(no subject)

I forwarded the mislead titled "ADMINISTRATION MISLEADS ON COST OF WAR."

Here it is:
Before the invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration told the American people
that it could be fought on the cheap. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
said "We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own
reconstruction and relatively soon."[1] Budget Director Mitch Daniels said Iraq
will be "an affordable endeavor,"[2] "that will not require sustained aid"[3]
and cost "in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion."[4] Defense Policy Board
Member Richard Perle said, "Iraq is a very wealthy country...They can finance,
largely finance, the reconstruction of their own country."[5] They were all
wrong.

The Washington Post reports "the Bush administration intends to seek about $70
billion in emergency funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan early next
year, pushing total war costs close to $225 billion since the invasion of Iraq
early last year."[6]

Sources:

1. "Dems charge 'bait and switch' on Iraq," UPI, 10/03/03,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65222.
2. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65222.
3. "U.S. says oil in Iraq to pay for rebuilding," Washington Post, 3/28/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65223.
4. "Estimated cost of Iraq war reduced," New York Times, 12/31/02,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65224.
5. "Saddam's Ultimate Solution," PBS, 07/11/02,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65225.
6. "Increase in War Funding Sought," Washington Post, 10/26/04,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=3528501&l=65226.


I got this email back:

"Just for clarity sake, Reconstruction is not the same issue as the war."