Sign In

The $$$ spent on the war on terror

Author
Time
In 2007 Washington will have spent well over 500 billion dollars on the war on terror.

I really don't understand how the US can afford this. Where is all this money coming from? If they wouldn't have spent it on the war on terror where would the money have gone?

Is it worth spending this kind of money on the war on terror? I mean, is it helping? I don't feel like the threats are less then they were 5, 6 years ago.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
wow, and what difference has this made?
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
The major question is: who is profiting from this? Who is getting these 500 billion dollars?
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
The oil companies, Bush, his cabinet, and Halliburton
The cost: a new "Vietnam", threat of nuclear holocaust from North Korea, possible extinction of the human race and possibly all life on Earth.
Author
Time
I sense this is going to become a liberal wank thread. Count me out.

4

Author
Time
Yeah you tell um Darth....don't you people remember the "Mission Accomplished" sign? The Iraqi conflict ended long ago.........

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
I sense this is going to become a liberal wank thread. Count me out.


setting aside the whole liberal/conservative/democrat or whatever else Americans catagorize their governments.

Your telling me that this money was well spent?

anyone who thinks it was is a complete idiot.
I don't care if you support Bush or not. Anyone (meaning anybody in the entire world or throughout history) who would make this sort of a commitment into something that was never going to succeed in the first place is completely incapable of running a country.
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
I know the discussions we had in the Politics thread but I'm just curious how the US can afford to spent these amounts of money. It must be a real burden on the country. It's all money you can't spent on roads, education, healthcare, police etc etc. It's all tax money I guess? So that tax money would otherwise be spent on different things. So what is getting cut back?
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Better still, that money could have been used to eliminate world poverty. The U.S. annual military expenditure is $3 trillion. Why not use that money to eliminate the conditions that produce terrorists: like poverty, despondancy, hunger, disease, and revenge?

If America was an unequivocally benevolent superpower in this world, any terrorists that remained would have no leg to stand on - they would be evil beyond a shadow of a doubt.
MTFBWY. Always.

http://www.myspace.com/red_ajax
Author
Time

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: theredbaron
Better still, that money could have been used to eliminate world poverty. The U.S. annual military expenditure is $3 trillion. Why not use that money to eliminate the conditions that produce terrorists: like poverty, despondancy, hunger, disease, and revenge?

If America was an unequivocally benevolent superpower in this world, any terrorists that remained would have no leg to stand on - they would be evil beyond a shadow of a doubt.


Yeah, 'cause everyone knows poverty will go away if you just throw money at it and have rock concerts (sell those t-shirts!).

Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediSage
Originally posted by: theredbaron
Better still, that money could have been used to eliminate world poverty. The U.S. annual military expenditure is $3 trillion. Why not use that money to eliminate the conditions that produce terrorists: like poverty, despondancy, hunger, disease, and revenge?

If America was an unequivocally benevolent superpower in this world, any terrorists that remained would have no leg to stand on - they would be evil beyond a shadow of a doubt.


Yeah, 'cause everyone knows poverty will go away if you just throw money at it and have rock concerts (sell those t-shirts!).


no it wont. but neither will spending billions of dollars on a war which is making certain areas more worse of and poor than they already were.
and we're not talking about throwing money in the literal sense as you are making it seem. i guarantee that if any non profit organization were given that money to spend on a village in need of a new school or hospital or medical supplies, there would be a huge amount of volunteers to help build it.

ya it may not make that village the best place to live in the world but its at least making them better off. perhaps allowing them to seek medical treatment. or recieve an education. things we take for granted.

but your logic is right. throwing money into killing people is better than throwing money into saving people.
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
You wanna end poverty? Invest in education. Now. Because no matter where you live, if you have enough education and prepare, you'll never be poor. Even if you can't find a job where you live, you'll create one, you'll start your own business, even if starting at informality. Proper education strenghtens the democracy, as people will not be subjugated and manipulated, and populism (an evil trend of government regime that is taking power in south america now) will not succeed. Where do you think it's most likely a dictator to rule? Uganda or Denmark? And why? Due to the economy? I doubt it. Education is the key for success. It worked for South Korea.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ricarleite
You wanna end poverty? Invest in education. Now. Because no matter where you live, if you have enough education and prepare, you'll never be poor. Even if you can't find a job where you live, you'll create one, you'll start your own business, even if starting at informality. Proper education strenghtens the democracy, as people will not be subjugated and manipulated, and populism (an evil trend of government regime that is taking power in south america now) will not succeed. Where do you think it's most likely a dictator to rule? Uganda or Denmark? And why? Due to the economy? I doubt it. Education is the key for success. It worked for South Korea.


