NDR: stirring the pot - is the war on terror worth it

Charlie S and Titan

Charlie S and Titan

Well-known member
Hi All,

As Lee pointed out recently, nobody has quit here in a while. Time to start something...

I might just get to quit again before the day is out if all goes as planned. :)

What do you think:
http://http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/24/news/economy/cbo_testimony/index.htm http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/24/news/economy/cbo_testimony/index.htm

Is the cost of the war on terror worth it to you? What about to your kids and grandkids?

Did I mention that the war costs $10B a month and the SCHIP program would cost $7B a YEAR... Sure it is more important to go to war than to insure the children of our nation.

Charlie
 
Last edited:
No war is worth it if you mean dollars and cents.There are some things that must be done reguardless of cost.
 
Welp, I can't see where we started it..or that if we "win" it we will get any "spoils". As far as children being insured, what about welfare, Social Security..ad nauseum that pays for them now? I think the insurance thing is a big bunch of shit that the politicians are using to buy votes from people that don't see the "real" cost of such a program. Whatever it costs to keep the fighting "over there" is much cheaper than letting it come here.
 
Lee,
I couldn't agree with you more about the war. As for the SCHIP program, The current program is very generous as is but anyone who has an income up to 82K can afford to pay their own way.
 
I have since Sept. 11, supported the war on terror. Our initial efforts around the world and in Afganistan were tremendously successful and we had (almost) the whole world on our side. The support has unfortunately been squandered and lost.
The decision to go into Iraq, I never supported and I still think it was a huge mistake. Sadam was contained and going nowhere, there was no reason to invade. We could have taken him out and toppled his government without ever putting thousands and thousand of our soldiers at risk.

That said, as an American and a former infantryman, I fully support our troops. Until we get them out of that quagmire called Iraq, we need to give them every single peice of equipment, all the support and all the provisions they need to survive and maintain tactical and strategic supremacy. But we need to get them out of there ASAP and stop wasting our money, and, more importantly, losing the lives of our soldiers, in a place we should have never been in to begin with.

If we look strictly at money, here is one example:
The federal program our state agency recieves our Coastal Zone Management Program funds from has been level funded (which due to increases in costs, is a cut each year) or flat out cut for the last 3-4 years.
All of the state coastal management programs across the country combined received about $65 million in Fy 07 (They had gotten $72 mlln in '06) (also, for each $! recevied, the states have to put up $1).
This is probably less than it is costing us for 30 minutes each day in Iraq. I've had to cut public access construction projects, coastal resource research programs and grants to local communities to help with this crush of people and development moving to the coast, all because we are level funded because of the war. And this is happening in every coastal and great lake state. So just think about all the important issues which are going unaddressed just in the state coastal programs in your state because of the war. Then extrapolate that to all the other federal programs out there that are important to you. Do you like to use that small harbor navigation project to get out fishing or hunting? Better hope it doesnt silt in, the Corps small harbor nav projects have been ZERO funded again for the 3rd year running. How about your local refuge, think they are getting any money? Think again!

And on that note, I'll quit the DHBP. At least until my next work-break. : )
 
Carl--Not to bring this thread too far off-topic, because heaven knows I wouldn't want to distract anyone from Charlie's invitation to encourage him to quit again, but I've been meaning to ask you, just what is "bad beer" anyway?
Rick
 
Charlie, I didn't even read your link, but I lost a cousin over there, it was his third tour in the gulf region. He was there in '91, stopped in Bosnia in between, and was there twice this last "Crusade". Was riding in a Hummer (he normally rode in an Abrams) and got it from a roadside bomb. It would do him and all the others who have been lost an injustice to pull out without finishing. Besides that, I see very little reason to stay.

Chuck
 
Last edited:
Wow, not much to add to what carl just wrote, it looked like what i was going to say!

