While I won't disagree there has been a lot of waste and mismanagement in the reconstruction of Iraq, I think you are missing a couple things:

1) There was no banking industry in Iraq after the war. It was a cash economy.
2) Numerous studies have stressed the increased costs of security as one of the main reasons for draining away so much of the reconstruction money. Unfortunately I do not have a link available.
3) We (the US) has spent billions of our own money trying to repair the infrastructure there. It outweighs this alleged $20B by quite a bit.
4) Progress has been made. Not as much as we would like, but it has been made. Without having seen the program, my guess is that the presentation of the bad was much more important to the authors as portraying the good that has been done.

>People may think the "oil for food" skullduggery was bad, but this makes that look like a small prank by comparison. I wonder what's holding up publicity on the matter.
>
>Sad!

And again, not true. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme

The GAO estimates that the Saddam Hussein regime generated $10.1 billion in illegal revenues. This figure includes $5.7 billion from oil smuggling and $4.4 billion in illicit surcharges on oil sales and after-sales charges on suppliers. The scale of the fraud was far more extensive than the GAO had previously estimated.

The difference is not huge in numbers so much as in intent. Saddam and his henchmen purloined that money for their own benefit, under the guise of supporting his people, and with the complicity of the UN.