|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Views on Money for Iraq War, and What Else Could Be Done With It
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Issue
|
| Contributor | ArmyDem |
| Last Edited | ArmyDem Apr 14, 2008 08:51am |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | News |
| Media | Newspaper - New York Times |
| News Date | Monday, April 14, 2008 02:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: April 14, 2008
WASHINGTON — With long-term estimates of the cost of the Iraq war ranging from $1 trillion to $3 trillion or more, the question naturally arises of what else the country could have done with the money.
The issue occasionally crops up on the campaign trail and in public debate. Senator Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois, told voters in West Virginia last month that the war was costing each American household $100 a month. “Just think about what battles we could be fighting instead of fighting this misguided war,” Mr. Obama said.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said in Indiana recently that the war was costing $12 billion a month and was crowding out urgent national needs. “We’ve got to begin not only to withdraw our troops,” said Mrs. Clinton, Democrat of New York, “but bring that money back home.”
On the other hand, Senator John McCain of Arizona, the likely Republican nominee, says repeatedly that success in Iraq justifies any cost and that overspending in other areas is causing the strain on the federal budget. He says the government can afford whatever the war costs as well as a big corporate tax cut if it reins in wasteful federal spending.
President Bush addressed the cost more directly than before in remarks on Thursday at the White House. Mr. Bush acknowledged that the human and material costs had been high and would demand continued sacrifices from all Americans. But he said that relative to the cold war, the war in Iraq had consumed a “modest fraction” of the country’s wealth. |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