It pains me to hear people talk about how Iraq attacked us on 9-11. Thats what people where sold. Heck they're all the same color & dress the same, musta been then. Sadam was no more dangerous the day we invaded than the day we left 10 years earlier. We could have kept spanking his hand with surgical air strikes for the next 20 years, way I looked at it was really good pratice for our pilots and incredibly low risk of American lives. Now at least 4000 US lives, and probably 150,000 others, and we're no safer from our real enemies than before. In fact, we've given them something tangible to hate us for, instead of just ideals. Another generation raised to hate us, around the world, and we've proved we're the agressor to them. When your dealing with folks that idealize marters, welp, giving them valid reasons to hate us aint ideal. travis
 
We are in Iraq because Sadaam wanted us, and the world , to think that he had and was developing weapons of mass distruction. This thinking on his part was a big mistake after 9-11.

Kadafi, in Lybia, saw the light and abandoned all mass distruction rhetoric and programs and the world is now leaving him alone. Sadaam could have done the same.

I, for one, believe that the positive potential of our presence in Iraq is great and there is no negative. The positive potetial is the prevention of WWIII. The negative does not exist because WWIII would happen anyway without intervention. PEACE AT ALL COST is impossible. (an oxymoron if ever one was coined) I think many people are like Britain's Chamberlain before WWII. Hitlers cannot be appeased.

On an up note, my son says that most of the people in Fallujah seem friendly, the Iraqi troops he works and eats with are good and most people seem to appreciate our goals if not our presence there. Sean says that the food that the Iraqi contractors prepare at his outpost is quite good. The food they eat while away from the kitchens leaves something to be desired though. I sent him some King Oskar, double layer olive oil packed sardines along with crackers. He wants more.

An article in this morning's Des Moines Register pointed out that casualties are declining fast, Iraqi volunteerism is up and Iraqi anti-terrorist tips are also up. The staff of the paper must be choking, having to report good news.

Right now the world is about as peaceful as it ever has been ever. If our goal of a free, peaceful, and democratic Iraq is attained everyone in the world will be better off.

(I like that this forum is duck hunting centered but open to other related interests of duck hunters. That being said, while I'm into this thread, it is way way way off of duck boats as a topic. I threw in the item about sardines to make this wildlife related.)

Bob
 
Travis, I'm not sure anyone north of the Mason Dixon line thinks Iraq attacked us on 9-11. Everyone up here pretty much knows it was the Taliban. Saddam gave shelter and support to them and also went on a mass execution of his own countrymen (Kurds). I kinda agree that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, we should have went into Iran and Pakistan but both of those countries would have been much harder than Iraq..so now we have a foothold in the area if needed. That area of the world is run by the biggest bully on the block, it is all they understand and all they will ever understand. If we have to be that bully, at least keep it in their yard and break their windows. I think we should be pumping their oil into our ships as fast as we can to pay for "helping" them. Screw Europe and what they think..I don't care what the other countries of the world think of us..the only thing they love about us is the dollar anyway.
 
Charlie,
Are we debating the decision to contiue the war or the decision to go to war? Just trying to clarify the arguement.

Decision to go to war is debateable on many levels, that said, we are now at war and my belief is that you then support the troops and do whatever, and I mean whatever it takes to win the war and get those troops home. I don't care if it is waterboarding or some covert operations that are not "pretty" just get it done.

It is war.......

Please don't compare anything from the war to the debacle of socialized medicine and say "it is for the kids." If that whole program goes forward and the system is changed there will be tremendous cost burden shifting very quickly to the consumer, meaning you and I. Got to tell you, guys like Doc McCullough, Doc Askew and any others that are on here have spent a lot of time and money educating themselves so they can do what they love in providing medicine/healthcare, but the reimbursement rates from medicare/medicaid are damn near impossible to pay the overhead of the building/staff etc. let alone make a living, and I am not talking a high end comfy one, but a basic one. Rates are going down yet again, take away or change the insurance plans which frankly help absorb and cover all those other people and even less people will want to join that profession. I personally wrote off 15K last week in "unrecoverable care". This is not a "new" thing, happens weekly to each of my 7 partners....

there, does that help stir the pot?
 
Back in college, there was no such thin as bad beer! Now that I am a little older and have a little more money, I'd have to say that my old college stand-by, Milwakee's Best, is pretty bad beer!!!
 
War is bad, we should never go to war. We should not have fought the British for our independence, we should have just asked them to treat us nicer. And we were wrong to join world war II. Sure the Japanese attacked us but they only did it because we were helping the world fight Hitler. And Hitler never attacked us so we should have stayed out of.

