1) Why on earth hasn't the Australian government had the sense to sell arms to America? Some of that 3 trillion could have done a lot of good here-could have paid off a lot of mortgages.............subsidised a lot of rents..... built hospitals........

2) a coincidence and nothing else of course. The US went into Iraq just when the French, the Russians and the Chinese were about to sign a major agreement to open up a very large oil-field in Iraq. According to Time magazine, so it has to be true. And it was the French, the Russians and the Chinese who were most vociferous in opposing the invasion.

ASymeonakis - The 3 trillion you talk about which it has cost includes money which would have been spent anyway in the military budget. Sure its sneaky of you to claim that the 3 tril could have been spent on other things like saving the whales and reducing green house gas emissions but actually most of it would have been spent on military things anyway.
HenryVIII – The only reason the French, Russians and Chinese got those contracts was for political reason so that they would work against the Americans in an invasion as you pointed out.

Dear EasyTimes
43% of US 2007 Taxes have wasted for current military spending and cost of past wars. ONLY 3% went for science, energy and environment. What is this? How can you compete other countries with this kind of budget? Sorry sir but this kind of budget is very stupid, dangerous for the future of USA. If USA do not change its militaristic policy soon most of your taxes will go to cover the costs of past wars. 1% of Americans are in prison! You have no money for social programs, Neo-conservatives will destroy America.

Allocation of US 2007 Taxes

43% CURRENT MILITARY SPENDING AND COST OF PAST WARS
11% Interest on non military share of federal Dept
20% Health reaserch & services
12% responses to Poverty
7% Government operations
3% Social Programs
3% SCIENCE, ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
1% Non military International Programs

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

I dont know where you got those figures from but I doubt they are right!
"43% CURRENT MILITARY SPENDING AND COST OF PAST WARS" what does cost of past wars mean?

Here is the 2007 budget -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2007

Now ASymeonakis you should apologie for deliberately lying and trying to deceive the readers of OLO!

the only consolation for the brutal effects of american foreign policy is the resulting economic decay, which will ultimately reduce their capacity to do murder for profit.

Dear EasyTimes,
You know very well that I am not lying and trying to deceive the readers of OLO! You know very well who is the real lier, who said us for Iraq's weapons of mass, who said us for cooperation between Saddam and Al-Qaeda, who said us for the row material from Niger, who said us for a low cost war when it overpassed the 3 trillion dollars, who said us that our world now is safer, remember the London, Istanbul, Madrid, Bali, Pakistan etc bombs, remember that the Iraq converted to a huge training camp for Al-Qaeda. You know very well whose lies have cost trillions of dollars and took the life of many hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
About your question The U.S. Government says that military spending amounts to 20% of the budget, The Center for Defense Information (CDI) reports 51%, the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) reports 43%, and The War Resisters League claims 54%. You can visit the web sites of the CDI, FCNL or The War Resisters League for more details.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide