Dvorak Poll: How Should We Pay For The Troop Increase In Afghanistan?

Published on November 27th, 2009

Posted by Uncle Dave in Politics, military

War is expensive, and it’s about to get more so if the U.S. government escalates its military efforts in Afghanistan. [...]Over the past eight years, the nearly $1 trillion cost of the military’s efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan was essentially charged to the national credit card.

Will it be different this time?

There’s some chance lawmakers may opt to pay the bill as it comes due, rather than letting the balance and interest accrue. It’s not the first time the idea has come up, but it may be the first time the idea is given serious consideration.

A big part of the context for deciding whether and how to pay for a buildup are the growing deficits that have become a political and financial albatross. The country’s accumulated debt is expected to rise from $12 trillion today to $21 trillion by the end of 2019.

Some lawmakers are pushing for a war tax. Peter Orszag, the White House budget director, took part in the latest war council meeting. And Obama is expected to raise the cost issue in his Tuesday evening address at West Point.

40 users responded in " Dvorak Poll: How Should We Pay For The Troop Increase In Afghanistan? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 fpp2002 said, on November 27th, 2009 at 9:15 am

Wow, another tax to pay for a war that isn’t accomplishing anything. That sucks. After all these years, where’s bin Laden?

# 2 OvenMaster said, on November 27th, 2009 at 9:23 am

Gee, if we didn’t have to pay for unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, then we’d be able to afford health insurance reform!

I say do it the Al Bundy way: just go on down to the basement and chip off what we need from our stash of gold bars.

# 3 McCullough said, on November 27th, 2009 at 9:28 am

It pays for itself…it’s the poppies, remember? Plus we get to tax the shit out of people on the other end for the war on drugs… It’s a win win for jobs saved or created.

# 4 ECA said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:17 am

I would suggest letting the corporate world pay for it..they got all our money anyway.

# 5 SparkyOne said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:22 am

How will we pay? Like always, with a draft and the blood of our young.

# 6 LHO said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am

Hey Obama supporters…how about that promise that the first thing Obama would do is bring the troops home? How is that working out?

Cue the crickets…….

# 7 MikeN said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am

Pay for it with Iraqi oil money. If that’s not enough invade Iran and use their oil money.

# 8 brm said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:43 am

I dunno. Aren’t we supposed to “take that to the bank” or something?

# 9 barovelli said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:47 am

Hand the country over to Russia.

# 10 Mr Anderson said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:52 am

Just tax GWB & VP-JC Team 100%,
and those that voted for the Iraqi war 80%,
and those that voted for the above into office,
and the pro-war lobbyist 50%,
and those that supported-fund the above.

# 11 Pierre Serné / NetPierre said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:54 am

Why not let CNN, Fox and other news-networks pay too.
They are the ones making a lot of profit with wars like these…

# 12 StoopidFlanders said, on November 27th, 2009 at 11:08 am

Here’s an idea: If you truly are not in favour of the government killing people in your name, then stop paying them to do so. People are dying, and your tax dollars make it all possible. So stop whining and watch the bodies stack up, or man up and choose to keep the money that you earn.

# 13 Floyd said, on November 27th, 2009 at 11:12 am

StoopidFlanders: apparently you’re a troll, and to be ignored.

# 14 StoopidFlanders said, on November 27th, 2009 at 11:21 am

Hello #13. I am presenting an alternative point of view; perhaps slightly more libertarian in this case. By all means, you are welcome to ignore me. I’m going to go out of my way and suppose your solution to Afghanistan is to just bury our collective heads in the sand and allow our glorious comrade-Bama to handle things, right? War is scary, we shouldn’t think about these things or offer different ideas on the matter, right?

# 15 chuck said, on November 27th, 2009 at 11:32 am

Make Timothy Geithner pay income tax.

Charge the troops $10K each for their return flight from Afghanistan/Iraq/Whatever-shithole-we’ve-stuck-them-inistan.

# 16 Dallas said, on November 27th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Sell the Vatican. Pay for all the wars and money left over to pay for medical care for all the world.

Wouldn’t that be what Jesus would want?

# 17 dusanmal said, on November 27th, 2009 at 12:57 pm

Get protection money from countries we are protecting or, if they refuse, establish savings by withdrawing our man and basis. EU, Japan, S.Korea, Saudi Arabia,… just to name few.

For those claiming that we didn’t need these wars: please explain what estimated 100000 killed terrorists would be doing in mean time. I say at least 1% of them would found their way here… (As for deniers who’d say that wars are recruiting these people: which war recruited 9/11 bunch and others before that…? Maybe those wars US participated on Muslim side in Kuwait or Bosnia?)

