Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Supplemental Bill Gives Bush $92B for Wars & Hurricanes

Old 03-16-06, 06:20 AM
  #1  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Supplemental Bill Gives Bush $92B for Wars & Hurricanes

CapitalNews.org

AP

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

President Bush gets much of what he requested in a $92 billion House measure for wars and hurricane cleanup, despite a newfound willingness by GOP leaders to challenge the president.

The bill the House is expected to approve Thursday would bring the overall price tag for Iraq and Afghanistan operations since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to nearly $400 billion and total Hurricane Katrina-related spending to more than $100 billion.

Defying the president, the House inserted into the supplemental spending bill a provision that blocks Dubai-owned DP World from running or managing terminals at U.S. ports.

The president supported the company and initially threatened to veto any legislation delaying or killing DP World's effort to manage terminals at six major U.S. ports.

But the White House backed off that position after the company promised to sell its American operations under fierce bipartisan pressure from Congress. And, talk of a veto is absent from a Bush administration statement about its views on the bill.

On a 377-38 vote Wednesday, the House rejected an effort to strip the DP World provision from the bill. Because DP World plans to sell its U.S. operations, the vote was largely symbolic and the provision is likely to be eliminated from the final bill when House and Senate negotiators meet later this spring to compromise differences between their versions. The Senate has not yet completed its work.

Rep. Jerry Lewis (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said Wednesday's vote sends "a strong and unmistakable message that the Congress and the American people stand united on the critical national security issue that involves the ports."

But some lawmakers derided the vote as purely for show.

"This is like making everybody feel good that they can thump their chests and say we're doing something really tough here. But it has no effect," Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., said.

The weeks' long conflict over port security has overshadowed the bulk of the $91.8 billion spending measure, which provides $67.6 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $19.1 billion in new money for hurricane recovery along the Gulf Coast.

Bush had requested $92.2 billion, but the House trimmed some of the hurricane-relief money.

The House is expected to overwhelmingly approve the bill. Voting against it would invite election-year criticism for Republicans and Democrats alike that they were shortchanging U.S. troops at war or abandoning Gulf Coast hurricane victims.

Because of that, Republicans have little choice but to back the measure even though some fear the impact of the spending on soaring federal deficits in a congressional election year.

The bill has been particularly difficult to swallow for conservatives, who agree that troops and the Gulf Coast need the money but object to how the administration and Congress are providing the dollars without cutting the budget elsewhere.

"We have to put our fiscal house in order," Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., implored colleagues on the House floor.

Conservatives were expected to try and fail to get the GOP leadership to split the measure in two so that the lawmakers can soften the impact on the deficit by cutting money from other programs to offset the hurricane-recovery money.

Lewis said both the troops and hurricane victims need the money urgently.

A large number of Democrats also are expected to vote in favor of the bill, even though many object to how the Bush administration is handling the Iraq war.

"I'm not convinced that providing more money for Iraq will cure the problems in that country," Rep. Nita Lowey D-N.Y., said. But, she added, "I think we owe our men and women in uniform in Iraq every tool to achieve success."
_______________

Ah, those sneaky Repubs & their supplementals - daring the Democrats to vote against them - facing the Republican attack machine that they weren't supporting the troops or caring about the people who suffered loses from the hurricane.

I guarantee you the Republican leadership, and certainly the White House, don't want the measure split.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 01:58 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 20,721
Even without the hurricane relief, they would have tacked the Iraq gift bill with something else. Like maybe a new federal school lunch program, then attack those mean old Democrats for not caring about America's starving children.

BTW: What happened to Bush's absurd request for $120 billion to piss away on Iraq this year? Are they just splitting that up for later?
Ranger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 03:57 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
The House is now debating this supplemental.

I just heard an interesting statistic: With this supplemental, we will have now spent more money on the War in Iraq than we did in the War in Vietnam.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:17 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,393
Originally Posted by classicman2
I just heard an interesting statistic: With this supplemental, we will have now spent more money on the War in Iraq than we did in the War in Vietnam.
Wow! In 1961 my parents bought their house for $8,000 and today it sells for $500,000. I'm thinking the cost of things, including war, have gone up quite a bit since then.
General Zod is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:20 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
How long were we in Vietnam?

How many troops did we have as compared with Iraq?

BTW: You're comparing apples and oranges with comparing the meteoric rise in estate with arms; but, I assume you knew that and merely wanted to make a rather senseless point - maybe not.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:32 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 866
Originally Posted by classicman2
How long were we in Vietnam?

How many troops did we have as compared with Iraq?

BTW: You're comparing apples and oranges with comparing the meteoric rise in estate with arms; but, I assume you knew that and merely wanted to make a rather senseless point - maybe not.

