Cost of Iraq War

[scooterbug44]

I thought this Doonesbury cartoon had an interesting point:

http://www.msnbc.com/comics/daily.asp?sFile=db070513

In case I posted the link incorrectly, the gist of it is that for what we spend on the Iraq war in a DAY we could make microloans that would save 3 million from poverty.

It's a major oversimplification based on Muhammed Yunus's idea that by giving impoverished women loans/credit of as little as $100, they can become self sustaining entrepeneurs and lift their families out of poverty.

I know that I am very frustrated by the amount of money being spent/wasted in Iraq and wanted to start a discussion of approaching the situation from more of a humanitarian/relief direction as opposed to a solely military one.

What do you think of the idea that much of the violence is a result of frustration over living conditions, poverty, unemployment etc. and that it is hard to find support for an insurgency among people who are well fed and happy?

 

[6thGen]

I don?t believe that we should be going into countries to improve that country?s citizens? living conditions. I supported and continue to support the war because I believe it is a national security issue. I know many will post articles that show how we are less safe, terrorism has increased, etc. but the analyses are in a vacuum. No one can quantify the damage had this country chose to sit on its hands rather than strike. I don?t know that and neither do they. The US was attacked because we continued to show complacency on smaller attacks in the past and because we continue to prove that we don?t have the stomach for war. The cartoon is more silly than serious.

 

[TNJed]

Microloans at work and a way for us to put action in place of words.

http://www.kiva.org/

 

[6thGen]

Microloans at work and a way for us to put action in place of words.

http://www.kiva.org/

That is exactly the way it should be handled, rather than by the state. On the surface, great business idea.

 

[scooterbug44]

I don?t believe that we should be going into countries to improve that country?s citizens? living conditions. I supported and continue to support the war because I believe it is a national security issue. I know many will post articles that show how we are less safe, terrorism has increased, etc. but the analyses are in a vacuum. No one can quantify the damage had this country chose to sit on its hands rather than strike. I don?t know that and neither do they. The US was attacked because we continued to show complacency on smaller attacks in the past and because we continue to prove that we don?t have the stomach for war. The cartoon is more silly than serious.

Of course it's silly - that's why it's a cartoon!

The discussion I was trying to get going was whether or not a campaign aimed at improving living conditions would be more effective than our current one.

 

[GoodWitch58]

6th Gen:Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with our national security! I supported (and still support )the war to get bin Laden....but, the invasion and occupation of Iraq is insanity. How many more people have to die before someone in our government wakes up and makes a policy change!

I had the pleasure of working with Prof. Yunus and his Microlending Program, and it is life changing. While I don't necessarily believe goverenments should be the only ones supporting such a venture, I agree that the money we've spent on the Iraq invasion would have been better spent in this way, or in almost any other way.

And before you accuse me of being against national security, my father severed with George Patton in WWII, my son's father served during the Vietnam war, and my son served during Enduring Freedom in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Those who are in the military or who have served know better than most that war seldom solves anything.

 

[6thGen]

I'm bailing on this if we can't have a serious discussion. Iraq sponsored and funded terrorism. To say that that fact had "nothing to do with national security" is inane. If you want to debate better spending, fine, but don't start off with something ridiculously wrong.

 

[Cheering472]

Please let's not forget. Iraq did not attack us.

 

[scooterbug44]

Regardless of the hows and whys we are currently involved in a war.

You can argue about the causes all you want (if so, please start another thread) but at the end of the day, we'll still be over there and will have spent hundred of millions of dollars more.

 

[6thGen]

Please let's not forget. Iraq did not attack us.

For crying out loud- here's a quote from Andrew McCarthy, the U.S. attorney who led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others for the first WTC attack.

"If you want to say we shouldn?t have gone to Iraq, and should have anticipated the present chaos there, fair enough. But at least have the honesty to say you?d prefer the alternative: A Saddam Hussein, emboldened from having faced down the United States and its sanctions, loaded with money, arming with WMDs, and coddling jihadists."

From an article on Tenet.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2FiNWI4MTYyMjYzNzcxYjA0MzA0OGVhZWFhN2ZiNjM=