Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Paying for Two Wars (Original Post) SHRED Mar 2013 OP
our media has chosen to ignore the obvious.... not to mention the bu$h* tax breaks..... spanone Mar 2013 #1
Odd. Igel Mar 2013 #2
+ 1,000! upi402 Mar 2013 #3

Igel

(35,306 posts)
2. Odd.
Sat Mar 2, 2013, 08:31 PM
Mar 2013

Part of the financial news from last year involved bad numbers because of a decrease in certain kinds of military spending as the Afghanistan surge ended. It was a great thing at the time; it was a bad thing 6 months later. Then again, isn't "consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds" the way the quote is usually given?

So perhaps we could find real savings if we just got our troops out of Iraq and ending the bloodbath there?

Oh, wait, didn't the withdraw of US forces under the 2008 SOFA (apparently negotiated and signed by Obama) accomplish that already?

What's left is the interest on the debt incurred. The "Bush recovery" was weak, with job creation numbers being about what they are now. Such numbers currently call for a large dose of deficit spending, but sadly the Bush II deficits, with two wars actively prosecuted, dwarfed the current deficit and didn't have the desired effect, so perhaps ending the two wars and reducing the deficit that way is a good idea.

Then again, pretty much every paragraph that I wrote includes at least one real howler of a mistake.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Paying for Two Wars