Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (748033)	8/21/2006 10:35:33 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

"Pakistan has helped to shelter OBL from capture." Yep. (Not to mention that they CREATED the Taliban... and supported them all along.) "Our ally? Hardly!! I will never forget that on the day of 9/11 Pakistanis in Tampa were dancing in the streets, and scowling at all other citizens like they wanted to kill them." Tell it to Bush the Second. He's the one who calls them "our ally"... not me.

To: haqihana who wrote (748033)	8/21/2006 11:03:49 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The Count: A Nonpartisan Look at the Price Tag of Overseas Wars By HUBERT B. HERRING August 20, 2006 <click link to see graphic: Estimated average monthly obligations of the Defense Department: War in Iraq, War in Afghanistan & global war on terror, enhanced security and other.> nytimes.com <br> <img src="http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/19/business/yourmoney/20count.190.jpg"><br> <br> What, exactly, are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costing us? (In merely dollar terms, that is; the human cost is another, unthinkable matter entirely.) That’s what the Congressional Research Service, Congress’s nonpartisan public policy research arm, explored in a recent study. As the study notes, the Defense Department recently put the “burn rate” — a term for the sums being spent — for Iraq and Afghanistan at $6.8 billion a month. But as the study says, that excludes maintaining and replacing equipment or building and improving facilities. The official “burn rate,” it concludes, is only about 70 percent of the true cost. For fiscal 2006, monthly costs for Iraq alone could hit $8 billion, the study projected. The study found a bit of surprising news: that the cost of feeding troops in Iraq fell in fiscal 2005 to $1.2 billion from $2 billion, despite comparable troop levels. No, we have not cut rations. The change may simply reflect success at reducing costs, the study says. Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company