More politically correct to fund with American blood and tax payer money.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Back to the original question. Why does the U.S. taxpayer have to fund the cost of reconstruction in iraq and providing security for the Iraqi government? Iraq has the world's second largest oil reserves. They are not Haiti, they can afford to pay up. Is there something here I am missing? Is it because the administration is afraid of being accused of "stealing" Iraq's oil? I prefer the term "taking", but so what if we are? That's what happens when you are taken over, er... I mean liberated.
I would love to se the presidential candidates asked this question.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
The US taxpayer doesn't own the oil in Iraq.
Not unless our efforts were imperialistic in nature, i.e. to overthrow the government of a sovereign nation for the purposes of acquiring their natural resources.
Quote from liulala:
it is true taxpayer not own oil in iraq. The fact is that we don't ask for extra. We just reasonable ask them for what pay for the war and restruction. It is legitimate to do so.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Nonsense.
An invaded and conquered country has no obligation to the invading party.