"Pete C." wrote:

> > EXCUSE ME!?!? Just "a drop in the bucket"????
>
> Compare a few hundred billion to the many trillions of the national
> budget. Iraq is a drop in the bucket, don't let the "billion" fool you,
> relative to the total national budget, Iraq is the equivalent of your
> morning coffee budget.

Perhaps the morning cup of coffee for many years to come. Personally, I
would rather have that morning coffee money going to build and repair local
infrastructure that to have it being wasted on men and military equipment
to be blown up in a war that was based on lies. And of course you would
know that know viable WMDs were found.

Think about it for a second. Bush and his boys had so much proof of a vast
arsenal of WMDs that they went to war to disarm Saddam, but they were
unable to find them. One would expect that if they had had enough proof to
justify an invasion that they would have had no problem finding them.


Don't you think that if Saddam had had WMDs that he would have used them on
the invading forces? What on earth do you think he was saving them for?



> No, I'm one of the folks who knows the real story with the WMDs from
> someone who was in Iraq on the UNSCOM team and saw them first hand.

In that case, you were probably aware that, while Iraq had had a
significant WMD program but that it had been dismantled. You would know
too that, contrary to Bush's demands that Saddam allow the inspectors back
in, they had been withdrawn by the uS for their own safety because they
were going to launch air strikes.


> >
> > > A good chunk of our tax dollars are being wasted on
> > > well intentioned but counterproductive "humanitarian aid".
> >
> > Funny Uncle Sam gives candy to little countries because he wants
> > what's in their little panties.*
>
> That's not what I was referring to. I was referring to the feel good
> humanitarian aid given to countries that have nothing we want, and only
> server to exacerbate the problems in those countries.

Should you only offer aid to countries that have something you want?
Silly me. Of course. That is the way the US often operates. It tried to
undermine Castro's regime in Cuba because it was communist and therefore
corrupt and incompetent, but it had no problem with Batista's corrupt,
incompetent and repressive regime because it kissed American butt. When
Castro retaliated for those attempts to overthrow is government and
numerous attempts on his life he responded by nationalizing American
businesses, so the US turned around and placed an embargo on it. Castro's
regime is no more repressive than China's, but China is a major trading
partner. US consumers have no problem shopping at Walmart for cheap Chinese
goods, but Americans are not allowed to buy Cuban products.

> > OK, here's a challenge. Tell us EXACTLY WHAT that "largest portion of
> > our tax dollars" "are being wasted" on "right here in the US."
>
> Little things like the "war on drugs" which also includes a lot of
> foreign spending and by all objective assessments accomplishes next to
> nothing. Various superstition... er... "faith" based programs. Pet pork
> projects. Etc.

It's a pity that it was not spent on public education. If it had been, more
Americans would have known where Iraq was before it was on the nightly
news.