confrontation with the Govt left to Neighboring Borders..................
Houston - "hundreds" of thousands of lives lost in Iraq due to bush2. Care to share the links stating this, or did you just bend over to kiss your ass and farted the number out?
Nancy Pelosi doesn't confide in me, Spanky. Why don't you ask her yourself?
Bob-
Best Post Ever! I laughed till I cried.
This is great news a "cheap" war. That means we get to keep NPR, right???
And if it goes on long enough, we can keep Planned Parenthood, too.
Hey houston,
Bush gets bipartisan congressional approval and has 17 UN resolutions prior to a shot fired in Iraq
....and the libs scream bloody murder, war criminal.
Obama gets one UN resolution with 5 of the only legimate countries abstaining from the vote and a quick call to a couple senators before jetting off to Brasil for ice cream.
....and the libs scream his praises.
I love the smell of hipocracy in the morning. It smells like one term!
I dislike the smell of stupidity. Any time of day.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq
Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan
nice job - Houston qoute Annan, a disgraced thief.
Nice job, Rob - slinging mud to cover up your stupidity.
Hey Houston, what Kofi and his boy up to these days? Still raping and pillaging?
Off topic- yes. Neat headline below. BUT- for God's sake, don't no one tell Spanky....
Two-thirds of oil and gas leases in Gulf inactive
It's ok - Amy's got her a nice plug in electric and solar for her house.
Amy's a good listener and did what Carter told her.
Ok DBO - why are two thirds inactive? and what's gas gonna cost by summer?
Is it really neat? You like that less oil is being produced? I mean we are fighting 3 wars for oil now, so why not just shut it down all the way - you know to save it for later?
And as always, thanks for thinking of me. :)
It is nice to have things put in perspective. I know conservatives like to pretend that history began when Obama became President. But we know deficits began long before he entered office, and that huge amounts of American tax payers money has been spent on just and unjust wars. It is also refreshing to have a presidents party that does not fall lockstep into every decision he makes, and asks hard but fair questions of the leader of their party.
That is nice Patrick.
Know what is less nice? $14 TRILLION in debt.
Debt service also. Not particularly nice.
Spanky. Debt is never nice, but seems to happen more frequently when we have republicans in charge.
What you talkin' 'bout Willis?
So, just what was the debt when Bush left? And now?
Math is hard.
You don't want to count the debt Bush created which is ongoing into the future. Things like care for the veterans who were wounded because of his neglect, negligence, dereliction of duty, and policies of lying.
No Paul I want to count it all and actually do something about it.
Bush sucked at the debt. Obama and you all thought Bush Sucked.
Bush sucked at the whole "endless wars for oil." you all complained a lot about that.
So why is the current president continuing those suck-y policies? Why Paul?
Or you good with "endless" debt service?
On the books, or off the books? Big difference.
My understanding is that part of the reason the debt is so high now is that President Obama moved the off-the-books war debt back on to the books.
Is that correct or incorrect?
What ever portion we have to pay back.
So all the debt is due to war? Huh, so why does Obama continue to fight them. He is after all the Commander in Chief, correct.
THat's makes their continuation, and the whole Libya, although a smoking deal at just millions per day, his call, right.
Hey AM what happened in court this morninig with that law you like so much?
AM,
I think that you're incorrect, but I wouldn't bet my life on it. As I understand it, the annual "budget deficit" values did not include the cost of the war funding. However, the "national debt" did include the difference between "revenue" (taxes) and "expense" (outlays for whatever purpose). It was sneaky of President Bush to conceal the cost from the annual budgets, but there was no way to conceal it in the total national debt. That's the way I think it worked, but I'd appreciate enlightenment if someone else has a more accurate picture.
Anna Molly:
Spanky:
Anna Molly:
Uh, hello!
You persnikity little black kettle.
Why thank you, Spanky.
I definitely resemble that remark. ;-)
patrick of salt lake - according to a recent comparison by bloomberg tv, whatever party is in power spends money quite nicely, isn't it time for a change?
