With the hour soon approaching when we may see our military, in all it’s awesome power, spring into action, demonstrating just how well trained, well equipped and efficient they are, and as they once again take on the roles of liberator, justice administrator and friend to the oppressed, there is talk about how much all of this is going to cost the people of the United States. This is a very valid point. Our economy is a bit on the fragile side these days although I have to admit that it is getting better. We are going through a slow economic recovery in part due to a fickle group of antacid chewing brokers in our financial community who run to stick their heads in the sand every time someone reports that the world is an uncertain place but I am getting off the point. The undertaking that we are about to embark on is going to be expensive. To say anything else would be untrue.

It costs money to get all the men and women of the military stationed and equipped. It cost money to get the aircraft carriers into position and to fuel the jets, the tanks and the other assorted vehicles that our troops will use to free the subjugated people of Iraq. It also costs money for the weapons that will be required to liberate a nation due to the fact that its totalitarian leader, Saddam Hussein, chooses to play a very serious game of chicken with the United States and our true allies instead of forfeiting his weapons of mass destruction. That’s a lot of money when you total it up.

One of the many arguments being made by the anti-war protestors, the Bush haters and the liberals out there is we cannot afford this war during these strange economic times that we are experiencing here in the U.S. And do you know what? I agree with them. I don’t think we can afford it and I don’t think the American people should have to pay for it. I believe that putting American lives on the line for the liberation of others who are oppressed is donation enough by the American people. I see no good reason why our country should accrue a war debt so that we can hand 1500 oil wells over to a nation that will no doubt turn around and raise oil prices for the United States in their "appreciation” for all we have done for them. No, I don’t think that we should have to pay for this military action at all. But there is a solution. There is a way to "do the right thing” and to be fair about its expenses at the same time. Let’s charge the Iraqi’s after they are liberated.

Making the new government of Iraq (a government of the Iraqi people, for the Iraqi people and by the Iraqi people) take responsibility monetarily for the actions that they refused to do themselves is quite fair when all is said and done. I do not believe that it would be out of line at all to require the new Iraqi government to take a portion of the future oil proceeds and apply it to the debt incurred by the people of the United States in return for their liberation. Quite frankly, the Iraqi economy will be in the black by billions of dollars within years if not sooner. All of the people who are strategizing about the Iraqi government post Saddam Hussein have talked about the future partnership with the new government of Iraq and I say that if they truly are going to be partners in a new world then they can start being partners by paying us back for all we have done for them.

There are so many reasons that we should insist that this be done I don’t know where to start but because France and Germany are on "my list” these days I will start with them.

After World War II the United States, being the people with big hearts and big dreams that we are, decided that to simply walk away from Germany and Europe while they lay in ruins to return to our normal way of life back home wasn’t the noble or caring thing to do. So, we decided through a series of plans to help rebuild Germany and Europe both economically and by helping Germany to set up a government that would eliminate the chance of another mad Austrian coming to power and committing mass-murder and genocide (Stalin had other ideas but that’s another story all together). We helped them to get their factories built and their hospitals equipped. We helped them reconstruct their schools and raise their churches. We, out of the kindness of those big hearts of ours, rolled up our sleeves and helped to rebuild a broken country and a broken continent and all we really wanted in return was peace and a commitment from them to be our allies in times of distress. Today we look back and see that it only takes a few decades to erase the memory of all that good will along with the commitment that was made to be an ally during dark times, a commitment that was forged with the blood of all those who died so they could be free. As we approach the moment of action in Iraq we have two countries that owe us their very existence who are more concerned with "what’s in it for me” then standing by their commitment to an ally who helped them when they were broken. Quite honestly, we should send them a bill for all we did fifty years ago and demand interest! And this is exactly why we should insist that Iraq share in their burden of rebuilding their country.

Many would say that it would be barbaric to heap that kind of economic responsibility onto a lost nation and to that I say phooey! Iraq will be about as lost as an experienced sea captain at the helm of a luxury yacht with a GPS guided autopilot in about a year! This isn’t like Bosnia where the people made their living off of the land in the form of farming and the like. To have proposed such a thing for Bosnia would have been placing a hardship on people who would have been in no position to handle it. Iraq is a completely different story, apples and oranges. This is a region that is so rich with oil that there will be companies and even nations trying to beat down the foreign ministers door 24 hours after Saddam is ousted trying to get a piece of the oil pie that will no doubt get re-entered into the world oil market. Not only will they be able to afford it but they may not even feel it economically depending on how it is set-up in the first place.

The only danger about this suggestion lies within our own borders. If this idea is going to fly at all then it has to be created and worded in such a way that any and all monies that come from Iraq to the United States have to be completely dedicated to the war debt and nothing else. Why you ask? Just ask anyone from a state that has a lottery earmarked for education. The laughter should be over in a minute or two. The Congress of the United States, especially those who lean to the liberal side, has an incredible talent for spending money that isn’t theirs to spend. They have such a horrible sense of how to balance a budget that if left to "spin” the verbiage of an agreement that was intended to relieve the burden from a war that liberated a country, freed oppressed people and brought a bit of stability to a region of hostility, that the debt would actually have a chance of out living the oil supply of the Middle East.

So, after we get finished feasting at the table of liberation, after we share our bounty with the oppressed, let’s not be too quick to leap for the tab when it is presented. Let’s let those we freed pickup this one. I don’t think they will be leaving to go anywhere before the tab comes.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.