This is not necessarily the case. If everyone has a Ph.D there will still need to be someone who sweeps the streets, and a street sweeper will never make as much as a doctor or scientist. The "system" is predicated on the existence of a lower class, just as it is on a middle and upper class.

Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Some economists claim, although I partially disagree, that by creating a strong middle class you also create a strong lower class. The richer the middle class is, the better conditions will be created for a lower one. But the mere existence of a class of people who will be deprived of what the society may offer and are REQUIRED to exist so this society can exist is the main proof that capitalism can never, ever generate a perfect society. On the other hand, socialism can, but only teorically, as it goes against the main nature of human beings - at least, most of them.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Some economists claim, although I partially disagree, that by creating a strong middle class you also create a strong lower class. The richer the middle class is, the better conditions will be created for a lower one. But the mere existence of a class of people who will be deprived of what the society may offer and are REQUIRED to exist so this society can exist is the main proof that capitalism can never, ever generate a perfect society. On the other hand, socialism can, but only teorically, as it goes against the main nature of human beings - at least, most of them.


Class systems are not soley the product of capitalism, and no system can eliminate "menial" labor as a means of substaining society as a whole. H.G. Wells was a big time socialist, and foresaw this in The Time Machine when he wrote about the Morlocks and Eloi. Utopia may exist on the surface, but the great "unwashed" will always be the ones stoking the furnaces.

NOTE: Check out my post in the Politics thread with the Wiki link about Socialism. I think it's fascinating reading.

Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Originally posted by: theredbaron
Better still, that money could have been used to eliminate world poverty. The U.S. annual military expenditure is $3 trillion. Why not use that money to eliminate the conditions that produce terrorists: like poverty, despondancy, hunger, disease, and revenge?

If America was an unequivocally benevolent superpower in this world, any terrorists that remained would have no leg to stand on - they would be evil beyond a shadow of a doubt.


Hahaha.

Harrison Ford Has Pretty Much Given Up on His Son. Here's Why

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
no it wont. but neither will spending billions of dollars on a war which is making certain areas more worse of and poor than they already were.
Haven't read the everthing here, probably not going to read everything because I, like Darth Chaltab, would probably be better off keeping out of the discussion.

However, I must take issue with this comment. Maybe I'm mis-reading it, maybe I'm not. If you think Iraq is becoming worse and, more importantly, poorer, I have to disagree.

The Kurdish regions in the North are actually doing so well that those few coalition still there are hard pressed for things to do. The Kurds are so much better off than they were under Saddam. Schools are being built and stocked with materials at an amazing pace all over the country, and much of the work is being done by the military. Money produced by the sales of oil is no longer being stockpiled and hoarded by the Saddam handpicked elite. The people finally have the freedom to own things like cell phones and satellite dishes.

Is it a warzone? I'm not denying it is. What people are forgetting is that rebuilding and stabilizing a country is not a 2-4 year process. The US government was still in Berlin in the 1960s...that's over 15 years after the end of World War 2 and we have a great deal more cultural similarities with them.

A media that feeds on the ratings generated by bad news fails to show all the good being done in the country.

I may, at some point, return to address Arnie.D's original comments. I'm not sure.
Author
Time
Iraq has been a fiasco, but I don't think that the war on terror can be written off as a miserable failure because of this. How many successful terrorist attacks have been launched after Sept. 11 in the USA? None. Its disputable if Al Quada could pull off another Sept. 11 because of the wars in Afganastan. Iraq has been a distraction to the war on terror, and a costly one at that. But if, as some in this thread seem to suggest, that we just ignored Bin Laden and spend the money on somethiing else, he wouldn't of just gone away. The terrorists would of just kept coming back and continuing to hit us.
Author
Time
Iraq wasn't anything to do with the war on terror. I was told by my prime-sinister that it was about WMD's.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: eros
Iraq wasn't anything to do with the war on terror. I was told by my prime-sinister that it was about WMD's.


Iraq and Sadam's regime certainly weren't helping matters any. A friendly Iraq is an asset in the War on Terror. Which will probably last long after Bush and Blaire are out of office.

4

Author
Time
Before Saddam got into trouble with the US (before '91), muslim extremists had absolutely no chance in Iraq. Saddam wiped them out.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Why did this require its own thread? Couldn't you have just put this in the Politics thread?

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
I did not intend it to turn into a political discussion.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.