Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
Guess what, when all is said and done, that will be MUCH less than half of what the war will really cost.
What do you think is going to happen IF and when the soldiers come back? Do you think they are all going to just integrate back into society like nothing ever happened? That it will all be Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy?
There is an estimate that the cost of treating our returning vets from Iraq, for PTSD and similar mental disorders will be more than $600 Billion. Yep, more than the actual implementation of the war. Of course, that's just the FIRST layer of the cost. This estimate does not factor in the cost of consequences that branch off from the PTSD, etc., Many will become addicted to something (alcohol, drugs, etc.), there will be domestic abuse, there will be a whole host of issues associated with these guys and gals being in the middle of battle for years.
Okay, okay, we get it! What's the point?
I don't know about you but I don't remember, ever hearing our leaders in Congress and the Executive Branch talking about these kinds of costs. Fuck, not even the Democrats, the opposition, give this kind of thing any respectable or meaningful attention. We hear about the ramifications of this ill-conceived war in Iraq, and what it will do to foreign relations and how it's a strain on military and the resources that go to the military. Sure, they talk about wanting to bring the troops home, but then what?
If they ever summon up the spine to actually stand up to the Commander in Chief, and find a way to bring this Theatre of the Absurd, to a close, I hope they also manage to help these folks out when they do bring them home. Because, right now, it doesn't look so good.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
According to poverty.com, the cost of stopping all deaths from poverty-related hunger
and disease would cost only about $195 billion a year.
LOL PRIORITIES.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
Factor in the no-bid contracts and you can triple that number.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 05:25:39 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
According to poverty.com, the cost of stopping all deaths from poverty-related hunger
and disease would cost only about $195 billion a year.
LOL PRIORITIES.
We're already up to our arse in people. Feed two today, you feed 15 in 20 years. The math doesn't work in your favor.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 05:32:54 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 05:25:39 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
According to poverty.com, the cost of stopping all deaths from poverty-related hunger
and disease would cost only about $195 billion a year.
LOL PRIORITIES.
We're already up to our arse in people. Feed two today, you feed 15 in 20 years. The math doesn't work in your favor.
Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't. :)
But I'm just saying that on principle, there's a lot more that someone can do with 500 billion.
If we meat-sacks keep running around like we are, 15 more people won't matter when the shit hits the fan, anyway.
Although, some statistics show that when the mortality rate decreases, so does the birth rate.
I did say "some", of course.
Actually, the sure fire way to decrease the birth rate is to give everyone full bellies.
More assurances of family survival = less need to procreate like bunnies.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 06:19:52 PM
Actually, the sure fire way to decrease the birth rate is to give everyone full bellies.
More assurances of family survival = less need to procreate like bunnies.
If, that is, one also manages to reduce mortality from disease (vaccinations and clean water for this) and reduce the risk of getting shot or something. Otherwise, food security will backfire and the population will explode.
Quote from: Cainad on November 12, 2007, 06:40:48 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 06:19:52 PM
Actually, the sure fire way to decrease the birth rate is to give everyone full bellies.
More assurances of family survival = less need to procreate like bunnies.
If, that is, one also manages to reduce mortality from disease (vaccinations and clean water for this) and reduce the risk of getting shot or something. Otherwise, food security will backfire and the population will explode.
True, sanitation and security have to be addressed as well. But, if you feed them first, they will be more willing and able participants in the latter.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
Fucked if we do, fucked if we don't. :)
Not if you hate people. :digtbk:
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
But I'm just saying that on principle, there's a lot more that someone can do with 500 billion.
Yep. Secret bases under volcanoes. DO NEVER FUCKING TEST!
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
If we meat-sacks keep running around like we are, 15 more people won't matter when the shit hits the fan, anyway.
Um, 15/2, over 80% of the population. Call that 39 BILLION more people inside of 20 years.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
If we meat-sacks keep running around like we are, 15 more people won't matter when the shit hits the fan, anyway.
Um, 15/2, over 80% of the population. Call that 39 BILLION more people inside of 20 years.
And they won't speak English very well.
Quote from: Cainad on November 12, 2007, 07:02:09 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
If we meat-sacks keep running around like we are, 15 more people won't matter when the shit hits the fan, anyway.
Um, 15/2, over 80% of the population. Call that 39 BILLION more people inside of 20 years.
And they won't speak English very well.
Nor will they hold our values dear.
