Some say that a stable Iraq is possible, but will take years. Let's say they are right. Maybe Iraq can be stable. I mean, if you spend hundreds of billions of dollars in any troubled country, you can probably produce some security and even after awhile, you might start rebuilding some infrastructure. However, the War in Iraq is costing Americans nearly $100 billion a year just in money, not considering the intangible costs to the lives of our soldiers and our reputation around the world.
Iraq or "War on Terror" funding is usually part of a supplemental budget, which does not generally count as part of the official budget. So, instead of raising taxes on people to pay for the war, we just raise taxes on their kids down the road. $100 billion a year is about 3.5% of total government spending. When Clinton left office in January of 2001, it would have been about 5%, but President Bush has increased government spending by almost $1 trillion (comparing Bush's FY 2008 request to Clinton's FY 2001 request). You don't have to be a math major to realize that government spending is rising way faster than inflation, and that doesn't take in account the huge tax cuts Bush provided to people who spend lots of money no matter what the tax rate is.
The largest federal outlay continues to be Defense spending. Protecting ourselves and other countries from the weapons we unfortunately sold to our enemies during the Cold War.
Social Security is second, followed by Medicare, Unemployment and Welfare, and Medicaid.
Notice a pattern here?
Our largest funding programs take care, rather cover up for, the inefficiencies of our society. Maybe spending on all of these programs could be reduced if we enhanced spending in other areas that reduce these inefficiencies from occurring.
For example, education spending is about 1/7th of Defense spending, and 1/4th of unemployment and welfare. Don't you think if we spent more on education, we could reduce unemployment and welfare costs, and maybe teach Americans about the rest of the world, so we don't get mired in so many foreign entanglements and quagmires?
Also under funded are transportation, environment, and energy.
Transportation spending in effective ways allows us to use less oil by building up roads and improving mass-transit. That can help us reduce our defense bill which is heavily devoted on protecting international oil routes. Meanwhile, increased mass transit can improve mobility for lower-income people generally on welfare as well as Medicaid.
Environment and Energy are other areas where increased spending helps reduce the costs of these major programs. A new energy policy can help put people to work designing and constructing clean energy facilities and energy efficiency projects and products. That energy policy, combined with an effective, innovative environmental policy, can reduce health costs, especially among children, who need to be healthy so we can educate them. Domestic clean energy and energy efficiency provides energy security by reducing reliance on foreign sources of energy.
So how does Iraq figure into this? Well, if you noticed, some experts are saying we might need to be in Iraq for another 10 years. That is at least $1 trillion to cover up for one our mistakes, while spending less money on ways to prevent future mistakes and improve our society. (Seems like all that wasted money spent in Vietnam didn't teach our Ivy-league-educated President to not make the same mistake). We need to redeploy our troops and leave Iraq. We need to work with others in the region to combat terrorism, and find ways to stop Iraq from continuing to be a bloodbath between warring factions. Like Jim Webb says, these countries have a stake in the future of Iraq and they have much as to lose as anyone with a violent civil war.
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, America is a great place when we emphasize our strengths. And looking at Bill Clinton's record on spending, we don't have to pay through the nose to follow that advice.