From Tim Grieve in Salon:

The Bush administration is asking Congress for an additional $120 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan — money that comes on top of the $226 billion the administration has already budgeted for Iraq.

Would we be “aiding and abetting the terrorists” if we mentioned just now that the Bush administration’s top budget official insisted in 2002 that the entire war in Iraq would probably cost between $50 billion and $60 billion? Or that the president’s secretary of defense suggested that the cost would be “something under $50 billion” and that other countries would be paying some of it? Or that the deputy secretary of defense said that Iraq could “pay for its own reconstruction”? Or that the White House eased out the president’s chief economic advisor after he dared to suggest that the war would actually cost $100 billion or — gasp! — $200 billion?

You have to wonder: What if we earmarked $200 billion to make the world more peaceful? Which would be the better investment? Which would make our children safer? [Tags: iraq george_bush peace]

Categories: Uncategorized dw