As for Iraq, the fact is that they attacked a friend of ours, got beat to a pulp, and signed an unconditional surrender. Later they thumbed their nose at the world and it was "questionable" whether they had or were getting WMD. Either way, they violated their surrender and the world turned into a bunch of cowards.

As for child's health care, every kid should have it. But every kid should also have loving caring parents, a safe house, a safe car, a safe neighborhood, a savings account, a retirement account, blah, blah, blah. I didn't have free health care and neither did my parents or grandparents or blah blah blah. If we are going to give all these kids all of this free stuff, why don't we also build them new houses in safe neighborhoods so they can enjoy it? Then we could give them all free college educations. I'm sure that if we just gave them everything for free that the world would a much better place.

Heck, just look how great our welfare system works.
 
Never said we shouldn't ever go to war, I'm definately not a peace-monger. If I was, I would have never spent 6 years as an Army officier.
War, as in WWII, Korea, First Gulf War, Afghanistan, can be well justified. However, in my opinion, in the case of Sadam Hussein & the ongoing war in Iraq, starting that war was not justified.

I don't know if free health care or universal health care is the answer but I do know that health care costs are eating this country alive. Gotta be an answer out there somewhere. But I don't have it.
 
I think it is pretty easy to sit back today and point out all the reasons why we should not have gone in to Iraq. We are there and we need to continue the mission until we win. We also do not know what would have happened had we not gone into Iraq.

While we all have the right of freedom of speech we also need to be sensitive to the members of our armed forces and their families. The political grandstanding that has gone on has been atrocious and dispicable! The war on terror needs to be fought. It is unlike any war we have ever fought. The terrorist have a completely different set of values as us and we cannot us "our" logic to understand them.

As far as comparing the war funding to the government subsidized healthcare that is not real. They were wanting to expand benefits to 200% over the poverty line. There are things our government should and it is good at. Socialized medicine is not what we need in this country. Which current social welfare programs are well run, efficiently? Who do you want to make medical decisions for you? Someone sitting in Washington? Or, your doctor? It is bad enough now with insurance companies having as much control over the decision making process. I currently work for a private company that provides healthcare. We accept both medicaid and medicare.

My 2 cents,

Tom
 
Carl, maybe we should send all the lawyers to Iraq..then..without the litigation that pays millions,billions in malpractice suits..med costs would spiral down. I would much rather see doctors getting the money than some lawyer and their client. I'm not talking gross malpractice..just half the damn ad's on tv asking if you took some meds and didn't feel good afterwards type of crap.
 
Oh well, can't say I didn't try.

Not debating anything really. Just pointing out the costs of the war on terror. Most people hear about the big numbers in chunks, but don't really add them up, much less think about how were going to pay for them. Most of the money is generated through debt financing - so the principal is just the tip of the iceberg - think about the interest on loans that big!

Imagine what your mortgage payment would be like if your house cost 284 Billion! Boy howdy.

It isn't you or me or W that are going to bear the burden of paying for it - it is your and my kids and grandkids.

The other interesting thing is that this is impacting everybody today - economists are saying that financial impact the war on terror is increasing interest rates today. Hard to believe, but true. Lots of government debt = lots of bonds. I won't go into the boring economics behind it, but suffice it to say there is a real impact.

The ridiculous thing to me about not funding SCHIP is that it is a drop in the bucket. Really small potatoes - but who does it hurt - the working poor of this country.

It isn't the people that can get medicare or medicaid - it is not the people that have good employer sponsored plans - it is the family that works their butt off for a living but is caught in the middle. Primarily the service industries.

You and I both have neighbors that are in that position whether you know it or not. I gar-ron-tee it.

It is unreal to me that the richest nation on the face of the earth can't provide healthcare for all of our kids. There are 11 million kids out there in the good old flag waving US of A without healthcare... It is a damned shame that this is true.

Who cares if we cover up to $84K a year for a family of four. Frankly I could care less if we covered every kid in the US from birth to 20 years of age. It is just the right thing to do. We're a first world, industrialized nation that could afford to insure everyone alive if we wanted. Just look at the money we're spending on other things (ahem, war in Iraq...).

