US money is 'squandered' in Iraq

[fontaine]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6316057.stm

US money is 'squandered' in Iraq

Millions of dollars in US rebuilding funds have been wasted in Iraq, US auditors say in a report which warns corruption in the country is rife.
A never-used camp in Baghdad for police trainers with an Olympic-size swimming pool is one of the examples highlighted in the quarterly audit.

Billions of budgeted dollars meanwhile remain unspent by Iraq's government.

The report comes as President Bush is urging Congress to approve $1.2bn (£600m) in further reconstruction aid.

The audit by Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction (Sigir), is the latest in a regular series of updates to Congress.

Budgeting problems

"The security situation continue to deteriorate, hindering progress in all reconstruction sectors and threatening the overall reconstruction effort," says his 579-page report, which is due to be released later on Wednesday.

More remains to be done to account for past US investment and to promote the highest and best use of future US funding for Iraq

Stuart Bowen
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction

Among the wide-ranging findings, the audit says that corruption continues to plague Iraq and infrastructure security remains vulnerable.


Auditors express "significant concern" about the Iraqi government's record in managing and spending budgets.

Billions of dollars budgeted for capital projects remained unspent at the end of 2006, the report says.

Vague invoices

As well as not spending funds, the audit also highlights ways in which money has been used either improperly or wastefully.

One case involved a payment by the US State Department of $43.8m to a contractor, DynCorp International, for a residential camp for police trainers outside the Adnan Palace grounds in Baghdad. The camp has never been used.

The Iraqi Interior Ministry ordered $4.2m of work there, never authorised by the State Department, that included 20 trailers for important visitors and an Olympic-size swimming pool.

The State Department has said that it is working to improve controls.

Another example cited in the report is $36.4m spent by US officials on armoured vehicles, body armour and communications equipment that cannot be accounted for because invoices were vague and there was no back-up documentation.

Generator sales have boomed given Baghdad's frequent power cuts

Contracts have been awarded for virtually all of the $21bn earmarked by the US government for Iraqi reconstruction, and some 80% has been spent.

Democrats, who now control the US Congress, have expressed concern at the prospect of devoting more funds to rebuilding efforts in Iraq.

Rep Henry Waxman is planning in-depth hearings next week into charges of waste and fraud in Iraq.

Since 2003, the way reconstruction aid is used has changed, with money originally destined for infrastructure programmes cut and more spent on areas like security and democracy projects.

Electricity output remains below pre-war levels, while funds initially earmarked for water and sewerage have been cut by 50%, the audit says.

Investigations

The report also points to continuing high unemployment, put at 18% but widely believed to be under-reported, as a contributing factor in the insurgency.

It concludes that the Iraqi government's "most significant challenge" continues to be strengthening the judiciary, prisons and the police.

"The United States has spent billions of dollars in this area, with limited success to date."

Mr Bowen's audit office began operations in March 2004 and is currently conducting 78 investigations, of which 23 have been referred to the US Department of Justice.

There have so far been four convictions.

His office, which was nearly closed down last year by Republicans, is now due to carry on its oversight work through 2008.

US FUNDS IN IRAQ
Security and justice 34%
Electricity 23%
Water 12%
Economic, societal development 12%
Oil and gas 9%
Transport, communications4%
Health care 4%
Source: Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction

>>Just curious but does anyone else know anything about that last bolded statement?

Surely when undergoing such a massive reconstruction program that requires billions of dollars worth of investment the process should be open to independant investigation and audit?

As the report above states, of the 78 investigations carried out, almost a THIRD have been referred to the Department of Justice and convictions handed down so that in itself suggest the audit process is achieving just some of its initial requirements?

[OrangeShadow]

doesnt suprise me in the least

[Spider]

it is Clintons fault ,`dont know how yet , but if this thread hits the WRP forum , I am sure to find out .........in case you havent heard ,Bush does no wrong , I think Barak Obama is behind this to make Bush look bad ;D

[fontaine]

I'm not wondering about the corruption, allocated funds that cannot be tracked down etc.

I am though, puzzled by why the Audit Process/Group was almost shut down last year by the "Republicans" (Anyone know who specifically?).

It just reeks of bull headed stupidity and arrogance. I understand there will always be corruption and funds going missing/misallocated (just like I'm sure it was back in the Marshall Plan etc) but to attempt to turn off any light that may shine on these practices is downright absurd and self harming.

Surely if the current oval office wanted to pump money into specific areas/groups in Iraq then it could do so through untraceable private/back channels so that this money would never show up under the "official" reconstruction funds in the first place or as missing. But to try and stop an independant auditing body designed to expose various flaws/problems in the funds allocation of the reconstruction program is downright stupid and laughs in the face of common sense.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm not wondering about the corruption, allocated funds that cannot be tracked down etc.

I am though, puzzled by why the Audit Process/Group was almost shut down last year by the "Republicans" (Anyone know who specifically?).

It just reeks of bull headed stupidity and arrogance. I understand there will always be corruption and funds going missing/misallocated (just like I'm sure it was back in the Marshall Plan etc) but to attempt to turn off any light that may shine on these practices is downright absurd and self harming.

Surely if the current oval office wanted to pump money into specific areas/groups in Iraq then it could do so through untraceable private/back channels so that this money would never show up under the "official" reconstruction funds in the first place or as missing. But to try and stop an independant auditing body designed to expose various flaws/problems in the funds allocation of the reconstruction program is downright stupid and laughs in the face of common sense.Why would the Bush administration want oversight on the billions not millions that have disappeared over there?

Audit: U.S. lost track of $9 billion in Iraq funds (http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.audit/)

The Case of the Missing $21 Billion
Who's Following the Iraq Money? (http://tinyurl.com/lxpc4)

[Willynowei]

I'm not wondering about the corruption, allocated funds that cannot be tracked down etc.

