Obama to seek $83.4 billion for Iraq, Afghan wars

[debbierlus]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is seeking $83.4 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, pressing for a war supplemental spending bill like the ones he repeatedly voted against when he was senator and George W. Bush was president.

Obama's request would push the costs of the two wars to almost $1 trillion since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to the Congressional Research Service. The additional money would cover operations into the fall.

Budget office spokesman Tom Gavin said the White House will send an official request to Congress Thursday afternoon. Congressional aides briefed on the request revealed its overall cost on condition of anonymity since the briefing was private.

Obama was a harsh critic of the Iraq war as a candidate, a stance that attracted support from the Democratic Party's liberal base and helped him secure his party's nomination. He opposed a war spending bill in 2007 after Bush used a veto to force Congress to remove a withdrawal timeline from the $99 billion measure.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_war_costs

---

[TheCoxwain]

1. I thought the war was already budgeted for !!!

[debbierlus]

20. I wish I could say I am surprised, but I am not...not in the least

Obama is another arm to the ONE party system of government. The worst part is his election stopped the momentum for true change in its tracks...

[ixion]

2. I raised hell every time I saw a headline like this with Bush's name in it

and I see no difference now.

End the illegal invasions / hostile occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan NOW!! :grr:

[indepat]

33. It's almost as if some legitimacy were being given to junior's little pre-emptive war of choice

for oil, empire, and hegemony. :P

[bdamomma]

3. oh boy, we shouldn't keep quiet on this one, I thought he was

going to end those invasions.

[saigon68]

18. The War will Unfortunately go on

Change we need

Right down to this Bush Scumbag




http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/MDgatesR.htm

[Pastiche423]

4. Citizens are losing their jobs, health and homes

due directly to some of the people in Obama's administration, yet he is now demanding more of our lives and livelihoods to continue two wars that never should have been waged in the 1st place.

Both wars belong to Obama now. He's asked for them and it looks like he'll get them.

Another day, another disappointment.

[OhioChick]

24. My thoughts, exactly. n/t

[Cant trust em]

5. I'm going to reserve judgment until I hear the rationale for this

I don't like where this is going, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

[CountAllVotes]

6. The additional money would cover operations into the fall.

only until the fall?!! This batch of billions will only last for 6 months!

Is this enough for this fascist war YET?

:mad:

:kick:

[Baclava]

7. No Blood for Poppies!

That is all.

[snappyturtle]

8. Enough is enough. I voted for an end to the wars. I guess I was wrong. nt

[Dawgs]

13. Please tell me you didn't think he could or would end wars right away?

Geez. You guys act like Obama's job is easy.

[tomm2thumbs]

9. he should ask for 2 trillion for the war, the repugs will say 'sure' and then

... he can take the money and use it for health care. Done

[pleah]

10. And the war machine rolls on.

Same shit, different face.

[tritsofme]

11. Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but this sounds like stop gap funding until the start of FY10

Which I want to say is 10/01 for the Feds.

IIRC war funding will be in the budget starting with FY10, the only year Obama can plan himself.

Another case of Bush leaving unfinished FY09 business for Obama to clean up, save your poutrage for another day.

[Mithreal]

12. I so hope you are right. I bet you are too. nt

[Romulox]

14. So much for rolling the War(s) into the budget! nt

[acmavm]

16. So much for a lot of stuff.

[tritsofme]

25. Bush decided not to have wars in the budget for FY09, nothing Obama can do about that.

So much for whining.

[Romulox]

27. Er, he could propose to SCALE BACK expenditures in Iraq, rather than escalate.

But the last "surge" worked so well, I guess he's sticking with a winning formula! :hi:

[acmavm]

15. You know, it's almost just not worth it anymore. The country has gone down

the porcelain waste container, we're being taken to the cleaners to pay the rich man's gambling debts, we dems are now the proud owners of two never-ending unwinnable wars, and there is no end to it in sight.

Tell your kids and grandkids how damn sorry you are for the fucking debt and violence and wars you're leaving them on your deathbeds. I know I will. In fact, I TELL THEM NOW! Because that's how long (and longer) this shit will last. We have not only fucked up the present, but we've pretty well trashed the future as well.