And you honestly think that comparing costs of weapons, soldiers, equipment from 30+ years ago to today is comparing apples to apples? Spin it elsewhere.
Binger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:34 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally Posted by Binger
And you honestly think that comparing costs of weapons, soldiers, equipment from 30+ years ago to today is comparing apples to apples? Spin it elsewhere.
Don't you believe you'd be more comfortable in a tag thread?
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:42 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
1. He was comparing the cost of a home - real estate prices have risen at meteoric rates - considerably faster than weapons of war. It's an apples & oranges comparison, and I don't think it's takes much thought to realize that.

2. At the peak of Iraq, we had 160,000 troops. At the peak in Vietnam, we had 550,000 troops. The more troops - the higher the cost to maintain those troops. In addition, we had much, much more equipment in Vietnam than Iraq. The more equipment you have - the more money.

In addition - how long were we in Vietnam? The longer the duration of troop deployment - the higher the cost.

Last edited by classicman2; 03-16-06 at 05:47 PM.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:42 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,393
Originally Posted by Binger
And you honestly think that comparing costs of weapons, soldiers, equipment from 30+ years ago to today is comparing apples to apples? Spin it elsewhere.
This is really all I was trying to say. C-Man just didn't like it

Relative to today's economy I still agree that this war has cost a lot of money and I do wonder what sort of return on our investment we are going to get. However, yet another inapplicable comparison to vietnam gets tiresome.
General Zod is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:44 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
See post #8.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 05:53 PM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 866
Originally Posted by classicman2
Don't you believe you'd be more comfortable in a tag thread?

Depending on your source the cost of Vietnam in today's dollars would be between $500 billion to $600 billion. So we aren't there yet.

Call me anything your want, but what the hell is a tag thread?

Last edited by Binger; 03-16-06 at 06:00 PM.
Binger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 06:22 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
The Bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 54,851
Originally Posted by classicman2
How long were we in Vietnam?

How many troops did we have as compared with Iraq?

BTW: You're comparing apples and oranges with comparing the meteoric rise in estate with arms; but, I assume you knew that and merely wanted to make a rather senseless point - maybe not.
I am going to mail you an Econ 101 book. Please read it.
The Bus is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 06:34 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
BTW: Is the 400 billion dollars the total cost of the War in Iraq & Afghanistan - or is that just the amount of supplementals that have been approved by the congress?
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 06:41 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally Posted by The Bus
I am going to mail you an Econ 101 book. Please read it.


You'll be telling us next about the law of supply & demand.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 06:56 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 866
Originally Posted by classicman2


You'll be telling us next about the law of supply & demand.
And you'll still have nothing to say.
Binger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:02 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally Posted by Binger
And you'll still have nothing to say.
What should I say about his nothing comment?
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:07 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 866
Originally Posted by classicman2
What should I say about his nothing comment?

It's less about a response to The Bus' comments and more about the total lack of substance of all your posts in this thread.
Binger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:08 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 20,721
Originally Posted by General Zod
Wow! In 1961 my parents bought their house for $8,000 and today it sells for $500,000. I'm thinking the cost of things, including war, have gone up quite a bit since then.
It certainly would be a valid point if the figure on Vietnam was in adjusted dollars, don't you think?
Ranger is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:09 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Comment: "I'm going to mail........

That's really profound.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:11 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Bacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: the 870
Posts: 21,135
Originally Posted by Binger
It's less about a response to The Bus' comments and more about the total lack of substance of all your posts in this thread.
Yeah because mud slinging has a lot of substance
go back to your corners both of you

it doesn't really matter how much dollar value there is compared to Vietnam it matters that the money is spent in a wasteful way
Bacon is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:16 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
Wow, we've only spent as much as we did in Vietnam and we've been able to keep US casualties to 1-2% of our Vietnam casualties!

There's technology and tactics for ya! Worth every penny.

Oh... maybe there are more factors at play.
Th0r S1mpson is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:18 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
I think we could find, if we really tried, some better ways to spend the money that we've spent on our endeavor in Iraq, since it wasn't a necessary endeavor in the first place. Had it been, you might make a better case for the huge expenditures we've made in this war.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:19 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Bacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: the 870
Posts: 21,135
Originally Posted by Thor Simpson
Wow, we've only spent as much as we did in Vietnam and we've been able to keep US casualties to 1-2% of our Vietnam casualties!

There's technology and tactics for ya! Worth every penny.

Oh... maybe there are more factors at play.
with inflaction factored in it's really 85%

Bacon is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:22 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Originally Posted by Thor Simpson
Wow, we've only spent as much as we did in Vietnam and we've been able to keep US casualties to 1-2% of our Vietnam casualties!

There's technology and tactics for ya! Worth every penny.

Oh... maybe there are more factors at play.
160,000 as opposed to 550,000

length of time

Those 2 might be factors.

In addition, we faced a more formidable conventional war enemy in Vietnam - the North Vietnamese.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-16-06, 07:25 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
Wow, this argument is dumb.

Iraq and Vietnam are so dissimilar.

And yes, OF COURSE we could spend the money better than we do. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves, or easily fooled.

Any time a billion dollars is spent on ANYTHING, I'm fairly convinced <i>at least</i> 200 million is wasted in some way.
Th0r S1mpson is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.