[RM]

I think it's great to offer a reward for locating Saddam's sons. And it's great they were located. But did it have to be $30 million? How about 10 million, or even 5 million? I don't think someone turning them in would decide not to if the reward was only 10 million. THOSE ARE OUR HARD EARNED TAX DOLLARS! What government/military person decided to offer a reward that big?

[Rafter-S]

I don't know...big rewards haven't turned Sodamn Insane or Yomamma Been Laiden. Maybe a million dollars ain't what it used to be. ;)

[Schuey2002]

What government/military person decided to offer a reward that big?
My guess is that it was Rummy at the DOD. ;)

[BigG]

The little news blurb I heard on the AM radio said the State Dept authorized the payment. Maybe Colin Powell?

[444]

First of all, I don't care about the hard earned tax dollars thing. One of the primary missions for our invasion of Iraq was to get those two guys and their dad. If we got them because an informant tipped us off, that is just as good as if we spent 30 million getting them some other way.

I heard somewhere that the rewards were going to be paid with all the millons in cash that were captured with them, but this may be Bravo Sierra.

[Bigjake]

i also heard that they were taken along with somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 mil $! how ironic would it be if they did in fact pay their own bountys. :D

[resmeth]

Personally I think it is one of the best 30mil the government has spent in a long time. When you look att the Billions wasted on welfare, enviromentalist policies, foreign aid and various Senators pet beuracracies, 30 mill to kill two depraved dictators is a bargain.
Heck I'd quit bitchin altogether about my taxes if I was promised a few dead dictators a year!

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

My understanding is the reward money is being paid out of the $100 million that was confiscated from Ebay and Ubay's last stand. It's not coming (directly) from the US State Department.

Regards,
Rabbit.

[4v50 Gary]

Consider it money well spent. Now we got the big rat to catch and the sooner we do, the faster resistence will die and we can bring our troops home.

[Carnitas]

Best use of tax dollars I've ever seen. We could stand to a dozzen others world-wide at such a bargan price.

[10-Ring]

Seeing that somebody gave up Uday & Qusay, I got no problem w/ the reward. Plus, I heard they found $50 million in the building w/ the boys. Now the faster we find Daddy, the faster our boys come home!

[WonderNine]

I heard somewhere that both rewards $15 million a head is going to the same Iraqi that gave the information of Ebay UDay's whereabouts.

[Snake Eyes]

When you look att the Billions wasted on welfare, enviromentalist policies, foreign aid and various Senators pet beuracracies, 30 mill to kill two depraved dictators is a bargain.
Could some one PLEASE direct me to the actual budget line items detailing that we are spending "Billions" on welfare or environmentalist policies? Because I just can't find where we are spending anywhere near that much money on those programs.

I know--it's one of those "secret black ops" budgets that doesn't show up anywhere! I bet it's hidden in the Defense Department budget! That's why the damn defense spending is so high! Those sneaky Kennedys hid the welfare money and tree hugger money in the defense budget so no one would know! [/tinfoil hat]

Or did you mean all of those things add up to billions of dollars??

Are you taking into account the revenue from goods we sell and will sell to the countries we are giving foreign aid, as their markets develop?

Are you taking into account the revenue created by the jobs provided by the "Senators pet projects"?? (I find that nobody says they like "pork" until one of the barrels gets rolled out of their home towns--You should hear the locals scream when some one talks about closing Luke Air Force base, or shutting down power plants, or blowing up dams in Arizona. They like the pork when they're eating it, just not when it's on somebody else’s plate!)

[on topic]

I will tell you what is costing us one billion dollars per week: The War in Iraq.

So I guess if getting these two guys means 6 fewer hours in Iraq ((($1B/7/24)*6)=$35,714,285,71=net gain(?)), the reward is worth every penny.

Personally, I fail to see what damage Ebay and Ubay were capable of doing to anyone. I don't believe they were any threat or had any ability to do any kind of damage that creates a need for us to hunt them down. But then, I think there is no point in continuing to pursue Saddam--if he sticks his head up and manages to get enough power to be a threat again, we will now then exactly where to find him.

(Anybody remember Idi Amin?? Wasn't he the "Big Bad Boogeyman" that is going to TAKE OVER THE WORLD:what: and SPREAD COMMUNISM:what: in the '70s?? The Big Threat ? He got deposed, lived in exile and never created any further, real, problems. We didn't spend a penny to hunt him down. He just went away (and died recently). Why can't we do that with Saddam?? Is he really that important or is it all just a big Bush ego trip??)

[/off topic] (but relevant, dangit!)