I am though, puzzled by why the Audit Process/Group was almost shut down last year by the "Republicans" (Anyone know who specifically?).

It just reeks of bull headed stupidity and arrogance. I understand there will always be corruption and funds going missing/misallocated (just like I'm sure it was back in the Marshall Plan etc) but to attempt to turn off any light that may shine on these practices is downright absurd and self harming.

Surely if the current oval office wanted to pump money into specific areas/groups in Iraq then it could do so through untraceable private/back channels so that this money would never show up under the "official" reconstruction funds in the first place or as missing. But to try and stop an independant auditing body designed to expose various flaws/problems in the funds allocation of the reconstruction program is downright stupid and laughs in the face of common sense.

"His office, which was nearly closed down last year by Republicans, is now due to carry on its oversight work through 2008"

Look at the way thats worded. Look at source of the news. I'm not saying, but I'm just saying....

[Rohirrim]

I know that when the airport in Baghdad came under U.S. control, soldiers and airmen reported seeing pallets of bundles of $100 bills being off loaded. Kilo packages of $100 bills were being tossed around like Halloween candy.

[fontaine]

"His office, which was nearly closed down last year by Republicans, is now due to carry on its oversight work through 2008"

Look at the way thats worded. Look at source of the news. I'm not saying, but I'm just saying....

The BBC?

What're you talking about?

As to the way it was worded. Yes "Republicans" was a bit vague. That's why I specifically asked in my post "who specifically?"

[Spider]

The BBC?

What're you talking about?
left wing evil media bias ....... it is all the rage ;D

[Willynowei]

The BBC?

What're you talking about?

As to the way it was worded. Yes "Republicans" was a bit vague. That's why I specifically asked in my post "who specifically?"

"nearly" is a lot worse. What constitutes as nearly? If it was only mentioned and shot down in republican controlled congress, you could make that statement. There isn't a single media outlet without bias.

Another outlet could easily choose not to mention that part or reword it.

EDIT: I'm not attacking anything here, especialy not that article. Just saying that this particular statement was a little vague.

[fontaine]

"nearly" is a lot worse. What constitutes as nearly? If it was only mentioned and shot down in republican controlled congress, you could make that statement. There isn't a single media outlet without bias.

Another outlet could easily choose not to mention that part or reword it.

Yes thank you for that. I never realized that media outlets don't have some sort of bias!

:rofl:

By all means let us know the specifics if you do know (like I asked for in my post) regarding that sentence.

But if you don't then all you're doing is engaging in unfounded exaggerations based on some sort of vague media bias angle.

[Play2win]

Yet Federal Financial Aid for College Student is being cut at a tremendous rate, even though the cost of attending keeps going up. Tuition keeps increasing and Student loan rates keep escalating.

Education is probably one of the most important factors for continued development, both personally and as a nation. This is especially true with post-secondary and higher education. Education is an investment into the future and success of OUR ENTIRE NATION.

[cutthemdown]

Name one year in America where we haven't had stories about the Government wasting money? Nothing new here people and Bush did not invent Governmental waste and mismanagment. Man who are we going to blame for everything when Bush is gone? I guess that is when country wakes up and realizes that this finger pointing we do gets us nowhere. If you don't like the environment go out and work to make it better. If you don't think things are they way they should be get involved in local causes etc etc. I will tell you all one thing right now, complaining about how crappy the president is everyday and blaming every problem on him won't make things better.

[OregonBronco]

In other news, I heard on the radio this morning we've reached the $300 billion mark for taxpayer money spent on the war.

Here's a fun link:

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

[Bronco Bob]

Well, Iran has offered to rebuild Iraq. Why not let them waste their money
instead? Then we could use our money to beef up security at our own borders
and ports. Which is where the terrorists would get in anyway.

[24champ]

Meanwhile nobody wants to talk about the successful operation in Najaf...sad that all we can do is complain and whine. :nono:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

In other news, I heard on the radio this morning we've reached the $300 billion mark for taxpayer money spent on the war.
Here's a fun link:
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

As of July 2005 the VA estimated costs for Iraq veterans alone will be over 1.2 trillion dollars. Iraq will end up costing American taxpayers over 2 trillion dollars let alone all the American casualties which number over 50,000 so far.

------------------------------------------------------------------
The War in Iraq Costs $362,697,113,164

<table align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff"><tbody><tr><td colspan="2" align="center" valign="top"> See the cost in your community (http://costofwar.com/index.html)

</td></tr> <tr><td colspan="2" align="center" valign="top">Or compare to the cost of:</td></tr> <tr><td align="center" valign="top"> PRE-SCHOOL (http://costofwar.com/index-pre-school.html)
KIDS' HEALTH (http://costofwar.com/index-kids-health.html)
COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS (http://costofwar.com/index-college-scholarships.html)
PUBLIC HOUSING (http://costofwar.com/index-public-housing.html)
PUBLIC EDUCATION (http://costofwar.com/index-public-education.html) </td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2">
<table align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff"><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="top"> Notes and Sources (http://costofwar.com/numbers.html)
Embed a counter in your own web page! (http://costofwar.com/embedinstr.html)
Set up an LED counter on Main Street in your tow (http://costofwar.com/mainstreet.html)</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

[OregonBronco]

...let alone all the American casualties which number over 50,000 so far.

That number seems a little high. Last I heard, we were around 3000-4000 American soldiers and crap-ton of Iraqi citizens.

Ah ha...found it:

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

and

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

[Rohirrim]

Meanwhile nobody wants to talk about the successful operation in Najaf...sad that all we can do is complain and whine. :nono:

That's the shame of it all. If not for the press, we'd be winning. :thumbsup:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That number seems a little high. Last I heard, we were around 3000-4000 American soldiers and crap-ton of Iraqi citizens.

