Added: 4 years ago
From: TheModestAgnostic
Views: 1,079
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (42)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 3 trillion. I wonder if the States would be willing to buy Canada for that kind of money. I wonder if we'd sell.

  • I suggest you look into the Rothschild families works over the last few generations, looks like America is being run into the ground for a reason.

  • if you think that's bad modest, then add on all the billions for the welfare of illegal aliens and thier children and then add to that all the billions spent on welfare to other nations. it makes my head spin and it's no wonder i'm taxed beyond belief. another boston teaparty is needed.....

  • How about the billions that are going to corporate welfare in tax cuts and shelters, and breaks and subsidies of all kinds?

    That makes me sick.

  • Ah yes but if you did that how would Halliburton and the rest of the Bush cronies cream their cut off the top.

    Does this explain how you can get a £3million mortgage on a Prime Ministers salary?

  • Well if Iran is attacked hope at least the United States uses just their Air Force instead of ground troops.

  • ¡Brilliant!

  • WOW! It's so scary when you put it like that.

  • Aren't you forgetting the economic reversal of terminal sets?

  • don't sweat it, not sure it would do much good there anyway.

  • Chin up, its been a long time since it looked this good. Obama 2008 and all that kind of thing!

  • I'm one of the few who has been against that war from the very beginning. We have been the cause of an unbelieveable amount of death and suffering, and now the American economy is circling the drain, in part due to the tremendous burden the cost of the war has put upon us. I am doing everything I can do make sure there is a leadership change in DC this fall, but I am disheartened and pessimistic about the future at the moment.

  • Chin up, its been a long time since it looked this good. Obama 2008 and all that kind of thing!

  • To anyone who has been living under a rock on the moon for the past 6 years, this pretty much demonstrates that America didn't invade for humanitarian purposes or to spread democracy as Bush prattles on about. By the way, where'd the cat go? :(

  • Still around, I shall have to get her in for a cameo on the next vid.

  • I forgot the cat!!!

  • D'oh! You could have dressed the cat up as Jesus and then explained how they both survive by having multiple lives.

  • ROTFL

  • Truly, a missed opportunity!

  • This will be remedied forthwith!

  • I ... I ... DAMN.

  • the american population got totally owned/pwned.

    and many americans still dont realize that america has a problem with stupidity, it is just TOO EASY to MANIPULATE the population of the united states.

    some more of those mistakes, and america will be the new africa. you are messing with your future. not really funny.

    (and the youtube commenting system sucks)

  • They didn't have the money though, the borrowed it.And no one would give money to buy people. Killing them is much easier

  • EXCELLENT!

  • A quick google search suggests the cost is half a trillion, not three trillion. Are you sure that cost is accurate?

  • The final projected cost, not the cost to date.

  • I've included the original source.

  • Wow, and I thought $500 Billion was alot... Good old G.W. makes me glad I'm not an american tax payer!

  • Your own calculations show that it was a good deal. $107K per Iraqi. How much is YOUR freedom worth?

  • Of course, the freedom to die horribly at the hands of any madman, as opposed to merely a single lunatic is beyond price:-)

  • If you just gave people money, it would disappear and they'd still hate and despise you, like all welfarism.

  • Yeah of course there is truth to this comment. What I'd say is this. Firstly, the video is 90% tounge in cheek, it's merely a vehicle to highlight the lunacy of the Iraq war. Secondly, the comments I've made about how the EU works, and the longterm approach it takes to integrating countries into it's sphere of influence, is not a million miles away from simply giving them money to behave. However, it's a hand UP, not a hand OUT, and that is I think, the crucial difference.

  • Please explain how this ridiculous mechanism to bribe Iraqis into overthrowing Saddam would have worked, other than to have them end up with bullet in the back of their heads. See my vid "Iraq".

