The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the war in Iraq is currently costing Americans nine billion dollars a month on top of the thirteen billion dollars it costs to deploy our troops about a year and a half ago. On top of that, it is going to cost five to seven billion dollars just to come home. A lot of people all over the world say we have no right or reason to be in Iraq because we can’t link Saddam Hussein to nine-eleven and we haven’t found any weapons of mass destruction. The world is looking at us like we are the biggest and meanest bully of all! Is this really worth it?
Have we forgotten what Saddam Hussein has done to us? What he has done to his neighboring countries? What he has done to his own people? (The rape rooms, tortures, massacres, and massive shallow graves.)
Our media and the other medias around the globe are constantly telling us that we are not doing any good over there and that the people in Iraq don’t even want us there. I am so tired of the liberal news we are getting because it is only telling us one side of the story and that is even skewed! They refuse to tell us about anything positive going on over there.
Since we went into Iraq, we not only removed the murdering dictator and cohorts, we have also:
Increased school attendance as much as 80% from pre war levels, some of which are girls, who are not allowed to receive an education before.
The media claimed we bombed or sabotaged power plants, but refuses to tell us that Iraq now has more electrical power than it did before the war.
Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years.
Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations.
Over 1,500 schools have been renovated and rid of the weapons stored there so education can occur.
The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off-loaded from ships faster.
The country had its first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August.
Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq.
100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war.
Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place.
Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city.
Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets.
Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country.
Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers.
Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever.
Students are taught field sanitation and hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs.
An interim constitution has been signed
Saddam Hussein could have done all of these things and more, had he not been too busy building his palaces, murdering thousands of people, and communicating with leaders of Al-Qaeda. We are in Iraq for a reason and that reason is so that we can give Iraq back to the people and allow them to enjoy the economic prosperity that we enjoy here in the United States. If we have to fork out a few billion dollars causing us to pay more in taxes, I say it is well worth the money. We are not only helping those who are less fortunate than us, we are making the world a safer place for everyone and greatly reducing our chances of another attack on our homeland.
7 comments:
"and communicating with leaders of Al-Qaeda"
Government's propaganda does not have its place on an economic weblog.
An european reader.
Before even commenting on this post, let me tell you that there is an active blog community in Iraq, of both Iraqi citizens and U.S. soldiers. A good one to check out is Hammorabi, which links to many others. Perhaps we all ought to go and read about what Iraqi's say about the situation before passing judgement.
Now then. Hmmm. I'm inclined to agree that this doesn't belong in an economics class blog, but part of blogging is talking about the issues that people think are important (so I won't take off any points).
What is really going on in this post is a cost-benefit analysis. The costs are pretty well known, the benefits less so. But here is an alternative way of looking at it. There is a concept in risk analysis called statistical murder. It is the idea that a human life is worth about $10 million (that's a ballpark figure that is debatable, but let's run with it anyways), and if you are going to spend a certain amount to save lives that should be the figure you should use. So, if we are spending $9billion/per month, that is equivalent to $9,000million/per month. Dividing that by $10million per life, and we get a figure of 900 lives per month. So, the question is, the coalition efforts are costing 900 lives plus all the deaths on the ground each month. Would Hussein have killed more? There seems to be an awful lot of evidence that the answer is yes. This makes our intervention beneficial on cost-benefit grounds, without even considering all of the items listed in Micah's post.
As to the communication with Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorists, keep in mind that most of this information is coming from the intelligence services of other governments, and that they are not backing off of those allegations. Those countries trust their own intelligence services more than they trust the U.S. media or government officials.
Dr. Tufte, my remark was just about the precise sentence I quoted, not the whole post.
Of course, the Iraq issue has its place in this blog !
The european reader
«It may have not been Iraq directly that caused the attacks»
IT IS NOT Iraq, neither directly nor indirectly. It seems you have no knowledge of the ideology of the former Iraq's dictatorship. Is there a brainwashing process in the US ?
The european reader
I can assure Anonymous that there is no brainwashing process in the U.S.
If anything, the majority of what we hear through our media is very similar to the French/German view of the issues. I would even go so far as to say that what you hear in Europe about public perceptions in the U.S. probably overstates the anti-Bush/Iraq sentiment here.
One caveat to keep in mind that we are located in a conservative/Republican oriented state, so the students will reflect that.
So, where does this pro-Bush/Iraq sentiment come from? Hmmm. Are you Jeffersonian and regard the thinking of the public to be fundamentally smart (as in Surowiecki) or alternatively is the public collectively dumb (as in MacKay)? Personally, I think that Iraq is a polarizing issue, such that anyone's views about the situation there say more about how they view the world than about what the facts are on the ground.
"It is a shame that that Micahnay’s blog has become more of a political forum than an economics one"
When someone lies, it's not "political", but just a lie.
Spelling mistakes in Rolf Tiblin's and Kavindavis' comments.
Frankly .... I'm glad this post has quieted down a bit.
Post a Comment