Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

War on Terror - Saving Lives?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • War on Terror - Saving Lives?

    Saving American lives is what the whole war on terror is about, right?

    Well if that were the true objective, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to tell you that our money would be better spent elsewhere (don't worry guys, theres no "variables" involved). I don't have any exact figures, but I'm pretty good at estimating things on the fly. You guys with more time can work out the details.

    Ok, so lets say 2500 people died in Sept. 11, and we have lost about 1000 soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thats 1500 net people dead. Assuming that we are now 100% effective at preventing another attack on the scale of Sept 11th, I'll say we've spent around $150 billion dollars, maybe more (homeland security, extra military expentitures). That comes down to a rate of $100 million dollars a person (did you have to pull out a calculator?).

    When you think of what that $150 billion could buy in terms of medical research, advances in auto safety, or alternative energy, you realize that our buck isn't going very far.

    What do you think?

  • #2
    A) Your math is off.
    B) If preventing any further American losses from terrorist attacks only cost 150 billion, it isn't possible to predict how many lives were actually saved from that expenditure.

    While I agree that the money spent invading Iraq(specifically), could have been better spent on any number of things, it's hard to say what amount of money would reasonably maximise the reduction of terrorism, and how that money should be spent.

    Comment


    • #3
      The more I see it, Iraq has been a mistake.

      We have played into the hands of Iran. They have achieved wahtever they wanted to do.

      1. Remove Saddam Hussein.
      2. Get Shias to flex their muscle as the majority. (Al Sadsack).
      3. Ensure turmoil in Iraq.
      4. Ensure a Shia govt (that is in the offing).
      5. Ensure US weak (Economy is in a spin and troops far too stretched)! And no light seen at the end of the tunnel! Even solid friends chary of the US (Blair refusing to come to the US to collect his Congressional Medal of Honour!).

      Flame me if you wish. But as an American supporter, I am totally anguished at the mess.

      And now those Iranians with the pinprick Saddam out of the way, have their Western borders safe and so they can concentrate all their attention and wealth to make nukes. A report says theya re three years to it! And there are no more troops to take them on and Afghanistan and Iraq remain unfinished business.


      "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

      I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

      HAKUNA MATATA

      Comment


      • #4
        Barrow, do you realize how unsafe we still are? Both of our borders are wide open, millions cross them unchecked every year ... including members of Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc. We still have poor security some research facilities, such as Plum Island, NY where we hold the only known samples of some diseases. We have over 10,000 Muslims in this country on expired visas, green cards, etc and anyone of them could be a terrorist. We have sleeper cells all over. And you want to spend money on healthcare and educaton while we are still wide open?

        Comment


        • #5
          Chris,

          I will apppreciate your reply to me queries.

          I am most purtubed at the way the whole nonsense if spilling over. It has to be stopped. How? I have no clue.

          I know you and I can do nothing, but I want to feel good.


          "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

          I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

          HAKUNA MATATA

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by barrowaj
            Saving American lives is what the whole war on terror is about, right?
            Nope, it's about defeating Islamic extremists, and a few others, that purposefully target civilians. It's about getting rid of the state sponsors of terror, and the removal of tyrants bent on spreading same.
            Originally posted by Ray
            Economy is in a spin
            What's wrong with the economy? Good (great?) growth rates last I checked, even those World Bank people were excited...
            No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
            I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
            even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
            He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

