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

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,868 posts)
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 02:23 PM Oct 2015

Concerned about the cost of Bernies programs, but not about Hillary's wars?

So far the Iraq war has cost us more than 2 trillion dollars.

US involvement in Libya has cost nearly 900 million dollars.


Where are all the cost concern trolls? How many people could have been put through college, fed or cared for with $2,000,900,000,000?

35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Concerned about the cost of Bernies programs, but not about Hillary's wars? (Original Post) ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 OP
Bernie voted for the Afghan War. JaneyVee Oct 2015 #1
The no answer answer. ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 #2
and to fund all the rest of them DURHAM D Oct 2015 #4
What would you say if the Congress sent the troops to wage war and then defunded them? n/t Uncle Joe Oct 2015 #28
bernie votes for war spending year after year but don't mention it on DU ok lol nt msongs Oct 2015 #5
He also voted yes on HR Res 64. JaneyVee Oct 2015 #7
Should the men and women sent to war by Hillary and Bush pay the price? ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 #10
Bernie voted for background checks Duckhunter935 Oct 2015 #8
Re: "how much does gun violence cost America every year?" About $200 billion. DanTex Oct 2015 #12
BS gets a D- (at best) from NRA thesquanderer Oct 2015 #22
Penalty! American Flag Oct 2015 #30
Can you think of any fundamental differences between the Iraq war & the Afghan war? think Oct 2015 #34
It's all about priorities and we aren't the priority. neverforget Oct 2015 #3
At least we get something back from Bernie's programs. jwirr Oct 2015 #6
Yes, something substantial for workers & the poor, instead of glutting the MIC & ME blowback. -nt- 99th_Monkey Oct 2015 #14
I didn't here the new wars Hillary was starting during the debate. upaloopa Oct 2015 #9
We still haven't paid off the old Bush/Clinton wars. ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 #11
They now estimate 4-6 trillion before it's all done AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #13
and BS is the one who keeps sliding his credit card DURHAM D Oct 2015 #15
So we should let soldiers pay for Hillary's mistake? ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 #19
Give Hillary's "no fly zone" in Syria a couple of weeks -nt- 99th_Monkey Oct 2015 #17
Sigh, now Bush's wars are Hilllaries!? ... let just make more false shit up uponit7771 Oct 2015 #16
The Bush wars Hillary voted for, YES. -nt- 99th_Monkey Oct 2015 #18
..... ForgoTheConsequence Oct 2015 #20
She took up a main Iraq war 'architect', who thought up the rationale for invading cprise Oct 2015 #33
If your answer is "yes" you share political values with Republicans. nt stillwaiting Oct 2015 #21
HRC Will Continue To Serve Her Campaign Donor Masters - Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks cantbeserious Oct 2015 #23
I would bet that Bernie also voted for Obama for president. LiberalArkie Oct 2015 #24
Her Banker Friends Can Pay For The Wars ProgressiveJarhead Oct 2015 #25
In The Zeal To Elect A Female President - Much Has Been Overlooked - IMHO cantbeserious Oct 2015 #26
BIG difference between INVESTING trillions and WASTING trillions. Beartracks Oct 2015 #27
Give these two vintage clips from the Mike Malloy Show a listen... Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #29
Sadly - Most Americans Just Don't Care Anymore cantbeserious Oct 2015 #32
HRC started a war? Who knew? n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #31
Eh, a trillion here, a trillion there, a billion here, a billion there FOR WAR - anything goes! in_cog_ni_to Oct 2015 #35

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,868 posts)
10. Should the men and women sent to war by Hillary and Bush pay the price?
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 02:33 PM
Oct 2015

Would you rather they be unarmed and unfed while fighting Hillary and Bush's wars? That's pretty disgusting.

thesquanderer

(11,982 posts)
22. BS gets a D- (at best) from NRA
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:03 PM
Oct 2015

Sure, it could have been an F. But he has hardly been on board for most of what they've wanted. Ridiculous to paint him as hard right on guns.