I'm alright with the Libya actions and expenditures, they make sense, and Obama explained them well last night. I still don't get why we have to leave so many troups in Iraq, and I still don't know what we a trying to accomplish in Afghanistan. Obama should start using the cost saving rational to start us drawing down troups in both Iraq and Afghanistan then use some of the savings to pump up our anti-terrorist intelligence and inter-agency communication.
i agree buck - hell, bush won the iraq war before he left office. why obama wants to continue to bomb muslims in five different countries is anyones guess.
Whether that was a joke or not, you might be interested in this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/world/middleeast/30iraq.html?ref=iraq
The war was won so good that American soldiers got hurt there TODAY.
And for some strange reason, probably having to do with ongoing violence, the Iraqis don't want us to leave.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/world/middleeast/29kirkuk.html?ref=iraq
p.s. The Kurds are those people that we actually claim we went to Iraq to save from the brutal dictator. If we leave now, we just may undermine the entire reason -- well, at least one of them -- that we said we were there.
to Jody in Iowa:
You misread my item. Please re-read & note that the total Defense Dept. budget is $712 billion, or 19% of all federal spending this fiscal year.
Contrary to what you wrote, the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan is NOTÂ 19% of the federal budget. The combined cost of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is about $160 billion this FY, according to the Congressional Budget Office. -- TC
Does that include the continuing cost for wounded veterans?
Tom - Jody is math challenged.
In fact math tends to be the bane of the Libbie existence, as seen here.
How many Libbies are totally cool with this war cause it's so "cheap."
It's just silly.
George W. Bush phoned in to ask what you think it will cost not to do anything for them.
Because that's how he did it.
Houston!
I see you're really desperate to divert attention from the fact that the intervention in Libya has saved thousands of lives while what we bought for the trillions spent on Bush's Iraq misadventure was hundreds of thousands of deaths and intense dislike for the US in the Arab world.
How about that Ahmed Chalabi, the man who helped provide cooked intelligence on Iraq to the Pentagon and the New York Times in the lead-up to war?
Chalabi burned the CIA on multiple occasions, including fabricating a letter in which he implicated former CIA officer Bob Baer in an assassination plot against now deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Chalabi conned the neo-cons out of millions od tax payer dollars.
Once again Bev. highlights her complete and total lack of understanding.
Bev. that whooosing sound was the point whizzing by your head.
Keep rocking, I continue to hold out hope for you.
"Spanky"
"Nice personal attack, but perhaps you can provide some actual insight.
1. why am I wrong?
2. what is the end game?
3. Who the hell are the rebels, and now that they are being routed, what happens next;
4. In 2, 3, 10 weeks will Gaddafi still be around;
5. Obama said others are bearing some of the costs. Which costs, and what percent?
6. 200 tomahawks [$1.5 million per], 193 from us. Seem fair to you?
7. Why Libya? Oil. What intervention to a non oil state?
So let's hear it from you Torpedo, and please be a specific as you can be."
Well Spankster since you cut and ran from this issue on a previous thread here are my responses to your questions:
First I am not going to let you deflect and reframe and argument which is a typical"conservative tactic. However since you asked:
1. Weren't you and Newt for "intervention" before you were against it?
2. The end game will be defined by the Libyan people. NATO is in a supporting role to stop the needless slaughter of hundreds of thousand of civilians in Benghazi. How long NATO is involved depends on the threat to civilians. The President was quite clear on this.
3. The situation on the ground is fluid and changes hourly so how can you expect an answer to that question.
4. Who knows if Gaddiffi will be around? Do you? 5. Unknown at this time. Arab countries and Europe should bear more of the cost .But then again if we changed the tax code, we might get GE and other Corporate welfare clients to pay their fair share of the burden. After all America is known for it's humanitarian efforts now isn't it? On a personal level, I don't have a problem with paying a surtax in order to stop the slaughter of innocents.
6. Seems fair to me since my company measures some of the parts for the Tomahawk for Raytheon. Kinda makes me part of the military industrial complex and keeps me and others employed which is good for the economy now isn't it?
7. Complicated, because Libya is only one component of a complex middle eastern puzzle. That said, I believe that America cannot in the long run afford to be the world's policeman. I agree that it is time for those countries that have accrued the benefits of American protection to step up and share some of the burdens.
I repeat: Explaining complex issues like the middle east are like teaching fractions to a house cat!
