How much should be spent and by whom to help a post-war Iraq?

[Fencer128]

Hi,

Who should be paying for rebuilding/medical/economic aid for post-war Iraq and how much? In terms of the US - if you agree they should contribute - what percentage of the overall total should this be (or estimate in actual $).

I'm very interested in this.

Thank you,

Andy

 

[Fencer128]

OK, I'll go first...

Contributions should be derived from all those involved in the fighting - as well as those who have been at the forefront of the anti-war campaign (i.e. France, Germany, Russia, China).

I definitely think that approximately half of the money should come from the "fighting powers" - as they are the ones doing the damage and claiming "liberation". Within this the money could be organised along the lines of military contributions (i.e. larger number of troops = larger economy and larger damage = larger contribution).

Outwith the fighting powers - the other money money should be put forward by the main anti-war countries + international community as a whole. The money put forward by each country here could be dictated by the size of their economy.

Not a perfect solution and I'm sure you all have other opinions.

What would you do?

Andy

 

[xirtam]

Well after not having to spend all their money on weapons of mass destruction anymore, their economy should take a pretty good turn as it is.

Couple that with the reinstallment of Saddam's treasury into their economy, and we've got all the money we need for Iraq's rebuilding.

I guess at this point my answer is that we don't have enough info. We don't know how much damage we're going to do to Iraq. A lot of that is dependent on what Iraq does. If they play nice, we won't have to invest that much. If they don't, we'll probably wind up evaluating how trustworthy the world can be of the new regime.

Iraq isn't another Japan, so our investment shouldn't be handled the same way. Of course, we have to be careful not to set up another Hitler.