Ah ha...found it:
http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/
and
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
We're suffering around a 1000 casualties a month now in Iraq according to testimony in the House hearings two weeks ago by one of the generals.

American Wounded Official Estimated
Total Wounded: . 23114 . 23000 - 100000

[24champ]

We're suffering around a 1000 casualties a month now in Iraq according to testimony in the House hearings two weeks ago by one of the generals.

American Wounded Official Estimated
Total Wounded: . 23114 . 23000 - 100000

Ok so where do you get the 50,000 number? Link?

[OregonBronco]

We're suffering around a 1000 casualties a month now in Iraq according to testimony in the House hearings two weeks ago by one of the generals.

American Wounded Official Estimated
Total Wounded: . 23114 . 23000 - 100000

When you say "casualties", do you mean dead or wounded?

[Bronco Bob]

Meanwhile nobody wants to talk about the successful operation in Najaf...sad that all we can do is complain and whine. :nono:

Was this the "successful operation" you were refering to, or did you mean
something else?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2201103.ece

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Ok so where do you get the 50,000 number? Link?The DOD doesn't update casualties accurately as it's not in their best interest to do so, so numbers are taken from multiple sources also. Some estimates are high as 100,000 casualties.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly 50,000 American Casualties (http://tinyurl.com/3c4e3c)
The US Body Count in Iraq: an Analysis of Who is Dying and How

By WINSLOW T. WHEELER

In the month of October 2006, 104 Americans in uniform died in the war in Iraq. That makes this October the fourth most deadly month in Iraq for Americans since the war began in March 2003. (In April 2004, 135 Americans were killed; in November 2004 there were 137 killed; and in January 2005, it was 107). While it is impersonal to manipulate the statistics, it is also informative.

The Department of Defense (DOD) has made available significant data on the dead and wounded from the war. Among others, two particularly useful entities have analyzed DOD's and other data to help us understand the numbers. One is the website for the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count; another is a study released last August by the Population Studies Center of the University of Pennsylvania: "Mortality of American Troops in Iraq." The material below summaries their data (and provides additional links to them).

Total Dead

As of Nov. 1, 2006, 2,817 Americans have died in Iraq of all causes; 239 military personnel have been killed from other countries (U.K.: 120; "other:" 119), for a grand total of 3,055 casualties from the coalition forces. (See these and more data at http://icasualties.org/oif/

The data at www.icasualties.org for American military fatalities include:

2,268 deaths from hostile fire, which occurs in many forms; and 550 non-combat deaths.

Among the deaths resulting from hostile fire:

improvised explosive devices (IEDs) caused at least 998, or 35 percent of all deaths, which exceeds all other causes.

Although the other subcategories at www.icasulaties.org includes some causes listed more than once and other poorly organized or unexplained entries (from what DOD appears to have provided), other hostile fire causes attributed in the data include:

CONT

[Bronco_Beerslug]

When you say "casualties", do you mean dead or wounded?Both.

casualties (http://tinyurl.com/37zw8c): One injured, killed, captured, or missing in action through engagement with an enemy. Often used in the plural:

[Dudeskey]

Rep Henry Waxman is planning in-depth hearings next week into charges of waste and fraud in Iraq.


Its about time, what the **** took so god damn long?

[Bronco Bob]

Its about time, what the **** took so god damn long?

The rubber stamp Republicans had to lose their majority in Congress.
It's not really a coincidence that as soon as the Democrats gained
a majority, they would be looking into this. Especially in that they
won the majority based on the American public turning sour on the war.
Expect a lot more of this sort of thing to come out.

[24champ]

Was this the "successful operation" you were refering to, or did you mean
something else?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2201103.ece

Sorry but the supposed "tribesmen" were terrorists that called themselves soldiers of heaven and were heavily armed.

[24champ]

The DOD doesn't update casualties accurately as it's not in their best interest to do so, so numbers are taken from multiple sources also. Some estimates are high as 100,000 casualties.


People are only keeping count for political purposes.

[OregonBronco]

People are only keeping count for political purposes.

:kiddingme

Yeah, because the number of American soldiers that have died really isn't important at all.

[OregonBronco]

Both.

casualties (http://tinyurl.com/37zw8c): One injured, killed, captured, or missing in action through engagement with an enemy. Often used in the plural:

Gotcha. I always assumed casualties and fatalities were synonymous.

[Dudeskey]

The rubber stamp Republicans had to lose their majority in Congress.
It's not really a coincidence that as soon as the Democrats gained
a majority, they would be looking into this. Especially in that they
won the majority based on the American public turning sour on the war.
Expect a lot more of this sort of thing to come out.

Yeah I was aware of all that, just frustrated that the Dems didn't move sooner... but they did have to do their 1st 100 hrs of buisness first.:peace:

I'm glad the Senate Judiciary committee has already started airing out Gonzo though

[TailgateNut]

Name one year in America where we haven't had stories about the Government wasting money? Nothing new here people and Bush did not invent Governmental waste and mismanagment. Man who are we going to blame for everything when Bush is gone? I guess that is when country wakes up and realizes that this finger pointing we do gets us nowhere. If you don't like the environment go out and work to make it better. If you don't think things are they way they should be get involved in local causes etc etc. I will tell you all one thing right now, complaining about how crappy the president is everyday and blaming every problem on him won't make things better.


BLAHBLAHBLAH, Bush and CO have taken it to new heights. It's akin to givng a no-limit credit card to a teenager!

[Jetmeck]

BLAHBLAHBLAH, Bush and CO have taken it to new heights. It's akin to givng a no-limit credit card to a teenager!


AMEN Brother. Bush and Cheney are the King and Prince of this country didn't you know. The middle class have been slapped up side the side in plain view for all to see
and no one is even willing to pick up the phone to call the rep or senator. How lazy are people ? Don't tell me it won't make a difference, it has made a SMALL difference last election and if the trend continues the politicians will finally realize WE RUN THIS COUNTRY.

