$67 Bn?

[Peachhead22]

Shrub wants $87 Bn for Iraq and Afghanistan. $20 Bn for rebuilding Iraq and $67 Bn for the military. Dem congresscritters, the news and we here at DU have been focusing on that $20 Bn for rebuilding. But nobody has really said a peep about the $67 Bn for the military ("for the troops"). I think mostly because no-one wants to be seen as "against the troops".

Well, I'm not against the troops either, but $67 Bn!? We're occupying one country and fighting a low-level conflict in another. I mean, I don't mean to minimize anything, but we're not talking about pitched battles involving hundreds of tanks. What the <bleep> costs $87 Bn? Thank heavens we aren't fighting a large-scale, WWII-type war. At this rate it's be trillions!

I think our congressmen should be taking a closer look at that. They need to make sure Shrub isn't sneaking a few billion here and there for things like Star Wars II, other high-tech boondoggles that won't do a damn thing for "the troops" (military contractor pork), checkbook diplomacy, and the like. Things that aren't really "for the troops" but are being hidden in that bill.

[rucky]

1. 67 Billion For 150,000 Troops = $446,666.00 per troop!

zeroes added for emphasis

[LastKnight]

2. no, thats around 149,700 troops...

lets not forget the dead like BushCo would want us to.

btw, wtf DOES cost 87B?

-LK

[jokerman93]

3. 67 Bn? Oh that!

That's not for flack vests, food, water, and socks for our soldiers!

That's to finance the expansion of the neocon military strategy in the middle east. Don't forget! We're taking the war to the terrorists so we don't have to fight them in New Jersey.

Lots of Islamic butt to kick bro! Lots of bribes to broker. Lots of private corporate contract mercenary payrolls to keep flush. Lots of sexy new weapons to purchase. Lots of kickbacks and black funds where so much of the other missing trillion dollars in military funding has gone...