To tie the two seemingly unrelated topics together again - it is the least we can do for the folks who are going to bear the financial burden of the war we are fighting today and into the forseeable future.

Oh well, I don't quit, but you can't say I didn't try.

Oh yeah, ducks, I haven't been duck hunting - our season is closed for a split. Too much other crap to do anyway - like try to get you guys all riled up...

Have a good night.

Charlie
 
I believe the stated purpose of the WAR was to remove Hussein and insure the destruction of WMD's......we did the first and the second never materialized......Tell me I'm wrong and I'll listen but when this thing got cranked up I don't recall the purpose of going to Iraq being converting them to a Democratic Country....might have been mentioned but that sure wasn't what our "justification" was when we sought "World support" for the invasion....

So now, (5) years after we waded though their armed forces like crap through a Goose, almost (4) years since we dug THE POS that was the main reason for the War out of his spider hole and almost a year after he was sent to his Virgins and sheep, we're still there.....only NOW we're there to bring Democracy to the people of Iraq???....a people who NEVER asked us to come and give them that particualr treasure and that, to a large part, don't want it???

I figure we won the war, (the WAR being the part where you are fighting a military force whose goal is to repel you), when we crushed their military and cut the head off of that particular snake.....after that we lost our focus and fell right back into the quagmire of "occupation", a particularly nasty process which History has poven, time and again, to be 100% unsuccessful.....(name one "conquered and occupied" country that hasn't eventually shed that yoke)....

So now we are involved in a POLICE ACTION, something our military is not trained for, and should never have been asked to do, with the "goal" being to insure that the fledgling "democratic" government doesn't fail.....

I'd agree 100% that if we were still fighting an oganized Army, looking to oust a "sitting" head of Government, and prosecuting the war like a war, (or to put it crassly doing WHATEVER it took to win), that to leave would be wrong and would dishonor those who have died there......

But thats not what we're doing....instead our soldiers are dying in the place of Iraqi's who should have long ago stepped up to defend their own country against an enemy who is smart enough not to organize into an Army and who knows that since we are "civilized" that we'll never commit the atrocities that they are willing to commit against their own children, much less a people that they hate so deeply that they'd martyr themselves to kill us....

I haven't heard anyway say WIN in a longtime....and I think the reason for that is no one has a definition of WIN.....at this point I see those Generals who had charge saying "it can't be won" and I don't see anything coming out of the mouths of the powers that be saying that those people are wrong.....

So DEFINE WIN......do we leave after the idiots in their congress sign a Constitution? You think thats ever going to happen? When our Forefathers hammered out our Constitution I don't recvall them being "protected" by the most powerful Country in the World while multiple factions fought over THEIR SHARE of the power.....imagine if back then they would have had representatives of the Indian Nations, the Spanish population, the Mexicans, and the French, all who were living in the country and who all, at one time, had had "control of their part", that all had to "Agree" to a document......wouldn't have happened then and won't happen now......and if it did, and we then left, doe anyone really think it would stand?

Would WIN be when we defeat Terrorism? I don't believe ANYONE believes thats going to happen....stay in Iraq and "some" of the Terrorists stay there because thats the "easiest" place to kill us....leave "there" and they'll follow "wherever" we go......they already are.....

So, since I haven't heard Bush define what WIN, mush less how he would expect to achieve it, is, I'd be interested in what "winning" would be.....

To close I think that when Soldiers of the line are spending their third and fourth rotations under fire AFTER the stated purpose of the original deployment has been achieved, when they are dying at the hands of the very people they believe they are defending, when the general population shelters the enemy, when we have to pay "damages" when a "mistake" is made, when their spouses and children are on welfare at home because the salaries that the Government pays can't support them, when the health care system that will protect them when they return can't properly dischage taht duty, when "merc's" are being paid a quarter mill a year by our
Government to "help" WIN the war because there aren't enough Soldiers to do the job, its time to say....."we're outta here"......give the elected government a timetable, (THIS DATE), and an ULTIMATUM, (figure it out, and be advised if you FIU were coming back to kick YOUR ass), and then leave.....that's WINNING to me....play by OUR rules not there's.

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top