F*** KING GEORGE

This war is his baby as he created it and wanted it. Now that the whole world is against him and he will not change course or even adjust his thinking. This idiot needs to go for MANY, MANY more reasons than just the war. He is clueless.

[sirhcyennek81]

This war is his baby as he created it and wanted it. Now that the whole world is against him and he will not change course or even adjust his thinking. This idiot needs to go for MANY, MANY more reasons than just the war. He is clueless.


Whole world...like Iran, and Syria...or Germany and Russia or France, ya know, the countries 1. either with the same political system as saddam had 2. eyes on a new "persian empire" in the gulf region or 3. nations who signed oil deals with iraq during the embargoes and sanctions. Iraq and Afghanistan is not a waste of money, or time. In fact, social security is possibly the largest scam ever perpetrated on the american people by our government.


:Broncos:

[Spider]

Whole world...like Iran, and Syria...or Germany and Russia or France, ya know, the countries 1. either with the same political system as saddam had 2. eyes on a new "persian empire" in the gulf region or 3. nations who signed oil deals with iraq during the embargoes and sanctions. Iraq and Afghanistan is not a waste of money, or time. In fact, social security is possibly the largest scam ever perpetrated on the american people by our government.


:Broncos:

LOL ........... Russia ,Germany and France are Batthist also hey .......... so many Hitlers so little time ...........

[sirhcyennek81]

LOL ........... Russia ,Germany and France are Batthist also hey .......... so many Hitlers so little time ...........

Reread what I wrote, I numbered it. Germany, France and Russia were #3.


:Broncos:

[defenseman]

AMEN Brother. Bush and Cheney are the King and Prince of this country didn't you know. The middle class have been slapped up side the side in plain view for all to see
and no one is even willing to pick up the phone to call the rep or senator. How lazy are people ? Don't tell me it won't make a difference, it has made a SMALL difference last election and if the trend continues the politicians will finally realize WE RUN THIS COUNTRY.

**** KING GEORGE

This war is his baby as he created it and wanted it. Now that the whole world is against him and he will not change course or even adjust his thinking. This idiot needs to go for MANY, MANY more reasons than just the war. He is clueless.


His war endorsed by the house in 2002 I might add. You conveniently left that out. Toss them in the briar patch while you are at it..dman

[sirhcyennek81]

If we are going to launch invesitgations into corruption and theft in Iraq, can we do the same for the state of Louisiana? I would think finding where 40 years worth of federal money went to to fix levies and dams would be important. IMO. Or is it a better usage of time to only publically investigate things that can embarass or marginalize a president of the US?

:Broncos:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

People are only keeping count for political purposes.
Yeah, why would anyone bother to worry about how many Americans are being sacrificed in Bush's occupation of Iraq other than to say "I told you so".

[Spider]

Reread what I wrote, I numbered it. Germany, France and Russia were #3.


:Broncos:

LOL naw one go around with your post is enough .........

[Spider]

If we are going to launch invesitgations into corruption and theft in Iraq, can we do the same for the state of Louisiana? I would think finding where 40 years worth of federal money went to to fix levies and dams would be important. IMO. Or is it a better usage of time to only publically investigate things that can embarass or marginalize a president of the US?

:Broncos:

Makes perfect sense ..... there is corruption in Louisanna , so therefore Billion in Iraq is ok ........ those damn hippies wanting to know where Billions of tax $$ went to .........the nerve of them hey .......

[sirhcyennek81]

LOL naw one go around with your post is enough .........


dammit spider, why can't you let me remain in my righteous political anger...:rofl:


:Broncos:

[missingnumber7]

I think that our major problem is the same as it was in Vietnam, we didn't seal off the borders then, and neither did forces seal borders now. The unit that I am assigned to now had captured insurgents who had iranian, syrian, jordanian, and turkish papers on them. I think if we seal the borders off that will solve half our problem. We can deal with the iraqi's fighting themselves if we don't have to worry about the crazy extremists provoking the sunni's or shia's. Then we have the crazy guys fighting soldiers while the soldiers are breaking up the sunnis and the shia's and then the really crazy guy drives the car filled with things that go boom into teh middle of the area and lots of innocent people die.

[Spider]

dammit spider, why can't you let me remain in my righteous political anger...:rofl:


:Broncos:

:notworthy continue on Bro .......

[sirhcyennek81]

Makes perfect sense ..... there is corruption in Louisanna , so therefore Billion in Iraq is ok ........ those damn hippies wanting to know where Billions of tax $$ went to .........the nerve of them hey .......


nope, I simply ask for transparency. Billions went to the state of LA for improvements in levies, dams ect. So...are they going to hold public, congressional hearings on this, too?

:Broncos:

[Spider]

nope, I simply ask for transparency. Billions went to the state of LA for improvements in levies, dams ect. So...are they going to hold public, congressional hearings on this, too?

:Broncos:

they should

[sirhcyennek81]

they should


I am a proponent for transparency, I dont care what party you are in, democrat, republican, conservative or liberal, the ability to see nearly everything a government does is a must. Oddly enough, hard to get our government to do this.


:Broncos:

[Paladin]

Yet Federal Financial Aid for College Student is being cut at a tremendous rate, even though the cost of attending keeps going up. Tuition keeps increasing and Student loan rates keep escalating.

Education is probably one of the most important factors for continued development, both personally and as a nation. This is especially true with post-secondary and higher education. Education is an investment into the future and success of OUR ENTIRE NATION.

Watch it! That's a terribly "liberal" statement there...........


Hilarious!

[Paladin]

That's the shame of it all. If not for the press, we'd be winning. :thumbsup:

:rofl:

[Paladin]

Was this the "successful operation" you were refering to, or did you mean
something else?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2201103.ece

Please try not to muddy the waters here, okay?