[billyoc]

17. Hey, freedom isn't free. Those bridesmaids ain't gonna bomb themselves, you know.

[mike_c]

19. Congress-- just say no to funding Obama's illegal and immoral wars....

I never thought I'd post that request after Bush left office. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[mikelgb]

21. not one more fucking dime

assholes

stop killing people

ask for reparations money, then we can talk


money for war is off the table

[totodeinhere]

26. How are we going to finance removing the troops if you don't want to spend even one more dime there?

It will cost millions to get all of the troops and equipment out of there. If we just left the equipment there then someone else would use it for more killing.

[AZ Criminal JD]

28. Do you actually think that's what the money is for?

It is being used to increase our presence not decrease it.

[totodeinhere]

36. The poster I replied to said "not one cent more."

So by their logic it wouldn't matter what they want to use the money for. At some point, and we both hope sooner rather than later, they are going to have to pull out US troops. And when that happens it will cost a lot of money to do it. So if we follow the poster's advice and don't spend one cent more over there, then we wouldn't even be able to get our troops out. That's crazy.

[AZ Criminal JD]

39. I am replying to what Obama is doing

I don't care about the semantics of a poster.

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. No money for single payer health care though, eh Obama?

Disgusting! :mad:

[Night_Nurse]

23. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss... nt

[2Design]

29. not happy with this continue waste of money and lives n/t

[DallasNE]

30. This Is A Bush Carryover

It only covers until the fall. When the new fiscal year begins October 1st I would hope the funding would be taken from the regular Defense Department budget. Obama deserves some slack on this request. He has to play the hand that he is dealt. It is what happens starting October 1st that matters. This, however, better be the last supplemental request.

[Zhade]

35. If true, then Obama needs to explain it or risk it being misunderstood.

NT!

[FudaFuda]

43. Yeah, but Obama did vote to continue war funding under Bush almost every time

He voted no once, and he abstained from voting once. All the other times it came up while he was in the Senate, he voted YES. I wasn't aware of that last year, though it's not like it would've changed my vote - I wasn't gonna vote for McCain under any circumstances, and I'm too much of a pragmatist to vote for anyone but the party nominee.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_war_costs_votes_1

[Mithreal]

31. Are we kneejerks or appropriately skeptical?

This is the most obvious post I have seen recently that some of us are too quickly jumping to conclusions.

A fellow DU'er posted that Bush did not include the cost of the wars in the 2009 budget. The President has no choice. Did AP have a choice to put the story in context? They did put it in context and the AP is no friend to Democrats. It is hard to believe but it appears AP is fairer to the President than some of us at times.

"Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, acknowledged that Obama has been critical of Bush's use of similar special legislation to pay for the wars. He said it was needed this time because the money will be required by summer, before Congress is likely to complete its normal appropriations process.

"This will be the last supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan. The process by which this has been funded over the course of the past many years, the president has discussed and will change," Gibbs said."

It was probably a mistake not to have included one of these two paragraphs in the op's 4 paragraph quote considering how predictably some of us would react to the request.

I am against the occupations and consider the escalation and risk that we will be at war soon with Pakistan as utterly nightmarish and illegal but that is a separate debate. I condemn President Obama's choice to escalate Afghanistan but attacking him based on this request is inappropriate. I would like to see more of these funding stories in the context of our national debt and wilting economy.

Anyway, I too have jumped to conclusions but thanks to being wrong a few times, I am making the effort to be more appropriately skeptical. Big thanks to all DU'ers who are patient with knee jerks.

[lamp_shade]

40. Ah... an "adult" among the knee-jerkers. Good and thoughtful post Mithreal.

[Turborama]

41. Maybe some people haven't got used to the idea that Bush isn't in control any more?

Of course, time will tell (this is only the very beginning of his presidency, after all) but I do trust Obama more than I have trusted any president in my lifetime.

You have to read between the lines and actually research what's going on to get the full picture, but a lot of people don't have time to do that, I guess.

[Romulox]

42. The decision to increase military spending is a policy choice, not a procedural maneuver.

:hi:

[Winterblues]

32. Americans are twelve thousand times more likely to die from Cancer than terror and yet...

This is the type of stuff that truly makes me ill. If only one tenth of the amount of money being spent on military and war were to be spent on fighting the true enemy of Americans we would be so much better off but apparently it isn't meant to be.

[Zhade]

34. This isn't what I voted for.

NT!

[Bushknew]

37. We spend more money on improving our military than on our society i.e. health care, education & jobs

As a consequence of this neglect, we see all this urban violence/mass killings.

[Mari333]

38. one term prez. nt