If even half of the money that the U.S. has send in Iraq went to developing hybred vehicles?
370696
we would have 500hp alternative fuel vehicles. and generals would be screaming they need at least twice as much money for the war in iraq.
865766
I would have thought that would be high on the list of things to do considering the amount of money it is costing to keep the troops over there. Must be running into billions of $ and its all coming from the tax payer.
480269
No it is not, the money is used to allegedly support the troops and to supposedly rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. Actually, it's $10 billion a month (not per day) being spent.\nImagine for a moment if that money was used for education of OUR citizens, or for health insurance, or to help the homeless. The war is a scam! The oil in Iraq was supposed to pay for the war, but you know how that goes when you have an oil man in the White House.
1165013
Not any more. They simply don't have the money to maintain the big military they once had. Most of it is rusting in storage areas that are poorly guarded.
35933
Possibly, because of the cost. For one soldier, the new body armor only cost more several hundred dollars. But USA have more than thousands soldiers, it will create problem in USA national budget if they equipped all of their soldiers with the new body armor in relatively short time. The same with their humvee. (most soldiers killed when they are riding humvee. I think their Abrams are strong enough to withstand carbombs. Though we can do nothing with choppers, they will never be armored enough to withstand explosive rounds).\nUSA didn't wait long enough to attack Iraq, may be because they are pissed with *ahem* terrorism and Saddam. The best defense is offense, right?\n\nBtw, from the lastest news, I heard that USA already sent new armor pieces to be added to their old body armor. It protects parts that unprotected previously and hope that it will add soldiers survivability rates.
928147
No.  The entire process was doomed from the beginning.  Besides the fact that the operation was poorly planned and executed, the people of Iraq have too many long standing ethnic/religious differences.  Just like eastern Europe under the Communist regimes, these differences were quelled by the strong-armed rule of Sadaam.  We are dreaming if we think that we will force middle eastern people to become like us.  They will not accept our religion or our western values.   They will have to work it out themselves with our support, not our intervention.
440995
IIRC the M60A1 tank (produced about this time period) cost about $750,000.
1150717
I am sure that we could have given a fraction of what we spent on military maneuvers in Iraq to the people and they would have happily overthrown the government and be a lot better off for it. Even the Pentagon has recently recognized that we do more to win the hearts and minds of our enemies with aid than by military means. Then there is the ethical issues...
1056610
No, if it had we would have pulled out of Iraq. Typical democrats though, always pulling out before the job is done. Makes me wonder how they ever managed to have children.
230182
true...these wars that could have been avoided...are costing the US more than just money.  Its costing us people, supplies and money
793563
No enough, and by a far margin.  If only 1/10 of what is being spend on armament would be devoted to space, NASA would be swimming in money.\nIn 2005, NASA budget was $16.2 billion (see link #1) and compare that to the spending of US army in Iraq: $3.9 billion per month in 2003 ($1 billion per month in Afghanistan -- see second link) and that was in 2003!  US military spending is over $400 billion per year, and that is to *not catch*  Bin Laden.
596940
Whether the US-Guv created Al-Kye-duh or not, it sure has made it easier to justify increased military spending, hasn't it?  Just another way for the rich to get richer, and in the process, turn the entire world against the good, hard-working people who live in the United States.  This justifies increased defense spending, and it goes on and on from there...
157448
It may be because they will have a lot of backing from the US and other western nations/business/contractors. The US will look very foolish if Iraq fails economically so every step will be taken to guide them into prosperity. \n\nHowever, insurgency and other threats may seek to stall growth there which of course would make it a poor investment. \n\nIf the people view economic growth as a prosper for Iraqis and Muslims, then they will allow it to grow with US guidance. If they see it as another imposition of Western controll they will boycot and loot that growth. \n\nAn emerging markets investment may be a wiser choice.
60514
I dont know any, Iraq equipments were mostly Russian specially it's Air Force which was mostly MIG-21 and MIG-25, Their Missle systems , Helicopters and light infantry equipments \n in the late years of war with Iran they used some europe made equipments.\nUSA only helped Iraq with some sattelite Information and in some cases prepared detailed battle planning on some of the best Iraqi military operations in Iran-Iraq war.\nAlso in some point in Iran-Iraq war US military helped Iraq in Persian Gulf.
1166316
Hmm $25 million. That could buy a lot of weapons for Al Qaida couldn't it?
177227
Yes, financial aid is being decreased.  The money is going to pay for a war in Iraq, for tax breaks for large corporations and wealthy individuals, and for interest on the money the country has borrowed in the past.
315336
Absolutely none.  The war machine only benefits the wealthy.  In human terms, most of the soldiers are from families that could not afford to send their children to college.