  • Ah I see not interested in the olive wreath then? Lets back up a little. Notice how in the previous post I make the point the vid is 90% tounge in cheek? Perhaps you just missed it in your excitement to post something pointless, and adversarial? No matter you've seen it now, and you could hardly be so humourless as to miss the point twice. All humour contains a core of truth of course, thats part of what makes it humour, but I'll spell it out for your tin ear:-)

  • Clearly offering the citizens of an impoverished country $100,000 each to reject their oppressive and tyrranous government wouldn't work. It's a crazy idea. Bonkers. However, the EU model of providing a complete legal framework, judicial assistance to implement it, and post succesful implementation, generous structural funds on joining the EU does work. See how that is sort of similar, but not quite the same thing?

  • Spain, Portugal, Greece and the entire East Block have been transformed by this policy, and Turkey, with its prize of 100 million secular muslims is inching its way in the right direction for the same reason. Not so funny when it's spelt out, but I trust you've got it now?

  • Your e.g.s were all AUTHORITARIAN regimes. Iraq under SH was TOTALITARIAN.

    As for the EU providing a "complete legal framework". This is the same EU full of corrupt govts (e.g. France) and companies that were violating their own sanctions and taking kickbacks from SH under the oil-for-food scandal? The same EU that sat by while 200 000 Bosnians were slaughtered, (only ended by US airstrikes)? That EU?

  • Oh dear. I detect a little proto fascist. Pro Bush, anti EU, anti UN and global warming denialist to boot? Did I get anything wrong? It's the 5 year old, long since debunked talking points that give you away:-) Seriously, get a new script writer.

  • You need to ditch ALL the dogma Steve, not just the religion. The nationalism, and latent racism have to go too.

  • You may have been tongue-in-cheek. But you seem to have quite the little fan club here, who regard your suggestion as totally sensible.

    This sort of mentality is shared by parents who never physically correct their kids and give them treats when they misbehave.

  • I think we can be fairly certain that you are alone in having completely missed the point. Anyone else with Steve?

  • I think Saddam would have nicked the cash and bought some weapons of mass destruction. Then we really would need to go to war, and we'd be broke. Other than that, great idea.

  • DOH!

  • sorry, this is off topic, but did you get new glasses or am i going mad?

  • Yes. Well spotted. And a haircut.

  • I agree completely, and I've often had the same thoughts about both "foreign" policy issues--meaning "wars of liberation," and domestic policy decision--for example the "War On Drugs."

    I think the problem with your idea, however, is that the Halliburtons of the US can't see a way to capitalize on peace. For them, war pays.

    That said, I couldn't help but guffaw at your cheap-shot gun reference. Damn you! leave my guns out of this. They're fun! ;-)

  • Sorry! Sorry!

  • Good point. But that's assuming that the purpose of the war was to free Iraqi's. Not to transfer money from the average American to the hands of republicans, giving them more political donors and defense (or I should say offense) industry dependant jobs.

  • I want to know how YouTube marks a comment from the channel host as spam. YouTube has such a bad system of managing comments.

  • This say it all... Nothing more to say.

  • Exactly right. The whole purpose of this war was based on Bush's idea that a "war president" would be beyond criticism and could pretty much do as he pleased. And in this, he was very much correct. His wealthy buddies and their respective companies have raked in untold billions of tax payer dollars for themselves -- all soaked in human blood.

  • You know, that actually sounds like a really good idea... I mean, short of the US just keepin' their hands to themselves, that's the most clever way to use the warmoney.

    Well done.

  • In all seriousness, it's not a bad plan. The EU extend an enormous carrot, force countries desperate to join to meet certain standards, and then give them money until their per capita GDP approaches the norm. Greece, Portugal and Spain were all military dictatorships less than a generation ago, and the eastern countries totalitarian communist states even more recently. Now all established democracies. Money talks.

  • That's about three trillion dollars and who knows how many lives more than should have been "spent".

  • Spot on.

  • Yes, I saw that same figure announced on the news and coincidentally enough I thought the same thing you did.

    For 3 trillion dollars we could have bought Iraq and the allegiance of all it's citizens. I imagine we still would feel the ire and wrath of the rest of the world when they said, "Those f*ing Americans, buying countries obedience and commitment to democracy. Who do they think they are?!?"

  • No doubt. Life isn't fair. You need to be subtle, the EU has been "buying" countries for decades, and it works, as long as it's not too overt:-)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more