Can we bomb them?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 07:10:39 PM
Quote from: Cainad on November 12, 2007, 07:02:09 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
If we meat-sacks keep running around like we are, 15 more people won't matter when the shit hits the fan, anyway.
Um, 15/2, over 80% of the population. Call that 39 BILLION more people inside of 20 years.
And they won't speak English very well.
Nor will they hold our values dear.
We'll have to take advantage of the One Laptop Per Child, to ensure that the tradition of lulz et al isn't just a "white power" thing. Intertubez for
all more of humanity!
The Book of The SubGenius has multiple translations, right? Or will that have to wait until the "developing world" reaches the stage of Bureaucracy?
in the course of surfing idly yesterday i found something called 'what would $611 buy?' http://boston.com/news/nation/gallery/251007war_costs
the $611 billion cost of the war could have fed and educated the world's poor for seven years
At published rates for this year, $611 billion translates into almost 14 million free rides for a year at Harvard University.
Tuition and fees at the University of Massachusetts-Boston could be paid for over 53 million years.
With $611 billion, you could convert all cars in America to run on ethanol nine times over.
TheBudgetGraph.com estimates that converting the 136,568,083 registered cars in the United States to ethanol (conversion kits at $500) would cost $68.2 billion.
US drivers consume approximately 384.7 million gallons of gasoline a day. Retail prices averaged $3.00 a gallon in early November. Breaking it down, $611 billion could buy gasoline for everybody in the United States, for about 530 days.
ethanol is bad.
Quote from: wordweaver5 on November 13, 2007, 12:06:08 AM
With $611 billion, you could convert all cars in America to run on ethanol nine times over.
Why the fuck would I want to do that?
You could turn the whole of the great plains and midwest and any arable land you could find into ethanol production and you know what would likely happen?
You'd run out of water and all your soil would be in either one of two places: the Atlantic or the Pacific.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 12, 2007, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on November 12, 2007, 06:04:44 PM
But I'm just saying that on principle, there's a lot more that someone can do with 500 billion.
Yep. Secret bases under volcanoes. DO NEVER FUCKING TEST!
MOBILE AUTOMATON JESUS: Let nuclear fallout convert you!
:lulz:
Quote from: Buddhist_Monk_Wannabe on November 13, 2007, 04:38:55 AM
You could turn the whole of the great plains and midwest and any arable land you could find into ethanol production and you know what would likely happen?
You'd run out of water and all your soil would be in either one of two places: the Atlantic or the Pacific.
Plus you get more than a hundred gallons of high-alkaline water for every gallon of ethanol.
Not to mention you can't really grow enough corn. Besides, I need to eat. If I can't eat regular food, I'll just have to eat you bastards.
And you don't want that, do you?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
Guess what, when all is said and done, that will be MUCH less than half of what the war will really cost.
What do you think is going to happen IF and when the soldiers come back? Do you think they are all going to just integrate back into society like nothing ever happened? That it will all be Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy?
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
Quote from: Xooxe on November 13, 2007, 08:56:02 AM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 12, 2007, 05:09:01 PM
Do you know how much it has cost to implement the Iraq War? $500 Billion. Lotta money right? Yep.
Guess what, when all is said and done, that will be MUCH less than half of what the war will really cost.
What do you think is going to happen IF and when the soldiers come back? Do you think they are all going to just integrate back into society like nothing ever happened? That it will all be Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy?
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
:| :?
Quote from: Xooxe on November 13, 2007, 08:56:02 AM
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
Kill yourself.
Seriously.
Quote from: Random Probability on November 13, 2007, 05:52:58 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on November 13, 2007, 08:56:02 AM
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
Kill yourself.
Seriously.
Well, it is. Methinks if he'd switched the second and third sentences, it would be interpreted differently.
I have no idea what happened but I think I may need to call in an Orbital Bombardment.
Heh. No moral stance intended.
Shit costs money. If we spent all that money for the "noble causes" abroad everybody would complain about problems we need to take care of in America. If we took care of those problems people would complain about other shit that is "more" important. People are just bitches.
Quote from: Xooxe on November 13, 2007, 08:56:02 AM
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
You are a dumbass for more than the obvious reason in your post. People need shit just as much as other people produce shit. Thats what an economy is. People need shit, they buy things that other people make. If you dont make goods or offer services you are useless. Dead people cannot generate more money than a living person that could be put to work or provide entertainment. Or a wounded soldier can train other soldiers or some shit you are an ass.
Money is important, but why do you value it so much?
