Showing posts with label cost of iraq war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cost of iraq war. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Misrule of Law

I can't think of anything dumber than the sentencing of Muntadhar al-Zeidi to three years in Iraq prison for throwing a shoe at President Bush during an unannounced visit to the country. Not that the punishment isn't justified - though the defense argues shoe-throwing is an exercise of free speech, I think it's fair to consider it an assault on a foreign leader. But that's not the point. This will only exacerbate al-Zeidi's role as a focal point for anti-occupation sentiment, and increase instability in Iraq. The court could have made its point while slapping him on the wrist and punishing him with the time he's already served.

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

At Last, Some Perspective

I was heartened to see this story from Reuters today, titled "FactBox: Military and Civilian Deaths in Iraq." It's a nice counterpoint to the constant news ticker with the number of US military deaths, creeping upward by a few bodies per day and now in the low 4,000s... if you add in deaths of coalition forces from other countries, the number jumps by a paltry few hundred.

Hard to swallow of course, if like me you're in a military family, but on the other hand those in uniform sign up for the posssibility of being killed, get paid for it, are legitimate targets, and are dying at lower rates than most wars in US history.

If you bar-graph this against the average of conservative estimates of civilian deaths so far (that is, deaths of innocent individuals who shouldn't be hit and didn't sign up for the risk), it looks something like this.


I'd really, really like to see more coverage of this discrepancy in the US media. Not sob stories of Iraqi families, but the sheer numbers, a regular day-by-day ticker. Could provide some ongoing perspective.

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Liberating Iraqi Women?

This sobering analysis came across my desk today from the Real News Network: they report women's human rights activists continue to be under attack by militias, suggesting that the insecurity in the country is not only sectarian in nature but also gendered. The brief concludes:

"As the ongoing insecurity and instability in Iraq enters its sixth year, the situation of women sees few signs of improving. For women to live with security, access to the same rights as men, and equal protection under the law, is going to take more than a new constitution, forced imposition of democracy, and a quota system in the parliament."
Indeed.

If you follow the link, you'll also find an illustrative video (sorry, couldn't embed here) published by Alive in Baghdad, an organization that provides media coverage of the everyday reality for Iraqi citizens and those PRTs working so hard to help them rebuild their lives.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Is we made America safer?

“Today, we are safer, but we are not yet safe.”

That was the quote from President Bush on the 5th anniversary of the Sept 11th attacks, in which 2973 Americans died… 11 days later, the death toll for American soldiers killed in combat due to the undeclared war on an idea that has existed for over 2 millenia crept over that mark.

Yet, even discounting the deaths of those centurions on the far edge of the Empire, how factual was the President’s statement?

America is not a safe place, but the real threats are far more insidious than any martyr-bound jihadist, and could have been largely eradicated over the course of the last five years for a fraction of the cost of the debacle in the Middle East.

If David Letterman had done a ‘top ten threats to American safety’ list in 2001, it would have read like this:

1. Heart Disease - 700,142
2. Cancer - 553,768
3. Stroke - 163,538
4. Respiratory Disease - 123,013
5. Accidents - 101,537
6. Diabetes - 71,372
7. Influenza and pneumonia - 62,034
8. Alzheimer's disease - 53,852
9. Nephritis, nephrosis - 39,480
10. Septicemia - 32,238

That’s right, terrorists weren’t a measurable threat to US safety in 2001. Didn’t make the top ten… didn’t make the top 15… In fact, you were more likely to drown while engaging in watersports than to become a victim of a terrorist attack.

If the Bush Administration had really sought to make America a safer place, here’s what they could have spent their 486 billion dollars on, and which civil liberties might have been better sacrificed to make America safe.

Money: The National Institute of Health has spent about 2 billion dollars on all medical research over the past 7 years; less than 0.4% what we’ve spent in Iraq. And while no American has died as a result of an Iraqi attack in the US during that period, about 7.2 million Americans have died just from heart disease, cancer, and stroke. How many of those deaths could have been prevented if we had even merely doubled our spending on research and education? The fact is that we could have increased our research spending by 10 times, spent an additional 8 billion dollars on accident prevention, and still had enough money to give a $1000.00 grant to every man, woman, and child in the United States – all 300 million of them.

Civil Liberties: We’ve done away with the right to a fair trial, habeas corpus, and privacy, none of which can be empirically linked to a decrease in American mortality. If government was really going to interfere for the benefit of the people, all it had to do was ban the sale and use of tobacco products (a causal factor in 435,000 deaths annually), ban the private ownership of firearms (28,000 fewer deaths per year) and require all obese people to undergo a strictly regimented routine of diet and exercise, administered by the National Guard. That would save an additional 494,921 lives each year, according to a study in 2000.

Safer today than on 12 Sept, 2001?

It’s safe to say you’re not, but it didn’t have to be that way.

 
"; urchinTracker();