            Comment


            • #7
              9/11 masquerade

              In February 1933, after Hitler came to power, the Nazis burned down the Reichstag (Parliament) building and blamed it on the Communists, to justify abolition of civil liberties and the imposition of dictatorship. 9/11 was the American Reichstag Fire.
              Three years after the attacks on the twin towers, 9/11 comes to us as a reminder of one state's coercive power over the rest of the world. Those who have followed the issues and facts concerning 9/11 and the Bush administration's inexplicable cover-up; understand that this is not a topic of "conspiracy theory" but instead a true scandal of serious proportions. A scandal which, if aggressively pursued by the media, should have helped hamstring and sideline the Bush administration months ago; which would have made it politically impossible for it to push ahead with their war plans in the first place.
              Lt. Col. Steve Butler, vice chancellor for student affairs at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California - a US military facility that one or more of the hijackers reportedly attended during the 1990s - strongly believes that Bush knew about the impending attacks on America and did nothing because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed in the Oval Office by a conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.
              The 585 pages long 9/11 Commission Report was a futile effort at investigating facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The report in its preface states that the commission reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries. And what did they discover at the end of it all? They learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined, and lethal; that it rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievance; and that its hostility toward the US is limitless. And it makes no distinction between military and civilian targets. The Commission also learned that the institutions charged with protecting the US borders, civil aviation, and national security, did not understand how grave the threat could be, and did not adjust their policies, plans, and practices to deter or defeat it. It also discovered fault lines within the government - between foreign and domestic intelligence, and between and within agencies. Thus effectively laying the blame on lower-level agents and officials.
              Overall the Report ignores most of the real questions and spins the few answers it provides. It serves no purpose whatsoever. The report's omissions consistently avoid bodies of evidence pointing to a circle of complicity within the U.S. government and its covert agencies. What's most intriguing is, that the Commission says, it won't issue its report on how the Bush Administration used or misused that information; until after the election. Researchers and activists are now putting the case directly to the public.
              A poll commissioned by 9/11 Truth.org and Walden3.org, which American media is keeping under wraps, produced interesting results. It showed that 49 percent of New York City residents (and 41 percent in New York state overall) are no longer buying the official story of Sept. 11. In the city, more people than not believe that high officials consciously allowed the attacks to happen. 66 percent of NYC residents support a new criminal investigation or Congressional hearings on the still-unanswered questions.
              The truth lies before us while we examine and reexamine the glitches and stark evidence that states the obvious. We know that Bush could have assumed command immediately after hearing of the first attack; instead, 27 minutes went by while he sat in a schoolroom and then posed for photos. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, somewhere on the Pentagon premises, was strangely missing from action, uninvolved in defending the country until after the horrific events had unfolded. Even though the protocols were clear, NORAD could not reach Rumsfeld and did not scramble jets until long after the horrific mass-murder attacks were over. When Bush did emerge from the school, he claimed he could not reach Cheney or the White House by phone, whereas passengers using cell phones on the final doomed jet had no problems reaching their loved ones and emergency centers all around the country.
              We also know now that the WTC, which was believed to be a civilian target, also concealed a secret military one. Tower 7, and perhaps other buildings and basements as well, masked a CIA base. During the 1950s, it served as a base for spying on foreign delegations to the United Nations, but under Bill Clinton, it had illegally extended its activities to electronic espionage of Manhattan.
              The principal resources of the American intelligence apparatus had been transferred from anti-Soviet espionage to economic warfare. The CIA base in NY had become the most important center of economic intelligence in the world.
              And the attacks were not pre-empted and allowed to proceed.
              The powerful neo-cons conned the American public and the whole world to usurp the American state apparatus, to further their agenda of global domination.
              9/11 was indeed neo-cons' Reichstag fire.

              http://www.weeklyindependent.com/editorial.htm

              Published from Lahore, Pakistan


              "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

              I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

              HAKUNA MATATA

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ray
                9/11 masquerade

                In February 1933, after Hitler came to power, the Nazis burned down the Reichstag (Parliament) building and blamed it on the Communists, to justify abolition of civil liberties and the imposition of dictatorship. 9/11 was the American Reichstag Fire.
                Three years after the attacks on the twin towers, 9/11 comes to us as a reminder of one state's coercive power over the rest of the world. Those who have followed the issues and facts concerning 9/11 and the Bush administration's inexplicable cover-up; understand that this is not a topic of "conspiracy theory" but instead a true scandal of serious proportions. A scandal which, if aggressively pursued by the media, should have helped hamstring and sideline the Bush administration months ago; which would have made it politically impossible for it to push ahead with their war plans in the first place.
                Lt. Col. Steve Butler, vice chancellor for student affairs at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California - a US military facility that one or more of the hijackers reportedly attended during the 1990s - strongly believes that Bush knew about the impending attacks on America and did nothing because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere. He wasn't elected by the American people, but placed in the Oval Office by a conservative supreme court. The economy was sliding into the usual Republican pits and he needed something on which to hang his presidency.
                The 585 pages long 9/11 Commission Report was a futile effort at investigating facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The report in its preface states that the commission reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries. And what did they discover at the end of it all? They learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined, and lethal; that it rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievance; and that its hostility toward the US is limitless. And it makes no distinction between military and civilian targets. The Commission also learned that the institutions charged with protecting the US borders, civil aviation, and national security, did not understand how grave the threat could be, and did not adjust their policies, plans, and practices to deter or defeat it. It also discovered fault lines within the government - between foreign and domestic intelligence, and between and within agencies. Thus effectively laying the blame on lower-level agents and officials.
                Overall the Report ignores most of the real questions and spins the few answers it provides. It serves no purpose whatsoever. The report's omissions consistently avoid bodies of evidence pointing to a circle of complicity within the U.S. government and its covert agencies. What's most intriguing is, that the Commission says, it won't issue its report on how the Bush Administration used or misused that information; until after the election. Researchers and activists are now putting the case directly to the public.
                A poll commissioned by 9/11 Truth.org and Walden3.org, which American media is keeping under wraps, produced interesting results. It showed that 49 percent of New York City residents (and 41 percent in New York state overall) are no longer buying the official story of Sept. 11. In the city, more people than not believe that high officials consciously allowed the attacks to happen. 66 percent of NYC residents support a new criminal investigation or Congressional hearings on the still-unanswered questions.
                The truth lies before us while we examine and reexamine the glitches and stark evidence that states the obvious. We know that Bush could have assumed command immediately after hearing of the first attack; instead, 27 minutes went by while he sat in a schoolroom and then posed for photos. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, somewhere on the Pentagon premises, was strangely missing from action, uninvolved in defending the country until after the horrific events had unfolded. Even though the protocols were clear, NORAD could not reach Rumsfeld and did not scramble jets until long after the horrific mass-murder attacks were over. When Bush did emerge from the school, he claimed he could not reach Cheney or the White House by phone, whereas passengers using cell phones on the final doomed jet had no problems reaching their loved ones and emergency centers all around the country.
                We also know now that the WTC, which was believed to be a civilian target, also concealed a secret military one. Tower 7, and perhaps other buildings and basements as well, masked a CIA base. During the 1950s, it served as a base for spying on foreign delegations to the United Nations, but under Bill Clinton, it had illegally extended its activities to electronic espionage of Manhattan.
                The principal resources of the American intelligence apparatus had been transferred from anti-Soviet espionage to economic warfare. The CIA base in NY had become the most important center of economic intelligence in the world.
                And the attacks were not pre-empted and allowed to proceed.
                The powerful neo-cons conned the American public and the whole world to usurp the American state apparatus, to further their agenda of global domination.
                9/11 was indeed neo-cons' Reichstag fire.