I'm far more concerned about the hemorrhage of money we're spending on Iraq than any domestic programs. We're creating a damn big hole in our cash flow--and I know Pres. Bush's defense contractor buddies aren't going to foot the bill. I know sooner or later they're going to want me to pay for it--but probably not until a Democrat gets elected so we can all complain about the damnable Democrats and their tax and spend ways. Nobody seems to remember who spent the money--just the guy that has to collect the money to pay for it.

[Gun Related]

Along this line of thinking: Go buy a new gun on a credit card, then make sure you are not at home when the bill comes. When your wife/spouse/significant other/domestic partner asks about the charge, tell them: "It's not my responsibility! You're the one with the bill in your hand!" :neener: See if that works out for you. (If it DOES work and your wife/etc has a sister--call me IMMEDIATELY!!)

[/Gun Related]

Isn't it odd?

Bush I=War in Iraq=Larger Deficit + Larger Trade Deficit (But we get a Tax Cut--sort of) = Hero of the Free World

Clinton=No War + Largest Budget Surplus In History(? not certain of that fact)=Lower Trade Deficit + Highest Employment Rate EVER + Blowjob = Impeachment and derision as worst President EVER.

Bush II=War with Iraq + Cronyism With Corporate Oil & Defense Corps + Tax Cut (?!?!?) + Higher Unemployment + Lower GDP + MASSIVE budget deficit - Budget Surplus (Gone!) + Higher Trade Deficit + Falling Dollar = Hero of the Free World Part II

I'm confused. I guess that's why I'm a Democrat (sort of).

I can't wait for deflation. That's when the S is really gonna HTF.



(Must be my night for long, rambling, adamant, sometimes indignant & righteous posts. Don't worry--I'll sober up soon. On the other hand, there's probably about 3 members left here that I haven't mortally offended--so I'll go find another topic to get fired up about.)
:rolleyes: :scrutiny: :o :D

[longeyes]

Would that we were as generous to our own combat troops.

[Snake Eyes]

Please, Please, PLEASE don't infer that I am anti-American or that I don't support our Men and Women in Uniform.

I am not. And I do.

Fully and completely with all gratitude and praise.

Regardless of what my overall opinion is of their mission.

[Malone LaVeigh]

In DOD terms, $30MM is chump change. The unfortunate thing is that it was just a payment for a short propaganda victory.

Given that the admin. has not shown that the reasons given for going to war were justified in the first place, there's something wrong in acting like we have the right to go offering bounties on the heads of these characters, as despicable as they undoubtedly were.

One last thought: I'm not sure this was such a great deal for the informant. He had his palatial mansion demolished for his trouble, and I'd guess such an edifice would cost a few MM even in Iraq. Not to mention that he's probably not too popular with the neighbors just now. If the resistance elements in the country are able to mount several dozen attacks per day, resulting in close to a US fatality per day, then they might make things pretty tough for him.

[243_shooter]

GB II casued all our economic woes... It had nothing to do with 9/11...

If Iraq winds up a true democracy, then it will have been a bargain.

They won't say a peep about what they've found in Iraq until Hillary announces her run for the presidency and starts using it as her primary campaign stance. Think of all the evidence they've collected as his BUG for the elections ;) Bush just isn't gunning for saddam, he's gunning for the whole damn democratic party. I sincerely think that he's hoping for his numbers to tank enough that hillary comes out to play.. At the very least it'll make all the whiners look like the dopes that most of them are, close enough to the polls that it's fresh in the minds of every american.

Personally I hate any type of Government spending, but I am of the opinion that what they are doing now (if it works at establishing a viable democratic state in the middle east) will go down as one of the turning points of history. I don't have a problem at all with paying a $30 million bounty on the scumbag's heads. Bargain at twice the price.

Of course I could just be nuts, and listening to way to much rush-bo..

Leo

[keano44]

I doubt that the informant will ever get a chance to spend his 30 million.

[Monkeyleg]

What's the value of having a stabilized Iraq in the Middle East?

1. We don't have to do fly-overs anymore. That $30 million bounty should pay for itself over a short period of time just by the elimination of the fly-overs.

2. We're able to pull out troops out of Saudi Arabia. What's the cost savings of doing so?

3. Syria and Iran have been making "nice" with us lately. Anyone care to supply a dollar figure for that?

4. The PLO, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are in a cease-fire with Israel as negotiations continue. I'm not going to hold my breath on this one, but if it succeeds we'll save a bundle.