I repeat: Explaining complex issues like the middle east are like teaching fractions to a house cat!
Wouldn't one have to have some minimal understanding of those "complex issues" first...
I am disappointed to report that Trouble, my cat has only been able to refute 2/3 of your rebuttal...so far...:)
Great job Torpedo - that's way more like my pal Anna Molley and way less like Feisty.
Much better. But dide, I did see it on the thread before, back where it was a relevant topic.
Here, not so much.
But hey, I love that you are stalking me. It's ok Torpedo, you had me at calling us conservative cats. Or was it dumb?
And why do you assume that I'm in line with Newt? Speculation is bad.
But see how much more fun and responsive that response was compare to the one before it?
Torpedo - now that we are engaged in an actual discussion, absent further digs related to cats:
1. I'm totally against any additional wars. We ain't got the money. And we both know Europe isn't paying for squat - they are broke-r than us;
2. Which Libyan people will decide - the ones we are bombing, or the ones we are supporting? Cause this is a Libyan deal, why is it our business? Are we the world now renta-cop, cause that's what we are acting like.
3. And how about that tax code? Why didn't the dems write it better? Rangel was in charge for how many years? You know like the budget - the dems had a super majority, but could not pass anything. You blame the dems for the existing tax code, right - it was their baby [Rangel].
4. I've said many times that a large part of the miilitary budget goes for salaries - directly for the troops and inderectly for folks like you. Hey, kinda looks like you are good with Trickle down economics now. Great!;
5. Why isn't this an Arab nation problem. Let them sort it out. We got our own problems, mostly related to $14 Trillion in debt.
But I'm still waiting for your explanation. And hey, if you could get responses out of Fiesty and the other Libbies around here, that's be great. Or she sould just stick with personal insults. That's entertaining too.
Oooh ... this is just too good to pass up. Sorry, Spanky.
TorpedoYou (quoting Spanky):
Spanky:
Anna Molly:
LoL I'm sorry, Spanky. Mea culpa.
From this month's California Lawyer mag: "You may no longer recognize how odd your language sounds, any more than a British barrister gives a thought to wearing a wig."
That there sure is one pretty wig AM.
Remember this her is more the LOL/IMAO crowd than one with a background in Latin.
But other than that, yeah you got me.
slinging mud - oil for food program. does it ring a bell - he and his kid are crooks.
You accuse a man of being a thief despite the fact that he was exonerated by an Independent Inquiry Commission. Maybe you should try getting your information from places other than World Nut Daily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme
Potential Annan link
BTW: Even if Annan were guilty of corruption, it wouldn't change the facts presented in the Guardian article proving that no UN resolution authorized the war in Iraq. Bush violated international law. It's a good thing he hates traveling to foreign countries because there are some where he'd be arrested for war crimes.
O' Houston, you must get very, very tired as you keep running up that hill.
FYI citing to Kofi Annan for anything is just a bad idea.
Or maybe next you rock a cite to Paucharri [head of the very credibleIPCC for some silly thing on global warming. Hey did you see all those ship locked in the harbors due to , umm global warming?
Because as we all know Global warming = ice. Heh, heh.
TorpedoYou........
"Seems fair to me since my company measures some of the parts for the Tomahawk for Raytheon. Kinda makes me part of the military industrial complex and keeps me and others employed which is good for the economy now isn't."
My lofty question....your answer for parts/portions of the Tomahawk construct. Forget the 'military industrial complex' (slur)......'cause employment is good for the individual and the economy!....
Can we step back to the reality of the cost structure for a moment. It says above, that the expected U.S. cost for the next twenty days is 40 Million if I read this correctly. That's the cost of essentially two cruise missiles a day. Does anyone on this board think that this is a reasonable assumption? It also indicates that the "non-U.S. NATO forces are taking the lead". Does that mean that our aircraft carriers, our AWAC's planes, our vessels, our people are standing down? Does it really mean that we are transferring control of these assets to NATO, and paying for the use of these assets thru NATO, rather than saying that the cost is part of the U.S. commitment? Same question, does anyone on this board actually believe that this is a reasonable assumption? According to various newspaper reports, last night and this morning we fired in excess of twenty cruise missiles at targets within Libya. That pretty much eats up half the estimated budget for the next three weeks.
