Quote:
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
2.7 TRILLION dollars for this debacle.
|
But the article says:
Quote:
|
William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis, told members of Congress that the Iraq war has already cost taxpayers $646 billion. That's only accounting for five years, and, with the conflict expected to drag on for another five years, the figure is expected to more than quadruple.
|
If it cost $646 billion for the first 5 years, I don't quite see the logic for the "quadruple" figure for the next 5 years -- if we are in the area to the same level for that period of time. The "invasion" was the really expensive part; "maintenance" after an invasion is usually a lot less expensive.
I'm
no "fan" of the war, but now that we've exposed the fact that Iraq is an extremely weak nation (Sadam was bluffing about his military capabilities), I don't see how we can leave the area without Iran immediately walking into Iraq and taking the country over (with unbelievable slaughter of the population for whatever resistance the Iraqis offered).
I'm not sure what you propose we do? Are you saying we should just "pull out" and let Iran over-run the country? Should we pull out, but threaten to obliterate Iran with air strikes and missile attacks if it invades Iraq? How much would such "protection" cost? Would it be effective in stopping Iran?
You can look back and say "we never should have invaded," but what's done is done. My question is, what do you propose we do
right now.
What exactly is your solution for the situation?