Snake Eyes, the recession officially began in late 1999 and officially ended in 2001. It doesn't feel like it, I know, but them's the facts from the economists. Your logic, however, is faulty.

Bush I has a recession during his term, which was actually on the rebound in 1992. Bill Clinton inherits the recovery, along with an historic boom in high-tech. Clinton didn't found Microsoft, Intel, Apple, Hewlett Packard, Cisco Systems, or any other successful high-tech company. Government does not create businesses; at best, it stays out of their way.

The high-tech boom creates a stock market boom, which creates new millionaires and also brings windfall tax revenues from capital gains taxes.

By 2000, everyone and his uncle is invested in a market that's way overbought. In March 2000, the bubble bursts, and millions of folks begin to lose billions of dollars. With the loss of discretionary spending comes reduced production by manufacturers, which in turn results in the loss of jobs.

September 11, 2001 exacerbates the economic problems. War in Afghanistan and Iraq add to market uncertainty. The stock market pauses from its incline just long enough to watch the progress in Iraq, then resumes its climb. The Nasdaq is now 60+% above its lows.

Presidents don't affect the economy very much through their economic policies, but do affect the economy in other ways. Bill Clinton was happy to let the problems of terrorism and Iraq fester during his tenure. Bush has--right or wrong--taken action.

You can give Clinton credit for whatever you like, but crediting him for the economic boom of the 90's is just flat wrong.

[MicroBalrog]

Clinton=No War

Kosovo? Iraq?

[MicroBalrog]

Clinton also = AWB, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Lamplugh, 200,000 FFL's withdrawn.

Clinton = Gun Free Schools Act = Columbine

Need I continue?

[Bigjake]

my hat is off to you microbalrog, for being a non-american, you have a great knowledge of everything about us. impressed!

[MicroBalrog]

my hat is off to you microbalrog, for being a non-american, you have a great knowledge of everything about us. impressed!


Was that sarcasm?:confused: :confused:

[Waitone]

$30 million for bagging Sadaam's two mutts is a clear example of why the US keeps doing stupidity on a grand scale.

Instead of thinking like Iraqis or Afgani's we posit a solution based on American thinking. What would it take to get an American's attention? A lotto size reward, therefore it will take the same thing to get an Iraqi's or Afgani's attention.

So you have the incredible sight of Americans offering rewards completely beyond the comprehension of those it was designed to enthuse. Maybe, just maybe something less than $15 million / mutt would be more effective.

I remember the same kind of nonsense went on in Afganistan where the US offered a mulitmillion dollar reward to a group of people whose annual income is registered in tens of dollars per year. Why offer a goatherder millions of dollars when a dozen new goats would have worked just as well.

Come on people. Think like Iraqis, not like Americans.

[444]

On the other hand, if the guy stays there and buys some big palace, the other people see what cooperating with the Americans gets you.




Or not

[Don Gwinn]

Any reward had to be better than what you could get yourself from the targets. For instance, several of you report "hearing" that the brothers had between 50 and 100 million dollars on them in that house. The neighbors in the area believe it was the owner of the house who turned them in. Let's assume that's true for a moment. We can draw several conclusions:

1. The owner of the house was a powerful man in Mosul and a tribal leader allied with the Husseins and Baaths. Probably, therefore, also a rich man, no? Any reward, in order to tempt such people, had to be huge. And let's face it; in an Arab culture, such men would be the ones most likely to have the information we would need and perhaps also the ones with the most reason to bump off the Husseins.

2. Being a tribal leader and loyal subject of the Husseins, the owner of the house probably also had his own fighters. Presumably, he could have killed the Husseins and disappeared with the money. U.S. forces might not have asked too many questions as long as he left us the bodies (or at least, when staring at that much money, he might have so reasoned.) Why didn't he do it?
Simple. Because he had the option of letting the Americans do the hard and dangerous part, and still getting $30 million. A much better deal for him. Also a much better deal for us, because we were able to make the attempt to capture them alive. Well worth $30 million.

"Not money, Dr. Painter--fifteen million dollars. Money is what you get at the ATM, it's what you take to the grocery store. Fifteen million dollars is a motive with a universal adapter attached."
--Joe Sarno

[Bigjake]

not at all. seriously. its just humorous to me to hear you getting in on the debates and politics of our country and then in turn, not be from it. so, no, it was a complement.

[Destructo6]

BTW, Ebay is an online auction site, not one of Saddam Husayn's sons.

His recently departed sons were Uday Saddam Husayn al-Tikriti and Qusay Saddam Husayn al-Tikriti.

I, too, would say it was a $30 million well spent.