:lol: As I said, no moral connotations were inserted other than your own.
You're right though, about survivors being of use to society when they return. I was talking about medical costs.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on November 14, 2007, 05:00:19 PM
Shit costs money. If we spent all that money for the "noble causes" abroad everybody would complain about problems we need to take care of in America. If we took care of those problems people would complain about other shit that is "more" important. People are just bitches.
Quote from: Xooxe on November 13, 2007, 08:56:02 AM
The soldiers which have been coming back even since day one are incurring huge costs for medical treatment. As far as I know, the American military is preventing the death of it's soldiers more than ever before due to technological advances in body armour and on-the-field medical treatment such as new agents which can instantly clot blood, preventing many fatal wounds. It's much cheaper to bring someone back in a body-bag.
You are a dumbass for more than the obvious reason in your post. People need shit just as much as other people produce shit. Thats what an economy is. People need shit, they buy things that other people make. If you dont make goods or offer services you are useless. Dead people cannot generate more money than a living person that could be put to work or provide entertainment. Or a wounded soldier can train other soldiers or some shit you are an ass.
Money is important, but why do you value it so much?
A wounded soldier has his treatment covered by the military, and if he's lucky he also receives disability payments (assuming he's wounded beyond full recovery, which happens disturbingly often). You obviously don't understand how the military works; a front-line soldier does not stay on as a trainer for other soldiers, he just gets a medical discharge. Only high-ranking officers have a good chance of staying on the military payroll after they cease to be deployable. It's a
good thing that the military keeps wounded soldiers alive as much as possible, but it also means that war is more expensive than in the days when the medic's tent contained a couple of cots and a bone saw. Money matters because if our national debt gets too deep, the government may end up repudiating it. That would be a really bad thing.
Some nitwit(s) decided to try and enter Iraq on the cheap, and it's just cost us more in the long run. Same thing happens when you pay for a cheap-ass plumbing fix: you pay for the whole damn bathroom floor once it starts to rot.
It strikes me that the american approach to warfare was to plough so much cash into personnel and hardware that they had no money left to invest in tacticians.
I mean really - Iraq will take a huge number of centuries and billions of dollars in mechanical and flesh-based assets to resolve - it's a total no-brainer but somehow the great US strategic planners kinda completely dropped the ball on that one.
Either the companies who's profits rely on the supply of flesh and machines have way too much say in the decision making process or you people really are as fucking stupid as the rest of the world seems to think you are.
go figure
I'd tend to agree, as much as it is an American stereotype in the Arab world. The latest US counterinsurgency manual is laughable, its just trying to apply hold and clear (a strategy devised for rural insurgencies) to an urban setting. Which doesn't work. All it does is fuck with the normal economic workings of a city, which is exactly what the enemy wants.
Plus, war requires a set political objective. What's the political objective in Iraq? Make it no longer capable of posing a threat to US interests? Whoops, done that (could have done that without expending any military resources). Install a democratic government? Whoops, done that. Drive around aimlessly in circles until an insurgent finds a way around the radio-jamming frequency and explodes the IED into a vehicle? Done that (for the past 2 years). Consistently backstab each major faction in Iraq and undermine the central government by backing tribal militias in a short term attempt to stem casualty rates and claim the surge is working, whereas in fact all that's happening is a long term sapping of the Iraqi national government's authority which will inevitably cause Iraq, as a viable state, to collapse, creating a new Afghanistan? Well, that would be the current strategy.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Halliburton and Blackwater make a lot of money in this war? Classical win-win situation.
Quote from: Cainad on November 14, 2007, 05:19:40 PM
A wounded soldier has his treatment covered by the military, and if he's lucky he also receives disability payments (assuming he's wounded beyond full recovery, which happens disturbingly often). You obviously don't understand how the military works; a front-line soldier does not stay on as a trainer for other soldiers, he just gets a medical discharge. Only high-ranking officers have a good chance of staying on the military payroll after they cease to be deployable.
If your injury is that bad you can still be of use and be reassigned to a non-deployable unit. Not the majority of people get discharged. Most people get their MOS reassigned to some admin job or refuse to do that and just accept discharge orders and collect their disability. But then again what do i know? You pretty much have to lose a limb to become useless. You can receive disability for any chronic injury that has been documented in your medical record enough, each ailment is given a percentage value towards the total amount of disability you collect. psychiatric casualties are a different story though.
