imbalance

[waider]

There's something of an imbalance here: $74b for a war, and a mere $100m offered for post-war support. I'm sure the latter is boosted by the fact that various people are graciously offering their services to run the new regime, whatever it may be, but it's still a bit one-sided.

Comments

[wisn.livejournal.com]

Not really - the US is denying the UN a role in governance after the war. Although apparently it's willing to let the UN provide all the humanitarian aid it can fork over.

In any event, us$75b is the current guess for the attack and conquer (per testimony in Congress - the number I'd heard Administration officials say on air before then was $100bn), before the Administration began to acknowledge that their military wasn't going to be welcomed with open arms, and doesn't include occupation after.

And it was awfully gracious for the President to address the nation on the day of the invasion after half a year of whipping up the public to say, 'Um, this probably won't go as fast as we thought.'

[waider.livejournal.com]

Actually, the UN is, I believe, looking for $1.3b, which is still slightly imbalanced. I guess it's cheaper to keep people alive than to kill them... (oh, the glibness)

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the US can fight war on its own, but if the UN could please clean up after our mess, that'd be swell.