Right, wrong, or indifferent to the plight of the Libyans, why is it that our government feels the need to place unrealistic data in front of us, and expect us to lap it up like good little drones? It would appear that the folks in charge, whether they be Democrats or Republicans, have been watching "A Few Good Men", and believe that we can't handle the truth. No one can possibly believe the cost estimates for the next three weeks, they've been blown by virtue of the 20+ cruise missiles expended in the last 24 hours. What else is being shielded from "We the people"?
From the AP fact check
The United States supplies 22 percent of NATO's budget, almost as much as the next largest contributors — Britain and France — combined. A Canadian three-star general was selected to be in charge of all NATO operations in Libya. His boss, the commander of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command Naples, is an American admiral, and the admiral's boss is the supreme allied commander Europe, a post always held by an American.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iFWACvAYca3zjwTnnLh1JG8l2Rtw?docId=f1839ff6dd0e4265b2952651c972f4a5
We are paying now and we will be paying in the future. How much the ultimate cost will be right now is unfathomable...
Dangerfield,
So, if I'm reading you correctly, if NATO spends a Billion, we effectively spend 220 Million of that Billion, in addition to the 40 Million estimated in the article above. That's kind of what I thought we were doing, sleight of hand with the financing costs, and lie to the public. Oh wait, mis-speak to the public, (that ought to pass the politically correct threshold).
And...
It appears that momentum is shifting back to Gaddafi...despite the the intervention of world's most potent military forces.
Can President Obama's coalition really allow Gaddafi to defeat our rebel allies?
Instead of a bloodbath in Benghazi...you'll be looking at a country-wide massacre in Libya if that occurs.
Can the the U.S., NATO, France, et al really allow that to happen?
Really?
LiLA-
Technically, they only lie to 1/2 of the people ALL of the time, because those who mistrusted every number from the previous administration now BELIEVE everything that comes from the current one. Simply reverse that for our suddenly intervention averse deficit hawks who mistrust every # from this one...
Lincoln was wrong, because you actually only have to fool half of the people all of the time...:)
MB-
What are you trolling for? You know that the goal IS regime change and that it is inevitable, whatever is happening today. We will be arming the "rebels" by the time the first pitch is thrown out on Thursday...Play Ball!
I'm wounded, dangerfield...
Me...trolling?
By the way...while we're busy arming the Libyan rebels, would it be too much to ask for President Obama to tell us who our new allies are?
Or...who he thinks they are, at least...?
Wasn't that sort of a glaring omission in last night's address?
Honestly, (and sorry if I hurt your feelings, but trolling does seem to be apropos to your "theme", no?) when have we ever actually known or really cared who our allies ARE? We always work from looking at who they''re NOT.
How many bloodthirsty madmen have we supported and do we NOW support because they weren't COMMIES, or because they are "Allies in the WOT"?
We armed bin laden
We armed the taliban
Of course, they were "freedom fighters" then and all they had to do was want to kill soviet soldiers to gain our support.
This is called "breaking eggs to make an omelet" or the Machiavellian "the enemy of my enemy is my (default) friend.
You are too smart for me to believe that you aren't being disingenuous when you gently query the President's strategy?doctrine/rhetoric.
We have crossed the Rubicon and MuMu is a goner. You know it, I know it and believe me he does too. We will arm the "rebels" because of who they aren't and that's just the way it is. They aren't Khadaffy and that's all that matters in the moment. Just my opinion of course...
Spanky-
Torpedo - now that we are engaged in an actual discussion, absent further digs related to cats:
1. I'm totally against any additional wars. We ain't got the money. And we both know Europe isn't paying for squat - they are broke-r than us;
One of the reasons they are "broker than us" is because Europe followed the U.S. financial model. After the repeal of Glass Steagall all kinds of new exciting products were created. You know thingees like CDO's and Direvitives that lead to the Mtg meltdown. See #3 below.
2. Which Libyan people will decide - the ones we are bombing, or the ones we are supporting? Cause this is a Libyan deal, why is it our business? Are we the world now renta-cop, cause that's what we are acting like.
