What really makes this costly is that the number of terrorists is also on the rise.

Costofwar.com is one of my favorites. Here's another interesting clock:

http://www.njlp.com/drugwar/

I'd LOVE to have that counter of WASTE and FRAUD on my computer, but there's too many zeroes!

As my old friend, Sen. Everett Dirksen once said, a TRILLION here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

Oh yes, Dirksen said BILLIONS, but the quote needed a GOP update.

So Jack, as a tax lawyer, what's your take on the eligibility for the 501(c)(3) exemption that the group that created this fine tool has?

I don't know, Bob. Maybe we ought to check up on all the churches that the other side uses to propagandize every Sunday, too. 8c)

Bojack... between this last post, and this one from yesterday...
http://joesschool.blogs.com/olsononline/2005/08/post_5.html

i have concluded that you are the man!

Bob,

Go to the site. While they clearly imply that they'd prefer to use the money being spent in Iraq on other priorities, there is no statement anywhere (that I could find) that credits or blames Republicans or Democrats for the current mix of policies.

The most "partisan" statement I found was: here is how, based on the current Federal budget allocations, an end to the war might benefit or harm your state.

Non-profit status means that you don't advocate for particular candidates; it does not mean that you can't advocate for particular policies or that the policy mix you advocate for cannot overlap unevenly with current partisan divisions.

didn't both the D's and R's vote for this nonsensical war? maybe this site blames both of them.

libertarian - Yep, everyone was for it, just like Kyoto. The best part is that Clinton and Kerry each complained of the dire need to take out Saddam, but that stopped being cool when bush could take credit for, you know, actually solving the problem.

Jack - How much cheaper (or finished!) would that total be if Clinton hadn't decimated the military?

The Democrats in Congress keep trying to start a draft, why not just re-fund the military to it's pre-Clinton Staff- & Resource-levels and finish things?

Even though it's Friday happy hour, I'm still not so out of it that I'm going to start blaming Bill Clinton for the Iraq quagmire. That's truly absurd.

Clinton cut the military down so far that "we don't have enough troops". That's an easy line to follow.

Yes, and after nearly five years of Bush and now with a completely Republican Congress, it's somehow still Clinton's fault? You're as delusional as Dick Cheney.

Raising the troop count of the USA requires cooperation from the Democrats in Congress in order to pass.

And yes, it is Clinton's fault for failing to fight the Islamic Terrorists when he had a chance. He had a chance to do good but blew it.

Yeah, Scott, the Republicans hold the House and Senate and it's the Democrats' fault. "Delusional" is right.

9/11, and consequently the war in Iraq, were on their way since the seventies. It's the fault of everyone who's been prez since then for not making good with the Middle East by ending the hypocricy and cultural encroaching before it got out of hand. A spoonful of cause and effect, a pinch of freakonomics, and you have yourself a counter to put on Jack Bog's blog.

Scott: Didn't Cheney advocate heavy scale-backs in military spending after the end of the Cold War, when he was Secretary of Defense for Bush I?

Didn't Rumsfeld decide to invade Iraq with only 150,000 troops, contrary to the advice of most army generals that at least 400,000 would be necessary, at a time when UN weapons inspectors were only halfway done inspecting Iraq and the UN Security Council had not authorized the use of military force to remove Saddam?

Will you pay the part of my 2005 federal income tax that funds the Iraq adventure for me, since I have always thought invading was a terrible idea, and you apparently still think it was the right thing to do?

But its not real money so what's the sweat?

The total bill will run more than a trillion, even if we're out after five years total. Consider the tens of billions of dollars in soldier disability benefits alone.

Bubba did something W will never be able to do, even with this Trillion Dollar War.

Bubba, aka William Jefferson Clinton, was President when Islamic terrorists attacked the World Trade Center. Unlike W, Bubba led the US to capture the terrorists who are now doing life times 1000 in prison.

Is Osama in prison? Zarqawi? Nope. They are "free to be, you and me", as they play that Marlo Thomas favorite during prayers, I'm sure.

Blaming Bubba is SO last century, baby. Time to get with the times, neocons, or better, find some courage and fight.

Like the Twins! (cough)

i came to this site because i was hoping maybe perhaps someone might be keeping a count on how many people are being sent over there on a draft or signup (for those that actually are signing up on there own ).basis. i mean, from what i hear these days is most people are being sent over not actually saying 'hey i'm going there cause i want to go there for my country.' yeah we love our country.but most comments im hearing is that the president messed up bigtime letting the world go wreckless since 911.we let all hell breakloose on our country and just stood there bent over and taking it. now we bury our men and women soldiers young and old and send them over blindly.Anyone keeping count on it?

I'm reminded of one wag's definition of the cynic: "knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

I've never seen a better fit that to this mediocre post.

Dear Donna,

The United States military is currently all-volunteer. Anyone wearing a uniform signed up as an adult or had mom or dad sign with them.

We do not have a draft in this country.

Yet.

Leader
(uncle of a fine young college man who may be called to serve)

Special thanks to the libertarians at the University of Chicago (namely Milton Friedman) for advocating an all-volunteer army.