Put differently, compare the damage done by the actual gun-related votes he cast to the damage done by the IWR... you really think he loses in that comparison?

(Not that I think such a comparison is the best way to choose your candidate, either.)

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
14. Yes, something substantial for workers & the poor, instead of glutting the MIC & ME blowback. -nt-
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 02:48 PM
Oct 2015

cprise

(8,445 posts)
33. She took up a main Iraq war 'architect', who thought up the rationale for invading
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:55 PM
Oct 2015

as an adviser and after pushing Obama on Libya and Syria she's delivering speeches like this about Iran:

Clinton proclaimed that she “too deeply concerned about Iranian aggression and the need to confront it. It’s a ruthless, brutal regime that has the blood of Americans, many others and including its own people on its hands.” Even worse, she said, “Its political rallies resound with cries of ‘Death to America.’ Its leaders talk about wiping Israel off the face of the map, most recently just yesterday, and foment terror against it. There is absolutely no reason to trust Iran.” She repeated that claim several times for emphasis: “They vow to destroy Israel. And that’s worth saying again. They vow to destroy Israel.”

She vowed that in dealing with Iran, she will be tougher and more aggressive than Reagan was with the Soviet Union: “You remember President Reagan’s line about the Soviets: Trust but verify? My approach will be distrust and verify.” She also explicitly threatened Iran with war if they fail to comply: “I will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon, and I will set up my successor to be able to credibly make the same pledge.” She even depicted the Iran Deal as making a future war with Iran easier and more powerful:

Should it become necessary in the future having exhausted peaceful alternatives to turn to military force, we will have preserved and in some cases enhanced our capacity to act. And because we have proven our commitment to diplomacy first, the world will more likely join us.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-hawkish-think-tank-gives-militaristic-hawkish-speech/


She's repeating the lie that Bush tried to use to attack Iran. She also said accepting the Iran deal was just preparation for eventual war on harsher terms (set in the deal) because she saw no possibility of our countries improving relations.

cantbeserious

(13,039 posts)
23. HRC Will Continue To Serve Her Campaign Donor Masters - Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:17 PM
Oct 2015

The rest of us be damned.

LiberalArkie

(15,708 posts)
24. I would bet that Bernie also voted for Obama for president.
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:17 PM
Oct 2015

He probably even voted for the Affordable Care Act.

God, I hate to think about how any dastardly things he has voted for.

 

ProgressiveJarhead

(172 posts)
25. Her Banker Friends Can Pay For The Wars
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:18 PM
Oct 2015

Wait. They don't pay for their wars, they just profit off of them. Funny how rabid Clinton supporters ignore her relationships with the banks and the $$$ they throw her way. I support democracy-not Clinton.

Beartracks

(12,806 posts)
27. BIG difference between INVESTING trillions and WASTING trillions.
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 05:24 PM
Oct 2015

So many Americans need to think beyond the usual rhetoric of "cost."

When you spend money on INVESTMENTS in education, jobs, infrastructure, etc., you gain observable benefit from it; not to mention, such invested dollars go RIGHT INTO THE ECONOMY. Investments produce net gains.

When you spend money on WARS, you are WASTING the money; it gets spent on things that get destroyed or used up, and on destructive, not productive, activities. In general, most of the money simply evaporates from the economy. Not to mention all the long-term EXTRA costs to society due to the economic burden of casualties. Waste leads to net losses.

=================

in_cog_ni_to

(41,600 posts)
35. Eh, a trillion here, a trillion there, a billion here, a billion there FOR WAR - anything goes!
Sun Oct 18, 2015, 06:03 PM
Oct 2015

They ALWAYS have the trillions/billions for starting & fighting wars and killing our children. They'd much rather kill them in their filthy wars than feed, clothe, house or educate them.
And Hillary's beating the war drums again wanting Obama to go after Putin in Syria! It will NEVER STOP with her in the WH.

We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.

Dwight D. Eisenhower

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Concerned about the cost ...