We have always been the World's renta cop and frankly I don't like it more than you do. Why don't you ask your corporate buds to pull their lobbyists out of D.C. or better yet ask the congress to wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers with corporate logos plastered all over them. That way we'll know who they are really working for.
3. And how about that tax code? Why didn't the dems write it better? Rangel was in charge for how many years? You know like the budget - the dems had a super majority, but could not pass anything. You blame the dems for the existing tax code, right - it was their baby [Rangel].
Yeah right spank! We have a system that favors the very rich and allows them to avoid paying taxes in THE country that made them rich, through the magic of corporate tax law. The free market is a illusion formulated and repeated daily by right-wing ideologues like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and the bulk of talk radio. Show me an example of a supposed free market commodity (drugs, food, oil, clothing, weapons) and I will show you a system of laws and controls that clearly favors large corporate players over individuals and enable wealthy shareholders to avoid paying taxes. The U.S., mostly under Republican administrations, has been the largest re-distributor of wealth in history since the WWII (and especially since 1980) Successive republican administration and their congressional lackeys have funneled trillions of dollars to the defense establishment, the financial markets, pharmaceuticals, and big agriculture, through direct spending as well as regulation. (The gutting of the FDA and repeal of the Glass Steagall Act come to mind here).
4. I've said many times that a large part of the miilitary budget goes for salaries - directly for the troops and inderectly for folks like you. Hey, kinda looks like you are good with Trickle down economics now. Great!
Please see above...Raytheon is only a small part of our business..The bulk of it comes from consumer product manufacturers and medical devices.
5. Why isn't this an Arab nation problem. Let them sort it out. We got our own problems, mostly related to $14 Trillion in debt.
And why isn't a Chinese or Russian problem..Maybe we should act like them. We'll do business with anyone. We don't care about your political system.
Oh no Torpedo - Europe did not follow the US model. It went a touch more socialistic and welfare-y. And sadly I have no corporate buds. I'm just a small business man.
But dude, the tax code was in large part written by dems, so take you issue with corporate "welfare" up with them. I pay plenty of taxes.
You lost me on Paragraph 3, but again these are Obama's tax cuts so yell at him. He is also the Commander in chief and in charge of all three wars, so again take it up with him.
And yes we should be more fiscally conservative like the Chinese, but it doesn't look like that going to happen anytime soon. We just good at being the debtor, not the lender.
Kinda sad really.
Also I don't listen to Beck, or Linbaugh. I only watch MSNBC. I love Rachel and especially Ed. Comedy gold.
Gee Spankster, I own my own firm and pay taxes too! And guess what Spank the company I own is involved in making stuff. (Manufacturing to you). As opposed to sitting behind a desk and pushing paper. Yuo it's rocket science. What's your point? But I digress. You mean to tell me that you don't know what a Credit Default Swap is? Or a Collateralized Debt Obligation? I'm Shocked, yes shocked that a person of your breeding and intellect hasn't kept better informed of these wonderful financial products created by people on Wall Street and sold all over the world. Why I'm stunned that you didn't know that these wonderful products nearly brought down the Royal Bank of Scotland, a 500 year old institution. Yup those dirty "socialists" have brought Europe' economies to their knees. But wait in this country your boys got the ball and socialized the debt thru TARP. Of course it is perfectly OK to privatize the profits, right? That's the conservative way.BTW, I watch Beck and Bill and Hanity and sometimes listen to Rushbo now there is a foursome?
Good speech Mr. President! I understood the President's positon and doctrine completely. The Obama Doctrine is as follows. It is not the role of the US to decide intellectually how people of different nations pick their politics, decide their diplomacy, and socially decide their own structures. It is very clear that, only in situations of human genocide. will the US use it's military force to prevent such situations. In all other cases, the US will not put more money or military forces in such situations. The President made it clear that all people must decide their oun political, social, and diplomatic goals. The idea of genocide must not be allowed to occur, and as an American, I am not for any type of genocide to occur. If genocide is not happening. Then the people need to step up and decide their own destiny. The Obama Doctrine is base on humanitarian principles, and must be practically economical. This is not difficult to comprehend my fellow citizens. It is really just common sense!