half a trillion dollars later...

[Dionysos]

"There's a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years... We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

-Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense, 2003


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13563055/

WASHINGTON - The annual cost of replacing, repairing and upgrading Army equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan is expected to more than triple next year to more than $17 billion, according to Army documents obtained by the Associated Press.

From 2002 to 2006, the Army spent an average of $4 billion a year in annual equipment costs. But as the war takes a harder toll on the military, that number is projected to balloon to more than $12 billion for the federal budget year that starts next Oct. 1, the documents show.


The $17 billion also includes an additional $5 billion in equipment expenses that the Army requested in previous years but has not yet been provided.The latest costs include the transfer of more than 1,200 2 1/2-ton trucks, nearly 1,100 Humvees and $8.8 million in other equipment from the U.S. Army to the Iraqi security forces.


Army and Marine Corps leaders are expected to testify before Congress Tuesday and outline the growing costs of the war — with estimates that it will cost between $12 billion and $13 billion a year for equipment repairs, upgrades and replacements from now on.
The Marine Corps has said in recent testimony before Congress that it would need nearly $12 billion to replace and repair all the equipment worn out or lost to combat in the past four years. So far, the Marines have received $1.6 billion toward those costs to replace and repair the equipment.
According to the Army, the $17 billion includes:

• $2.1 billion in equipment that must be replaced because of battle losses.
• About $6.5 billion for repairs.
• About $8.4 billion to rebuild or upgrade equipment.

One of the growing costs is the replacement of Humvees, which are wearing out more quickly because of the added armor they are carrying to protect soldiers from roadside bombs. The added weight is causing them to wear out faster, decreasing the life of the vehicles.


Congress has provided about $21 billion for equipment costs in emergency supplemental budget bills from 2002-06. All the war equipment expenses have been funded through those emergency bills, and not in the regular fiscal-year budgets.


Pentagon officials have estimated that such emergency bills would have to continue two years beyond the time the U.S. pulls out of Iraq in order to fully replace, repair and rebuild all of the needed equipment.


The push for additional equipment funding comes after the House last week passed a $427 billion defense spending bill for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, which includes $50 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. A separate $66 billion emergency funding bill for the two wars was approved earlier in the month.


War-related costs since 2001 are approaching half a trillion dollars.

[kalamu]

so are you saying that Paul was wrong?

[Dionysos]

Originally Posted by kalamu

so are you saying that Paul was wrong?

I've been calling for his head on a stick for 3 years now. So, yea.

[e-brake]

So we spent about $2,000 for every man woman and child in America to free a bunch of people that dont want us there in the first place. Fine bunch of leaders that we have in this country.

[elNastioBananaHando]

Originally Posted by Dionysos

I've been calling for his head on a stick for 3 years now. So, yea.

Paul works around the clock so the US can stay the super power and he doesn't want us having any rivals or new ones coming to play with us.

[kalamu]

Originally Posted by elNastyAndy69

Paul works around the clock so the US can stay the super power and he doesn't want us having any rivals or new ones coming to play with us.

that sounds like Cheney too.

[elNastioBananaHando]

Originally Posted by kalamu

that sounds like Cheney too.

Damn it Kalamu if you want to go there all those guys have the same goal in common. To keep the US#1 and stop anyone from being able to actually attack us.

Paul and Scooter have written about this goal. Its actually pretty interesting. I think they have a point but I think they go about the wrong way selling it to the American people.

[E-Nice]

paul wolfowitz...

the name sounds mean...like a predator .. and yet jewy.

-jon stewart

wolfy was the biggest hawk of them all. nothing but BS came from his mouth... yet he was nominated and accepted as chairman or ceo of the world bank. and you thought it was just the dems who were too pussy to put their foot down.

[elNastioBananaHando]

Originally Posted by E-Nice

paul wolfowitz...

the name sounds mean...like a predator .. and yet jewy.

-jon stewart

wolfy was the biggest hawk of them all. nothing but BS came from his mouth... yet he was nominated and accepted as chairman or ceo of the world bank. and you thought it was just the dems who were too pussy to put their foot down.

He was grilled pretty hard by Mrs.Clinton when he had to go before the Senate a couple of years back to ask for money for the war. Like a true Hawk though he flew above the Senate and got his way. He is the coolest Hawk of them all!

He has connections to a couple of cool think tanks!

[zerojunkie]

$500 Billion, eh? I guess they're including the $426 billion that appears to be a general defense appropriation? Because the other estimates I've seen are only at about $290 billion for Iraq.

[elNastioBananaHando]

Originally Posted by zerojunkie

$500 Billion, eh? I guess they're including the $426 billion that appears to be a general defense appropriation? Because the only other estimates I've seen are only at about $290 billion for Iraq.

Quick question.

Do you support the viewpoints of Paul Wolfy? Is so which ones?

[zerojunkie]

Originally Posted by elNastyAndy69

Quick question.

Do you support the viewpoints of Paul Wolfy? Is so which ones?

I'm not familiar enough with any of his ideas to really say.

[elNastioBananaHando]

Originally Posted by zerojunkie

I'm not familiar enough with any of his ideas to really say.

Interesting though because it was Paul Wofy, your boy Scooter(who by the way was a student of Paul Wofy), Richard Perle, and a couple of others who pushed for the war so in a way you are familiar with many of his ideas. LOL@ Perle saying they would build a statue for George W Bush in the middle of Baghdad. Wolfy is guy in the background who influences a large part of Bushies Foreign Policy.

Many time when I see your post I know Paul Wofy would be proud of the American Patriot that you are backing up his ideas and most important our fearless leader The Great George W Bush. God Bless America!

[elNastioBananaHando]

*waits for response*

[zerojunkie]

Originally Posted by elNastyAndy69

*waits for response*

I'd have to know a lot more about his ideas, outside of just the goals they were meant to achieve, to agree with them. I might agree with the end result (ie. the invasion), but that doesn't mean I would or wouldn't agree with the reasoning and methods employed to achieve those ends. Maybe you can clue me in...