This was a recent article about how our money is being spent in Iraq. http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20...n-38359fb.html

And McCain wants us to stay there 100 years?

Originally Posted by Lil Dancer

This was a recent article about how our money is being spent in Iraq. http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20...n-38359fb.html

And McCain wants us to stay there 100 years?

What an ignorant statement. But then, I've come to expect as much.

Muncle,
I don't want to offend anybody but...
name calling and put downs have no place on this blog.
Did you read the article? I don't think my taxes have been well spent.
By the way, Lil Dancer is an engineer and far from ignorant. I think you owe her an apology.

She has a right to her opinion and a right to share it on this blog without a put down.

"The audit released Sunday by Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, provides the latest snapshot of an uneven reconstruction effort that has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $100 billion. It also comes as several lawmakers have said they want the Iraqis to pick up more of the cost of reconstruction."

"The report paints a depressing picture of money being poured into failed Iraq reconstruction projects _ contractors are killed, projects are blown up just before being completed, or the contractor just stops doing the work."

I don't want our tax money, not one cent more, going to this abomination. McCain did say he doesn't care if it takes 100 years. Well let him pay for it then. And you can pitch in too Uncle Muncle.

I don't really care what her IQ is and I did not call her any names. However, she did say "And McCain wants us to stay there 100 years?" And that is an ignorant statement.

I'm not going to get into parsing statements, but that is NOT what McCain said. It was a purposeful misinterpretation of what was said and what has been explained ad nauseum.

There are a few posters from whom I've come to expect such tripe. She happens to be one of them. But she's entitled to do so. More power to her.

Dear Muncle, I think we are all disheartened and frustrated by the Iraq debacle. The anger and frustration cause us to vent. Maybe it's not all fair....but most things in life aren't.
I do worry that McCain will drag us into Iran.

Oh my, my, my don't we have a double standard. Clinton and Obama have to explain away every nuance and slip of the tongue ad nauseum, but not St. McCain? He will have a lot of explaining to do shortly.

It's always the same. Disagree with a Republican and you're either ignorant, uninformed or un-American. That song has been sung way too many times.

Chelsea,

Originally Posted by chelsea24

"The audit released Sunday by Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, provides the latest snapshot of an uneven reconstruction effort that has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $100 billion. It also comes as several lawmakers have said they want the Iraqis to pick up more of the cost of reconstruction."

"The report paints a depressing picture of money being poured into failed Iraq reconstruction projects _ contractors are killed, projects are blown up just before being completed, or the contractor just stops doing the work."

I don't want our tax money, not one cent more, going to this abomination. McCain did say he doesn't care if it takes 100 years. Well let him pay for it then. And you can pitch in too Uncle Muncle.

Sam,

John McCain's own words on January 3 regarding the number of years U.S. troops would stay in Iraq: "Maybe a hundred." Then on Face the Nation on January 6, McCain told Bob Schieffer, "I don’t think Americans are concerned if we’re there for one hundred years or a thousand years or ten thousand years."

My point in the previous post was, who is going to pay for all this, and is the money well spent. If Muncle considers that "tripe", he is certainly entitled to his opinion. I think most of us on this forum consider the war and its associated economic issues to be a little more important than that.

I fear Senator McCain is in denial regarding the consequences of the Iraq war.

Each of the candidates portray their view of the war in a direction that most affects their electability.
One of them will find what can really be done or not or undone or not ONLY when sitting as President with full access to the pertinent knowledge that is not available to the public or the media.

Until they sit in that chair of responsibility, they will say what ever they think will get them elected......they are politicians first, eh?

BTK

Well, Billie..As usual, you nailed it.

I understand what McCain meant once he had a chance to explain them. His view is that we Americans won't care if our troops are there but not fighting. That is, have the Iraqis doing the policing, etc. and we be there as backup. He uses Korea, Germany and a few other locales as examples, stating that so long as no American blood is shed, it should be okay with Americans. Unfortunately, I don't agree with him.

In Korea, those at the DMZ were receiving combat pay to at least the year 2000, possibly longer (I know they don't get it now). American blood was spilled in Korea long after the "official" war ended in 1953. Air Force pilots were offered some pretty hefty incentives, including an additional $300/month, to re-enlist for another tour in Korea in 2005. Most Americans didn't know (and still don't) that their young men were being put in the line of danger there long after the war ended. I wonder how many would have protested had they known the facts? I sincerely hope Iraq doesn't become another Korea, no matter what McCain's idealistic idea of us being there in the future might be.

Germany was a different situation. Once the peace treaty had been signed, the fighting stopped. Germans were happy to have the war end.

I believe Iraq would be more in the vein of Korea -- at the very least, there would be spots that would be war zones as long as Americans were there. Odds are that all of Iraq would always be a war zone and American blood would be shed there so long as we're a military presence there.

To me, McCain's statements that Americans won't care that troops be in Iraq for 100 years are naive at best, ingeniuous at worst.