                http://www.weeklyindependent.com/editorial.htm

                Published from Lahore, Pakistan

                CHALK ANOTHER ONE UP FOR FREEDOM OF THE PAKISTANI PRESS!

                EVEN LUNATICS CAN PRINT ANYTHING EXCERSING THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH!

                DAMN .... THIS IS THE PRICE YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR A FREE PRESS!

                Comment


                • #9
                  The purpose of any war is never to save lives. The easiest way to do that is for the US to elect a Taliban government and obey that twisted ideology fit for the goats to every edict.

                  The purpose of all wars is to find the enemy, to destroy the enemy. On that, there is no compromise because the enemy would most certainly destroy you if you let him.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Colonel,

                    That is the military aim.

                    The political aim is to ensure that killing the enemy ensures that others (civilians)can be safe and run their lives without interference.


                    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

                    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

                    HAKUNA MATATA

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ray
                      Colonel,

                      That is the military aim.

                      The political aim is to ensure that killing the enemy ensures that others (civilians)can be safe and run their lives without interference.
                      Sir,

                      That is only a post WWII interpretatation. Before then, the civies were out of luck.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Colonel,

                        You are being naughty. Unless of course I am what you say a 'dinosaur'.;)

                        Please clarify so that I can also see the newer meaning.

                        Do you really believe it is otherwise? If so, why?


                        "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

                        I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

                        HAKUNA MATATA

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Sir,

                          I was speaking in the historical context. Even the major portions of the Geneva Conventions dealing with PoW sick and wounded, and the treatment of civilians did not come into being until 12 Aug 1949. Thus, there were no laws concerning the treatment of civilians prior to that which was why the Nazis were charged with Crimes Against Humanity instead of War Crimes.

                          There is a whole list of treatment of hostile populace in wars that would be considered Crimes Against Humanity today. Kitchener's Concentration Camps of the Boer Civilians during the Boer War. The Native Americans (and Canadians) treatment by the White Man. The Zulu Wars. And while there was a hell of alot of soul searching for Hiroshima, there was less so for Nagasaki, and none for Dresden, Hamburg, and Tokyo fire bombings. Both Hitler and Stalin couldn't care less what happenned to the civilians.

                          As for my personal feelings. Civies at best are in the way and at worst, are hostile. Yugoslavia was a Civil War with the civies caught in the middle and hating each other. My own personal feelings, however, comes second to the GC and the RoEs that I was issued in which I am ordered to give every chance I can to the civies, even at the risk of my own people. This being said, I will protect those on my side of the line and enforce their protection. Those on the other side of the line would have to rely on God. When it comes to combat, I will do everything I can to get the civies out of the way. If I cannot then, they better keep their heads down because their protection is now secondary to me killing the enemy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Colonel,

                            I get the disconnect.

                            When I state that 'ensures that others (civilians)can be safe and run their lives without interference', I mean the civilians of the country that is waging the war.

                            Eg US civilians safe vs Iraq/ war on terror i.e. no more WTCs.


                            "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

                            I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

                            HAKUNA MATATA

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by barrowaj
                              Saving American lives is what the whole war on terror is about, right?

                              Well if that were the true objective, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to tell you that our money would be better spent elsewhere (don't worry guys, theres no "variables" involved).
                              Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out what a rocket surgeon is?

                              I don't have any exact figures, but I'm pretty good at estimating things on the fly. You guys with more time can work out the details.

                              Ok, so lets say 2500 people died in Sept. 11, and we have lost about 1000 soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thats 1500 net people dead.
                              huh?

                              Assuming that we are now 100% effective at preventing another attack on the scale of Sept 11th, I'll say we've spent around $150 billion dollars, maybe more (homeland security, extra military expentitures). That comes down to a rate of $100 million dollars a person (did you have to pull out a calculator?).
                              I dont think a calculator could help us understand how you came up with "net" 1500 dead.

                              When you think of what that $150 billion could buy in terms of medical research, advances in auto safety, or alternative energy, you realize that our buck isn't going very far.

                              What do you think?
                              I think your math, along with your logic, is way off.

                              1...what good is healthcare and safe cars when you're being blown to fucking hell by islamic extremists?

                              Thats one question you need to answer...besides all the others concerning your math and logic.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X