Well hello! Glad you've dropped by. Feel free to have a good read, but you should know that
I'm no longer writing on this blog. The new blog is over here: Pursuit of Redemption.

Tag: Iraq

Obama shouldn't have mentioned his bracelet

Posted by – 9/28/08

The mother of the fallen soldier asked him not to.

…she has turned down any subsequent interviews with the media because she just didn’t, she just didn’t want it to get turned into something that it wasn’t. She had told me that in an email that she had asked, actually asked Mr. Obama to not wear the bracelet anymore at any of his public appearances.”

And apparently Obama even minced her request to end the war:

“I didn’t get to say what I wanted to say. I just cried,” Tracy Jopek told the newspaper. “It wasn’t for anything but for him to know this is real, something he needed to know. . . I do believe (the war) needs to end, but I believe it needs to be done very carefully and very thoughtfully.”

To me, there is a clear difference between wanting the Senator to know the reality of war and putting in a personal request to end the war because it hurts too much. Either way, of course, I’d rather have a Commander in Chief that understands just how horrible and necessary war can be. The desire to pull out of Iraq because soldiers have died and are dying is simply ridiculous. Do we seriously give up when the scenario is anything other than no lives lost? How did we get to this idea that it isn’t our soldiers’ duty to protect and defend our country at any cost?

Let’s be straight on this: we ALL want the war to end. But I for one am not willing to tuck tail and run. And anything less than victory is defeat. That’s not hawkishness. That’s reality. It’s a concept with which Obama desperately needs to become familiar.

British forces held back?

Posted by – 8/5/08

Yikes. Maybe fewer American lives would be lost in Iraq if our allies weren’t also allies with the enemy.

Costs of Major US Wars

Posted by – 8/2/08

The Congressional Research Service, a non-partisan group, released a study recently detailing the costs of all major US wars in 2008 dollars. Surprisingly, Iraq isn’t first. Or second. It comes in third at $648 billion behind World War II and the Vietnam War. In fact, we’ve still got $3466 billion to go in Iraq to catch up to the cost of WWII! At the current rate, it’ll take another 4,813 10,152 days (almost 28 years) in Iraq to even match the costs of WWII.

I’m not saying it’s totally awesome how much we’re spending in Iraq, but studies like this do help put it into perspective. When the average person hears, “We’re spending over $720 $341.4 million a day in Iraq!” we’re shocked, but that’s because most of us think $500 is a lot. (And for a person, it is, but not for a government the size of the United States.) So $720 $341.4 sounds huge. This study really helps put war costs into perspective.

In terms of Gross Domestic Product, the Iraqi war is clearly not breaking us. It comes in at a quaint 1%, whereas WWII weighed in at 35.8%. In fact, there were only two major wars the US has been involved in that consumed less of a percentage of our GDP: the Persian Gulf War and the War in Afghanistan, both at 0.3% GDP.

Take a look, it’s interactive!

UPDATE: According to the National Priorities Project, the daily cost of the Iraqi war is $341.4 million, not $720 million. Heh, I guess that’s what quickly Googling something will get you.

Progress in Iraq

Posted by – 7/19/08

CNN: ‘Sunni Arab bloc rejoins Iraqi Cabinet

I suspect the progress is due to the proximity of The Great One, having just landed in Afghanistan.