[Paladin]

Sorry but the supposed "tribesmen" were terrorists that called themselves soldiers of heaven and were heavily armed.

Were you there? Did you know them? Personally?

Or are you just asserting a statement from some other "media" source?

[Bronco Bob]

His war endorsed by the house in 2002 I might add. You conveniently left that out. Toss them in the briar patch while you are at it..dman

As a last resort, if all else failed to persuade Saddam. Not as an excuse to
go in with guns blazing. Unfortunately no one on the right ever mentions that
and instead uses it as an excuse for W's misguided war.

[sirhcyennek81]

In thinking about it, during the last 18 months of WW2, the senate did the same thing, they started investigating theft and corruption stemming from lend lease.


:Broncos:

[sirhcyennek81]

As a last resort, if all else failed to persuade Saddam. Not as an excuse to
go in with guns blazing. Unfortunately no one on the right ever mentions that
and instead uses it as an excuse for W's misguided war.


Yeah, apparently the left only takes credit for things when it can be damaging to the US economically or militarily. Saddam had been ignoring the UN since 1990, so what makes you think he would have suddenly listened?


:Broncos:

[Rock Chalk]

I am shocked that a government is corrupt and using money they steal from working folks improperly.

Shocked I say!

You retards think this is something new? Pick any "program" from any party and there you will find money wasted and corruption rampant. Be it war, education,health care, police, fire, transportation, welfare, social security, whatever.

The fact is, you people know better how to use your money than the government does. You want to bitch? Bitch that they are stealing from you in the first place. If we get them to stop stealing our money and "redistributing" it they have no way to misuse the funds now do they?

This country, the people, continue to let the government take and take and before you flaming ****** liberals get up in arms about the republicans, they (government) do it every term, in every party, with every one.

When you want to stop bitching and start standing up for what is yours, maybe then you can make a difference. Bitching is going to do nothing however except raise your blood pressure. Either take it lying down like you have been or stand up and fight back in whatever way WILL make a difference. Calling your local corrupt senator or representative wont make a difference so dont bother.

[sirhcyennek81]

I wonder if imposing term limits on everyone in government, instead of just the president, would make a difference.


:Broncos:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I am shocked that a government is corrupt and using money they steal from working folks improperly.

Shocked I say!

You retards think this is something new? Pick any "program" from any party and there you will find money wasted and corruption rampant. Be it war, education,health care, police, fire, transportation, welfare, social security, whatever.

The fact is, you people know better how to use your money than the government does. You want to b****? b**** that they are stealing from you in the first place. If we get them to stop stealing our money and "redistributing" it they have no way to misuse the funds now do they?

This country, the people, continue to let the government take and take and before you flaming ****** liberals get up in arms about the republicans, they (government) do it every term, in every party, with every one.

When you want to stop b****ing and start standing up for what is yours, maybe then you can make a difference. b****ing is going to do nothing however except raise your blood pressure. Either take it lying down like you have been or stand up and fight back in whatever way WILL make a difference. Calling your local corrupt senator or representative wont make a difference so dont bother.
LOL In chimes the guy that stated his country comes in behind video games on his "what's important in life" list.

[PLOWHORSE]

I am shocked that a government is corrupt and using money they steal from working folks improperly.

Shocked I say!

You retards think this is something new? Pick any "program" from any party and there you will find money wasted and corruption rampant. Be it war, education,health care, police, fire, transportation, welfare, social security, whatever.

The fact is, you people know better how to use your money than the government does. You want to b****? b**** that they are stealing from you in the first place. If we get them to stop stealing our money and "redistributing" it they have no way to misuse the funds now do they?

This country, the people, continue to let the government take and take and before you flaming ****** liberals get up in arms about the republicans, they (government) do it every term, in every party, with every one.

When you want to stop b****ing and start standing up for what is yours, maybe then you can make a difference. b****ing is going to do nothing however except raise your blood pressure. Either take it lying down like you have been or stand up and fight back in whatever way WILL make a difference. Calling your local corrupt senator or representative wont make a difference so dont bother.


Amen Al!!
I just re-watched "All The Presidents Men" last night which is a damned scary movie. Nixon isnt the only Prez to cover up monies for illegal activity. He just got snookered by 2 wolverines(not UM) at the Wash Post.

[Paladin]

Ah, yes. The old John Birch b*******. I call BS.

Liberals pay taxes, too, don't you know? If it weren't for liberals, there wouldn't have been a democratic government in the US. In fact, there would have not been a Boston Tea Party, or even five day work weeks or holidays and vacations, and a decent banking system that you can mostly trust, or even the right to vote or the Civil Rights movements (if you are black hereon, that is important, I presume). The demand for the public education system is a classic middle class, liberal, issue.

If being a neocon is so freaking great, how come is this country now caught in the midst of an Iraqi civil war? How come the middle class is being beaten down? How come are so many jobs being outsourced?

You rant on liberals, but the conservative elements of this country have screwed the pooch for us all.....

Now, the agenda of the far left can be very stupid, agreed. But not all people who believe in social and economic equality along with fiscal responsibility are as insulting as you are in that post.

[sirhcyennek81]

Ah, yes. The old John Birch b*******. I call BS.

Liberals pay taxes, too, don't you know? If it weren't for liberals, there wouldn't have been a democratic government in the US. In fact, there would have not been a Boston Tea Party, or even five day work weeks or holidays and vacations, and a decent banking system that you can mostly trust, or even the right to vote or the Civil Rights movements (if you are black hereon, that is important, I presume). The demand for the public education system is a classic middle class, liberal, issue.

If being a neocon is so freaking great, how come is this country now caught in the midst of an Iraqi civil war? How come the middle class is being beaten down? How come are so many jobs being outsourced?

You rant on liberals, but the conservative elements of this country have screwed the pooch for us all.....

Now, the agenda of the far left can be very stupid, agreed. But not all people who believe in social and economic equality along with fiscal responsibility are as insulting as you are in that post.