# 18 LHO said, on November 27th, 2009 at 1:38 pm

#17. Jeez…another moron.

# 19 JeffL said, on November 27th, 2009 at 1:43 pm

Casinos.

In addition to the Indian Casinos, we could open casinos designed to provided additional revenue for specific segments of government funding.

# 20 Susan D. said, on November 27th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Where is the choice “add it to the cost of gasoline….”, oh wait, they did that already, it should be “add more to the cost of gasoline so that the poor get hurt more than the rich”.

# 21 TheCommodore said, on November 27th, 2009 at 4:03 pm

Whatever happened to the good ol’ days, when the conquerors simply pillaged the country they dominated; to pay for the war? I know this sounds unreasonable in this day and age, but when it comes right down to it, its the logical thing to do. That is war, isn’t it? Logical but unreasonable? This is why Americans shouldn’t fight such wars; it only makes sense if you extend the empire. And we’re not empire builders, or at least we’re not good at it.

# 22 AdmFubar said, on November 27th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

it can be paid for with all the bonuses the bankers are making..

i say if any more banks fail we should send those bankers to afganistan

that should clear up the problems in the banks really quick.

# 23 JimD said, on November 27th, 2009 at 7:14 pm

Two Ways:

Restore the Progressive Income Tax !!! Let the Millionaires and Billionaires pay !!! They STOLE ALL THE MONEY ANY WAY – TIME TO GIVE IT BACK !!!

AND

Remove the CEILING ON SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES !!! Again, Let the Millionaires and Billionaires pay !!! They ought to be glad they live in a Coountry that made their success possible !!!

BOTTOM LINE: SOAK THE RICH !!!

# 24 RSweeney said, on November 27th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

Why not have a minimum 5% income tax on the 50% of Americans who now pay NONE.

# 25 chris said, on November 27th, 2009 at 8:21 pm

Just leave. We can send in commandos\cruise missiles as needed, not like the Afghan gov’t can do anything about it.

We made an utter mess out of Iraq, but nobody can honestly say we screwed up Afghanistan. It couldn’t have been much worse.

Anyone who thinks we ought to gear up, just ask yourself what it will look like when we leave. Afghanistan isn’t even in the last century, much less this one.

# 26 b0geyman said, on November 27th, 2009 at 8:39 pm

Take it out of the israeli foreign aid budget. That’s who all of these wars are for after all.

# 27 B.Dog said, on November 27th, 2009 at 9:04 pm

Unleash our prisoners at the foreign scum. If the convicts subdue the place they can get out on parole. It would be like that movie The Dirty Dozen. Have our PBS employees film the mess and charge admission in theaters to pay down the national debt.

# 28 deowll said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

Use the left over stimulus money? Wars do create jobs and the claim is it worked during WWII.

# 29 Greg Allen said, on November 27th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

That we are even talking about how to pay things represents real change in Washington.

When the conservatives where in charge, the subject never even came up.

(well, except by us libs but the cons called us “troop haters” for even raising the issue of how to pay for things.)

# 30 RBG said, on November 28th, 2009 at 12:51 am

What? we’re still in Afghanistan? But I thought Obama was going to CHANGE all that. And Bush was a monkey for being there… Oh, never mind.

RBG

# 31 brian t said, on November 28th, 2009 at 2:21 am

The war only costs so much because you have all this expensive equipment and people expect to get paid … but you don’t need all that to prosecute a war, do you? You just need crazy people, lots of them, and a way to wind them up and point them in the general direction of Afghanistan.

For example, if you tell Christians that the Afghanis killed Baby Jesus and stole the Holy Grail, you can start a new Crusade. Or, tell Hindus that they eat cows there, or tell China that there’s coal in them thar hills. You don’t need fancy equipment when you can put millions of expendable, bloodthirsty fanatics on the ground.

# 32 Dr Dodd said, on November 28th, 2009 at 4:59 am

Now I ask, what incentive is there to ever end war if they are able to tax it?

One novel idea is to actually win the war as quickly as possible instead of dragging it out for a decade or more. No wonder it’s so expensive.

It’s time to suit up members of Congress and send them to Afghanistan. They obviously have it too good as the only contact battles they participate in is attending Washington parties that we pay for.

I propose we let Senators and Representatives play whack a mole and dodge roadside bombs for a while. That should speed things along quite nicely.

# 33 Rich said, on November 28th, 2009 at 5:03 am

Pay for it with a DIRECT increase in income taxes for the under $30,000 crowd, which includes me. Aren’t we tired of the passive-aggressive, pussified behavior of Congress? A righteous-indignation-induced national-scale RIOT would ensue. I can’t friggin’ wait.

