AP: Pentagon Wants $99.7B More for Wars
Thursday, December 21, 2006 6:38 AM EST
The Associated Press
By ANDREW TAYLOR
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon wants the White House to seek an additional $99.7 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to information provided to The Associated Press.
The military's request, if embraced by President Bush and approved by Congress, would boost this year's budget for those wars to about $170 billion.
Military planners assembled the proposal at a time when Bush is developing new strategies for Iraq, such as sending thousands of more U.S. troops there, although it was put together before the president said the troop surge was under consideration.
Overall, the war in Iraq has cost about $350 billion. Combined with the conflict in Afghanistan and operations against terrorism elsewhere, the cost has topped $500 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.
The additional funds, if approved, would push this year's cost of the war in Iraq to about $50 billion over last year's record. In September, Congress approved an initial $70 billion for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1.
A description of the Pentagon request was provided by a person familiar with the proposal who asked for anonymity because the person was not authorized to release the information.
The cost of the war has risen dramatically as the security situation has deteriorated and more equipment is destroyed or worn out in harsh conditions. The Army, which has borne the brunt of the fighting, would receive about half of the request, a reflection of the wear and tear that the war has had on soldiers and their equipment.
An additional $9.8 billion is being sought for training and equipping Iraq's and Afghanistan's security forces.
The administration's request for more Iraq money will be submitted along with Bush's budget in February for the 2008 budget year, which starts next Oct. 1. The White House can add or subtract from the Pentagon request as it sees fit, and the total could grow if money is added for reconstruction costs.
In a memo several weeks ago, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England encouraged the services to include in their budget requests projects connected to the broader fight against terrorism, as opposed to costs strictly limited to Iraq and Afghanistan. Critics have said that could be interpreted to cover almost anything.
Earlier requests submitted by service branches to Pentagon brass were considerably higher, but were trimmed back after meeting resistance at the White House and from key lawmakers.
The budget request includes:
—$41.5 billion to cover the costs of ongoing military operations.
—$26.7 billion for replacing and repairing equipment damaged or destroyed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
—$10 billion for body armor and other equipment to protect U.S. troops from attack.
—$2.5 billion to combat roadside bombs and other improvised explosive devices.
—$2.7 billion for intelligence activities.
Whatever request emerges from the Bush administration will go to a new Congress controlled by Democrats highly critical of the Iraq war and Bush's handling of it.
Even so, there is much sentiment among Democrats to protect troops and much fear about being portrayed as unsympathetic to men and women in uniform. These factors probably would overwhelm any efforts by anti-war Democrats to use the debate over the Iraq money to take on Bush's conduct of the war.
Democrats have promised, however, to give the upcoming request greater scrutiny than Republicans did when considering Bush's previous requests.
"Democrats are committed to ensuring our troops have all that they need, but we're going to return oversight to spending on the war," said Jim Manley, spokesman for incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "Our troops must have everything they need, but Halliburton shouldn't get everything it wants."
Halliburton Co. is a Texas-based oil services conglomerate once led by Vice President Dick Cheney. Bush administration officials have come under fire since the beginning of the war in Iraq for awarding more than $10 billion to the company and its subsidiaries in 2003 and 2004, some of it in a no-bid contract. There have been allegations of fraud, poor work, overpricing and other abuse, which the company has denied.
Democrats such as incoming Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota have grown increasingly critical of the fact that Iraq spending is kept on a set of books separate from the rest of government operations.
The Vietnam War cost an inflation-adjusted $121 billion at its height in 1968, according to the Congressional Research Service. The overall tally for Vietnam is $663 billion, adjusted for inflation, and Iraq costs are rapidly catching up.
Contest: How much money can this adminstration piss away?
Moderator: Dictators in Training
they cant because its not. Never was from the start.
well that isnt totaly true. To "win" this you would need Stalin like or Saddam like tactics and no way the US will ever do that. thats not even a "win" all you do then is suppress, the idology is still there.
Stupid fucker didnt learn a thing from 'Nam
well that isnt totaly true. To "win" this you would need Stalin like or Saddam like tactics and no way the US will ever do that. thats not even a "win" all you do then is suppress, the idology is still there.
Stupid fucker didnt learn a thing from 'Nam
For you
It's extremely difficult to win a conventional war with people who are willing to die for their cause, and even sacrifice their own children. Pulling out now wouldn't be the right thing to do though, as they will take that as a weakness. Then more attacks on U.S. soil will be forthcoming. They have sworn a Jihad against the west. That means we will be forever in a war with muslim terrorists whether we pull out of Iraq or not. We need moles to infiltrate their underground society and take them from the inside out.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
You aren't at war with Muslim terrorists, you're at war with a Muslim nation.
So Mindia you have basically conceded that troops will be in Iraq until the end of the American empire, and yet you think leaving is a bad thing. If you truly believe that then George Bush will go down in history as the single worst president of all time.
So Mindia you have basically conceded that troops will be in Iraq until the end of the American empire, and yet you think leaving is a bad thing. If you truly believe that then George Bush will go down in history as the single worst president of all time.
Zanchief wrote:You aren't at war with Muslim terrorists, you're at war with a Muslim nation.
So Mindia you have basically conceded that troops will be in Iraq until the end of the American empire, and yet you think leaving is a bad thing. If you truly believe that then George Bush will go down in history as the single worst president of all time.
We are not at war with the Muslim nation. If Bush pulls the troops out now, and then we start getting attacked more on our own soil... then yes, he will go down in history as being a bad president. Iraq still wants us there, and needs us. Pulling out now would be the biggest mistake the U.S. could possibly make.“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Zanchief wrote:Narrock wrote:Didn't I just say that we need to infiltrate the Jihadists from the inside? What I'm saying is that we're fighting this war incorrectly, which is why I think it's a good idea that Rummy got replaced.
So you think you should get solid snake in Iraq and just sneak attack them to death?
Yeah man, we should go in stealth mode and hamstring them one by one.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Narrock wrote:Zanchief wrote:Narrock wrote:Didn't I just say that we need to infiltrate the Jihadists from the inside? What I'm saying is that we're fighting this war incorrectly, which is why I think it's a good idea that Rummy got replaced.
So you think you should get solid snake in Iraq and just sneak attack them to death?
Yeah man, we should go in stealth mode and hamstring them one by one.
I giggled because you said stealth.
Narrock wrote:Zanchief wrote:You aren't at war with Muslim terrorists, you're at war with a Muslim nation.
So Mindia you have basically conceded that troops will be in Iraq until the end of the American empire, and yet you think leaving is a bad thing. If you truly believe that then George Bush will go down in history as the single worst president of all time.
he already HAS gone down in history as being a bad president. the only reason iraq needs us there is because president dipshit toppled their current government under false pretenses. We are now stuck with this and should not be. Hi Vietnam? this needs to end and end fast.
Alphonso's idea is more viable then ANY of the horse shit bush has come up with, and now he is talking about MORE troops? fuck that shit. Every good gambler knows when to cut losses.
For you
Evermore wrote:he already HAS gone down in history as being a bad president.
I'll bet the guy with the GED at least understands the difference between history and current events.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
Oh come on Arlos, you can do better then claiming to have psychic powers and name calling.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
No, weak is the assertion of impossibility as fact or claiming you can see the future with absolute certainty. And I'd hope you realized by now, if I was attempting to "argue" it would be more then a few sentences 
, really I'm just currently in an antagonizing mood.
, really I'm just currently in an antagonizing mood.Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.