There is no such thing as social or economic equality. People are not equal, therefore our circumstances wont be either. What you can promise is equal opportunity. If so many jobs are being outsourced, why has unemployment sat at or below 5% (for most, that is virtual full employment) The wealthiest people in this country pay the most in taxes, so how can you say the middle class is being beaten down? Typical of most social engineering projects liberals undertake, our public school system is a schitzophrenic joke. Teachers are overpaid and produce horrible results. The Civil Rights Act passed, because republicans voted for it too, to hold it up as a shining example of liberal yay for us ness is bull****. You needed conservatives to vote for it also to get it to pass. As for Iraq, I fail to see how Iranian interference in Iraq equals Iraq being in a great civil war. And since when is Baghdad the entire nation of Iraq? That would be similar to saying the entire US is embroiled in a civilwar because our gangs are shooting at eachother in Washington DC.

Anyone recall how long it took the US to leave Germany and Japan after we occupied them? Anyone? Anyone? We are still there. To crush "insurgencies" takes time, history demonstrates this, and the media, keyed by our hysterical liberals, is going to deny our military the ability to do their job.

:Broncos:

[PLOWHORSE]

Great Post Sir!

[Paladin]

The entire point of my post is that the US is a mixture of people who come from a full range of political beliefs. I am not so naive to believe that there is perfect economic and social equality, not will there ever be. However, the issue is that there not be barriers to the rights of all citizens to equal treatment in regards to governmental actions. You twist the equality stuff to deflect from the intent of achieving "equality". The Women's right to vote movement, for example, was more noteworthy for the REMOVAL of barriers to equal treatment under the laws of this country. Are women, as a political class, equal to men? Should they have the right to vote? That was a very liberal idea in those days.

Before your time, education was restricted to only the intelligentsia, and public education was limited for the common people. To have such education available for the common folk was very frightening to some. A case in point is that the plantation owners of the South would punish any slaveholder who allowed his slaves to learn to read or write. Why is that?

The Civil War marked the main turning point in this county's history on the role of government as "protector" of the people. J. P. Morgan made his first fortune selling defective rifles to the Union Army, and many people got rich selling other defective items such as shoes and uniforms. It was a very liberal Republican government that took on the "Big Business" interests, and managed to bring some of them under some degree of control, although it made large RR land grants. Mining laws were heavily contested because the laws protected the men who worked, and cost the owners money. But lives were saved by the inspections. Not perfectly, but something was done. That is a liberal idea. That Government should help protect the health and lives of the common citizen against the unscrupulous big business practices. That is responsible liberalism. Of course, there were "conservatives" voting that way, too. I would have preferred that we refer to them as responsible Americans acting responsibly. WE have not seen that so much over the past six years or so, have we?

The whole point is that you lump the term "liberal" into the same mix as a child would lump "boogieman" under the rubric of "strangers". It is overly broad and fails to recognize the vast richness of successes and failures of the American people over the years, and even today.

You say the education system is a joke. I presume you went to Europe or Asia for your college education? Maybe we all would benefit from your efforts to help improve the education system. Have you gone to a School Board meeting? I have. Lots of people work hard at it, my friend. Even "they" don't want to leave a child behind.

I will leave the entire issue of how the middle class is being hammered in this country. Since you ask how that is so, I presume you are not paying attention. So, it may well be that some day if you want a job, you may have to go to India, Mexico, China, Brazil, or some other place to get work for wages that you cannot raise a family on, let alone help them get a college education or training. Then you will get it. It isn't a tax issue, it is a social-cultural-economic issue

Good luck in your future......

[sirhcyennek81]

The entire point of my post is that the US is a mixture of people who come from a full range of political beliefs. I am not so naive to believe that there is perfect economic and social equality, not will there ever be. However, the issue is that there not be barriers to the rights of all citizens to equal treatment in regards to governmental actions. You twist the equality stuff to deflect from the intent of achieving "equality". The Women's right to vote movement, for example, was more noteworthy for the REMOVAL of barriers to equal treatment under the laws of this country. Are women, as a political class, equal to men? Should they have the right to vote? That was a very liberal idea in those days.

Before your time, education was restricted to only the intelligentsia, and public education was limited for the common people. To have such education available for the common folk was very frightening to some. A case in point is that the plantation owners of the South would punish any slaveholder who allowed his slaves to learn to read or write. Why is that?

The Civil War marked the main turning point in this county's history on the role of government as "protector" of the people. J. P. Morgan made his first fortune selling defective rifles to the Union Army, and many people got rich selling other defective items such as shoes and uniforms. It was a very liberal Republican government that took on the "Big Business" interests, and managed to bring some of them under some degree of control, although it made large RR land grants. Mining laws were heavily contested because the laws protected the men who worked, and cost the owners money. But lives were saved by the inspections. Not perfectly, but something was done. That is a liberal idea. That Government should help protect the health and lives of the common citizen against the unscrupulous big business practices. That is responsible liberalism. Of course, there were "conservatives" voting that way, too. I would have preferred that we refer to them as responsible Americans acting responsibly. WE have not seen that so much over the past six years or so, have we?

The whole point is that you lump the term "liberal" into the same mix as a child would lump "boogieman" under the rubric of "strangers". It is overly broad and fails to recognize the vast richness of successes and failures of the American people over the years, and even today.

You say the education system is a joke. I presume you went to Europe or Asia for your college education? Maybe we all would benefit from your efforts to help improve the education system. Have you gone to a School Board meeting? I have. Lots of people work hard at it, my friend. Even "they" don't want to leave a child behind.

I will leave the entire issue of how the middle class is being hammered in this country. Since you ask how that is so, I presume you are not paying attention. So, it may well be that some day if you want a job, you may have to go to India, Mexico, China, Brazil, or some other place to get work for wages that you cannot raise a family on, let alone help them get a college education or training. Then you will get it. It isn't a tax issue, it is a social-cultural-economic issue

Good luck in your future......