Quote from: stromcrow on November 14, 2007, 10:39:23 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Halliburton and Blackwater make a lot of money in this war? Classical win-win situation.
Blackwater should be the fuck out of iraq. They get in the way of the Marine Corps and Army, cause to many problems, are overpaid and undertrained.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on November 15, 2007, 09:04:57 PM
Quote from: stromcrow on November 14, 2007, 10:39:23 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Halliburton and Blackwater make a lot of money in this war? Classical win-win situation.
Blackwater should be the fuck out of iraq. They get in the way of the Marine Corps and Army, cause to many problems, are overpaid and undertrained.
let's not forget that they answer to no one and there seems to be no one legally responsible for disciplining them if stuff gets out of hand.
They can't be privately sued because they're part of the "total force"
and they can't be tried by the military because they're private contractors.
Mercenary free-for-all!
Wait, are you saying Blackwater is a militant discordian cabal that doesn't respect the state, ignores all rules and just spreads destructive chaos?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on November 15, 2007, 09:04:57 PM
Quote from: stromcrow on November 14, 2007, 10:39:23 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Halliburton and Blackwater make a lot of money in this war? Classical win-win situation.
Blackwater should be the fuck out of iraq. They get in the way of the Marine Corps and Army, cause to many problems, are overpaid and undertrained.
I personally don't care for them because they kill people.
But apparently that's war.
Merc's are the wave of the future. That's what happens when the bottom line becomes your guiding philosophy. They are cheaper than training and supporting more US troops, less politically dangerous than instituting a draft and, unlike mercenaries of the past, unlikely to switch to the other side for the promise of a better contract (which strictly speaking makes them auxilaries, and also loses them +50,000 cool points for the sheer possibility of it).
Also, aside their 'work' in Iraq, they do have a good track record of defending shit. Usually people whose own employees want to gut, or angry masses upset at a huge fucking oil refinery they get no benefits from, but you can't have everything. However, according to the statistics, their casualty rate is no better or worse than the US military, when it comes to civilian deaths.
Quote from: Cain on November 16, 2007, 05:40:39 AM
Merc's are the wave of the future. That's what happens when the bottom line becomes your guiding philosophy. They are cheaper than training and supporting more US troops, less politically dangerous than instituting a draft and, unlike mercenaries of the past, unlikely to switch to the other side for the promise of a better contract (which strictly speaking makes them auxilaries, and also loses them +50,000 cool points for the sheer possibility of it).
I do like the concept of mercenaries in iraq, but their employment should be limited to guerilla warfare and psyops. Remember the Americans that got hung on that bridge? Blackwater caused that. They made that city hostile towards us because they refused to listen to a General in the Marine Corps. He told them not to go into that area, but blackwater they think they know what the fuck is going on. The type of person in blackwater is either someone that couldnt make it in the infantry and want to be fuckin Ricky Recon, or (rarely) they do know whats up and are highly skilled and seek to profit big time as a Private contractor.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on November 19, 2007, 08:07:52 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 16, 2007, 05:40:39 AM
Merc's are the wave of the future. That's what happens when the bottom line becomes your guiding philosophy. They are cheaper than training and supporting more US troops, less politically dangerous than instituting a draft and, unlike mercenaries of the past, unlikely to switch to the other side for the promise of a better contract (which strictly speaking makes them auxilaries, and also loses them +50,000 cool points for the sheer possibility of it).
I do like the concept of mercenaries in iraq, but their employment should be limited to guerilla warfare and psyops. Remember the Americans that got hung on that bridge? Blackwater caused that. They made that city hostile towards us because they refused to listen to a General in the Marine Corps. He told them not to go into that area, but blackwater they think they know what the fuck is going on. The type of person in blackwater is either someone that couldnt make it in the infantry and want to be fuckin Ricky Recon, or (rarely) they do know whats up and are highly skilled and seek to profit big time as a Private contractor.
Another part of it is force retention, and this goes hand-in-hand with avoiding another draft. Not only is it cheaper to hire guns but the government is cashing in on the training they've already given these guys. They aren't just hiring shooters, though. Check out DoD job opportunities in Iraq. They want all MOS's and they're offering to pay at least two to three times what those same jobs would here in the states.
I'm pretty sure the masterminds behind Blackwater are good buddies with the Ranger cunts who took over when the Marines (sensibly) left Somalia. Now they get to play "Blackhawk Down" with a whole fucking country. It's just another case of people who know enough to be dangerous and are in a position to prove it.