# 34 Eric said, on November 28th, 2009 at 8:33 am

#32 – Dr Dodd

That sounds great… get in, get out, peace out. But it doesn’t work that way when the people you are fighting disagree with your plan and insist on keeping the fighting going.

In fact, the only time I think that happens is if the war is planned, like Teddy Roosevelt on San Juan hill, or the first Golf War.

# 35 MikeN said, on November 28th, 2009 at 9:13 am

Restore the Progressive Income Tax !!! Let the Millionaires and Billionaires pay !!!

Who do you think is paying now? As you cut tax rates, a higher share of income taxes is paid by the wealthy. Happened under Reagan, Clinton, Bush. When you raise tax rates, the reverse happens.

# 36 ECA said, on November 28th, 2009 at 12:18 pm

#17,
Dus,
Umm, you dont know your history or you are >30 years old.
War in Afghanistan, was between Russia and That country for 10 years, as russia TRIED to get the oil there.
WE, BACKED the country with Guns, weapons, ammo and TRAINING. We also made a few promise’s to Mr. Ben Laudin and the other GROUPS fighting at the time. This ened about 1990, and GUESS WHO was in Office. Mr. BUSH senior. and he declined all the promises that were made. After that point, THINGS started happening.

Do you want the Truth of HOW we went to war with Japan?? Japan was at war in china and the Pacific islands, and WE cut off their OIL ROUTES to the middle east. I wonder if that PISSED THEM OFF.

For some reason WE NEED WAR. if only to terrorize our OWN nation.

# 37 JimR said, on November 28th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

Just send a general message to the Taliban that they won the Nobel Peace Prize…. $200,000 dollars to anyone who shows up at The Chilzina and can prove that they are Taliban. I will be standing behind the photo backdrop with a large hammer.

# 38 Thomas said, on November 28th, 2009 at 11:21 pm

Which of the follow will cost less:
1. Pull out and let al Qaeda attack us again. (9/11 is estimated no less than $2 trillion).
2. Half-ass the troop increase and get mired into Vietnam 2.0.
3. Give the people that know what they are doing the troops they need and cut spending in other areas so that we try to minimize the hit to the deficit and at the same time try to finish in Afghanistan as quickly as possible.

Btw, where is the kumbayah foreign policy we were promised that would garner international cooperation and participation in Afghanistan? Were we not told that the rest of the world “hates” us and that was why we could not get more participation in Afghanistan and Iraq? AFAIK, Obama has yet to convince anyone to dedicate more troops to Afghanistan than Bush.

# 39 GetSmart said, on November 28th, 2009 at 11:31 pm

Sooner, or later, we’ll leave. And when we do, it’ll still be the 3rd Century B.C.E. there. Whether we leave today, or tomorrow. I’m not worried about Pakistan becoming a nuclear armed “failed state”, India has nukes, they can take care of the problem if it comes to that. Iran gets the Bomb? Israel can fix that as well, if Iran does anything hostile. A nice demonstration of what it really means to have the living shit nuked out of you is probably over due, and should shut a lot of folks up who think that god is on their side. And if our leaders are worried about appearing weak by leaving Shithousistan, we could just blow every piece of infrastructure up before we leave. Every bridge, power plant, water treatment and sewage treatment facility, communication center, cell tower, dam, irrigation system and off-ramp. Here’s the Third Century you want so much, enjoy. Might be something of a deterrent to the next potential terrorists.

# 40 chris said, on November 29th, 2009 at 7:31 pm

#39 Agree with part and disagree with part.

Afghanistan, after we leave, is going to be run by a combination of Iran, Pakistan, people that aggregate poppy production, religious fundamentalists and western puppets. We are only scratching around the edges. Not much more is possible on time frame and manpower\fiscal constraints that are realistic.

With respect, your reading of India\Pakistan is way off.

The current generation of Pakistani leaders is solid, sort of like a half frozen lake is solid. Corrupt and venal: we know how to channel those impulses, even if they can’t entirely be controlled.

The younger to middle end of Pakistan’s officer core is more suspect. Many are true believers aka “those you can’t buy off.”

Nuclear war on the sub-continent is just about the worst possibility that exists in this world. Mostly that’s because we need India to balance China in the next 50 years.

This would be my solution. Offer to grant the leadership of Pakistan a small extraterritorial state in Nevada, within distance of Las Vegas, in exchange for destroying or handing over the necessary infrastructure of their nuke program.

Mansions plus a guaranteed supply of chemicals, women, and gambling… I think we could swing that.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!