I went to DOD schools. IMO, some of the best schools in the country. The president who corralled big business was a conservative republican, so the entire argument that liberals alone are responsible for every bit of social progress made in this country is a lie. I now expect a litany of insults to follow from your fellow liberals. Its ok to be wrong, liberals often are.

:Broncos:

[Oleg Gordievsky]

These foolers are nothing other then sons of jackals!

[cutthemdown]

The notion that Liberals make more honest and less corrupt politicians is very very funny. I'm not defending Bush. He's made some mistakes. But to even forget some of the things Liberals have done as far as coruption and waste go is shortsighted. The way things look we very well could have a Democratic Congress and A democratic President in the near future. I'm sure all the liberals will then say sorry after they leave power that nothing has changed. There will see be Global Warming. There will still be corruption. And we will still be fighting the war on terror around the world. This is the country we have people and it's not ever going to be a utopia. It's time to roll up our sleeves, put party politics and finger pointing behind us, and kick some ass as Americans both domestically and internationally. That means all of us working harder, saving more money, buying american when we can, using less energy as individuals and not blame corporations for everything. It also means giving more to charity here at home and trying to help those less fortunate. It's not up to the government people it's up to us as Americans.

[Chupacabra]

Liberals pay taxes, too, don't you know? If it weren't for liberals, there wouldn't have been a democratic government in the US. In fact, there would have not been a Boston Tea Party, or even five day work weeks or holidays and vacations, and a decent banking system that you can mostly trust, or even the right to vote or the Civil Rights movements (if you are black hereon, that is important, I presume). The demand for the public education system is a classic middle class, liberal, issue.



thats funny i dont care who ya are

[OregonBronco]

The notion that Liberals make more honest and less corrupt politicians is very very funny. I'm not defending Bush. He's made some mistakes. But to even forget some of the things Liberals have done as far as coruption and waste go is shortsighted. The way things look we very well could have a Democratic Congress and A democratic President in the near future. I'm sure all the liberals will then say sorry after they leave power that nothing has changed. There will see be Global Warming. There will still be corruption. And we will still be fighting the war on terror around the world. This is the country we have people and it's not ever going to be a utopia. It's time to roll up our sleeves, put party politics and finger pointing behind us, and kick some ass as Americans both domestically and internationally. That means all of us working harder, saving more money, buying american when we can, using less energy as individuals and not blame corporations for everything. It also means giving more to charity here at home and trying to help those less fortunate. It's not up to the government people it's up to us as Americans.

Well said. It's not much of a checks and balances system when one party controls everything. I'm looking forward to a Democrat congress and pres about as much as I enjoyed a Republican congress and pres.

Let's hope the country becomes a little less polarized in the next couple of years.

[Bronco Bob]

Yeah, apparently the left only takes credit for things when it can be damaging to the US economically or militarily. Saddam had been ignoring the UN since 1990, so what makes you think he would have suddenly listened?


Saddam had been put in a box after 1990. He was no threat to any of his
neighbors anymore and certainly no threat to the US. The fact that he
has dismantled all of his WMDs was proof of that. So why the need
to rush in with guns blazing all of a sudden? Name one good, legitimate
reason Bush went to war with Iraq.

[Bronco Bob]

Anyone recall how long it took the US to leave Germany and Japan after we occupied them? Anyone? Anyone? We are still there. To crush "insurgencies" takes time, history demonstrates this, and the media, keyed by our hysterical liberals, is going to deny our military the ability to do their job.



Remind me again how many US soldiers were killed in Germany and Japan
by German and Japanese insurgents AFTER Germany and Japan surrendered.
The purpose of keeping troops in Japan and Germany after WW2 was
because the Soviet Union and its proxies were right next door. It
wasn't to fight German and Japanese insurgents. It was to keep
Germany and Japan from being overrun by the Soviets.
As far as crushing insurgencies, name one insurgency the US has
crushed in the last 60 years. And explain how sending a few thousand
more soldiers to Iraq is going to crush this one. All it is doing
is giving the insurgents more live fire training, which is just making
them more clever and dangerous.

[Spider]

Remind me again how many US soldiers were killed in Germany and Japan
by German and Japanese insurgents AFTER Germany and Japan surrendered.
The purpose of keeping troops in Japan and Germany after WW2 was
because the Soviet Union and its proxies were right next door. It
wasn't to fight German and Japanese insurgents. It was to keep
Germany and Japan from being overrun by the Soviets.
As far as crushing insurgencies, name one insurgency the US has
crushed in the last 60 years. And explain how sending a few thousand
more soldiers to Iraq is going to crush this one. All it is doing
is giving the insurgents more live fire training, which is just making
them more clever and dangerous.

Dayum ........ that was a backhanded blow ;D ....... good job

[24champ]

Remind me again how many US soldiers were killed in Germany and Japan
by German and Japanese insurgents AFTER Germany and Japan surrendered.
The purpose of keeping troops in Japan and Germany after WW2 was
because the Soviet Union and its proxies were right next door. It
wasn't to fight German and Japanese insurgents. It was to keep
Germany and Japan from being overrun by the Soviets.
As far as crushing insurgencies, name one insurgency the US has
crushed in the last 60 years. And explain how sending a few thousand
more soldiers to Iraq is going to crush this one. All it is doing
is giving the insurgents more live fire training, which is just making
them more clever and dangerous.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3689
Insurgencies Rarely Win – And Iraq Won’t Be Any Different (Maybe)
By Donald Stoker

Page 1 of 1
Posted January 2007
Vietnam taught many Americans the wrong lesson: that determined guerrilla fighters are invincible. But history shows that insurgents rarely win, and Iraq should be no different. Now that it finally has a winning strategy, the Bush administration is in a race against time to beat the insurgency before the public’s patience finally wears out.

STR/AFP/Getty Images

Not invincible: The that insurgents can’t be beaten is a myth, because history shows otherwise.

The cold, hard truth about the Bush administration’s strategy of “surging” additional U.S. forces into Iraq is that it could work. Insurgencies are rarely as strong or successful as the public has come to believe. Iraq’s various insurgent groups have succeeded in creating a lot of chaos. But they’re likely not strong enough to succeed in the long term. Sending more American troops into Iraq with the aim of pacifying Baghdad could provide a foundation for their ultimate defeat, but only if the United States does not repeat its previous mistakes.

Myths about invincible guerrillas and insurgents are a direct result of America’s collective misunderstanding of its defeat in South Vietnam. This loss is generally credited to the brilliance and military virtues of the pajama-clad Vietcong. The Vietnamese may have been tough and persistent, but they were not brilliant. Rather, they were lucky—they faced an opponent with leaders unwilling to learn from their failures: the United States. When the Vietcong went toe-to-toe with U.S. forces in the 1968 Tet Offensive, they were decimated. When South Vietnam finally fell in 1975, it did so not to the Vietcong, but to regular units of the invading North Vietnamese Army. The Vietcong insurgency contributed greatly to the erosion of the American public’s will to fight, but so did the way that President Lyndon Johnson and the American military waged the war. It was North Vietnam’s will and American failure, not skillful use of an insurgency, that were the keys to Hanoi’s victory.

Similar misunderstandings persist over the Soviet Union’s defeat in Afghanistan, the other supposed example of guerrilla invincibility. But it was not the mujahidin’s strength that forced the Soviets to leave; it was the Soviet Union’s own economic and political weakness at home. In fact, the regime the Soviets established in Afghanistan was so formidable that it managed to survive for three years after the Red Army left.

Of course, history is not without genuine insurgent successes. Fidel Castro’s victory in Cuba is probably the best known, and there was the IRA’s partial triumph in 1922, as well as Algeria’s defeat of the French between 1954 and 1962. But the list of failed insurgencies is longer: Malayan Communists, Greek Communists, Filipino Huks, Nicaraguan Contras, Communists in El Salvador, Che Guevara in Bolivia, the Boers in South Africa (twice), Savimbi in Angola, and Sindero Luminoso in Peru, to name just a few. If the current U.S. administration maintains its will, establishes security in Baghdad, and succeeds in building a functioning government and army, there is no reason that the Iraqi insurgency cannot be similarly destroyed, or at least reduced to the level of terrorist thugs.

Insurgencies generally fail if all they are able to do is fight an irregular war. Successful practitioners of the guerrilla art from Nathanael Greene in the American Revolution to Mao Zedong in the Chinese Civil War have insisted upon having a regular army for which their guerrilla forces served mainly as an adjunct. Insurgencies also have inherent weaknesses and disadvantages vis-à-vis an established state. They lack governmental authority, established training areas, and secure supply lines. The danger is that insurgents can create these things, if given the time to do so. And, once they have them, they are well on their way to establishing themselves as a functioning and powerful alternative to the government. If they reach this point, they can very well succeed.

That’s why the real question in Iraq is not whether the insurgency can be defeated—it can be. The real question is whether the United States might have already missed its chance to snuff it out. The United States has failed to provide internal security for the Iraqi populace. The result is a climate of fear and insecurity in areas of the country overrun by insurgents, particularly in Baghdad. This undermines confidence in the elected Iraqi government and makes it difficult for it to assert its authority over insurgent-dominated areas. Clearing out the insurgents and reestablishing security will take time and a lot of manpower. Sectarian violence adds a bloody wrinkle. The United States and the Iraqi government have to deal with Sunni and Shia insurgencies, as well as the added complication of al Qaeda guerrillas.

But the strategy of “surging” troops could offer a rare chance for success—if the Pentagon and the White House learn from their past mistakes. Previously, the U.S. military cleared areas such as Baghdad’s notorious Haifa Street, but then failed to follow up with security. So the insurgents simply returned to create havoc. As for the White House, it has so far failed to convince the Iraqi government to remove elements that undermine its authority, such as the Mahdi Army. Bush’s recent speech on Iraq included admissions of these failures, providing some hope that they might not be repeated.

That’s welcome news, because one thing is certain: time is running out. Combating an insurgency typically requires 8 to 11 years. But the administration has done such a poor job of managing U.S. public opinion, to say nothing of the war itself, that it has exhausted many of its reservoirs of support. One tragedy of the Iraq war may be that the administration’s new strategy came too late to avert a rare, decisive insurgent victory.

Donald Stoker is professor of strategy and policy for the U.S. Naval War College’s Monterey Program. His opinions are his own. He is the author or editor of a number of works, including the forthcoming From Mercenaries to Privatization: The Evolution of Military Advising, 1815-2007 (London: Routledge, 2007).

HOLY CRAP! SOMEONE ACTUALLY THINKS THIS THING CAN BE WON!

[DarkHorse30]

cut 'n runners be damned. War has always been, and will always be....hell.

Is this news? Back the troops, AND the president during wartime or get lost.

Rememer when Clinton said he'd have the troops back by Christmas during HIS war? Uh....they're still there......over 10 years later.

[24champ]

Foreign Policy, the article from which I just read, is published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which is striking, because the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is well you don't get more left-leaning than that crowd, and they've got some guy publishing a piece on how insurgencies rarely win and if we just have the fortitude to tough this out, we could prevail.

[Spider]

cut 'n runners be damned. War has always been, and will always be....hell.

Is this news? Back the troops, AND the president during wartime or get lost.

Rememer when Clinton said he'd have the troops back by Christmas during HIS war? Uh....they're still there......over 10 years later.

why`dont you go away , live in some country that has a military dictator ?