jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (4 posts)

Why is it that we cannot have a civil discourse on the real cost of war like we

  1. Deidra26 profile image55
    Deidra26posted 8 years ago

    Why is it that we cannot have a civil discourse on the real cost of war like we do about health?

  2. LetusPonder profile image77
    LetusPonderposted 8 years ago

    When have we had a civil discourse on the cost of health?

    The problem with the cost of war is that we had pretty much EVERY congress-person vote FOR the war.  And then, once we got so very deeply entrenched, and once public sentiment went against the war, many of those same people changed their mind. 

    It's kind of like an idiot mob telling someone to break the window.  "Break it!  Go ahead, you've got to break it."  After the person breaks the window and old man Smithers comes out yelling and demanding payment, the mob not only runs away but also starts insulting the kid who threw the rock; "Why'd you break the window?  You shouldn't have done that!"

    It's a pretty smart (or cruel, depending on which side of the fence you're on) thing to do, actually.  How many voted FOR the war knowing full well that in a year or so people would hate the President so much that they'd win politically?  You know those in Congress aren't idiots.  You know this was a part of the conversation before they voted.  And isn't that sad that a war - A REAL WAR - was waged purely for political gain.

    And yes, the money spent on war could be spent on other things.  But one must also consider that the vast majority of the cost of the war is actually returning right back into the U.S. economy.  The cost is going towards not only the salaries, but also to all the tens and even hundreds of thousands of people who contributed to the various weapons, clothing, vehicles, accounting, and on and on and on.  Yes, a bomb is expensive, but to make one bomb requires an entire company of engineers, writers, factory workers, truck drivers, not to mention all those who support these people, from the bank tellers to where they eat and buy their groceries.

    I'd rather spend a billion dollars on increased teacher's salaries than one fighter plane, but like I pointed out, war is not a complete waste of money.  Unfortunately, we broke the window and now we have to either fix it or pay for it.

    If only our congress wasn't so caught up in the moment of revenge after 9/11, maybe they would've thought things through a little better instead of listening to the freaking polls.


  3. Deidra26 profile image55
    Deidra26posted 8 years ago

    @ LetudPonder:

    You are perhaps correct that we have never had a civil discourse on the cost of healthcare. However, if you have looked at the healthcare debate there has been so much back and forth about the cost over the next few years as if the cost of war is not important. It is also disturbing that a president often has to be engaged in some kind of war to prove how tough he is- i cannot understand why that should even be the measure of any presidency.

    I think the public is too often caught in the realm of ideaolgy, without enough focus on the impact of real decisions! I just wish people would wake up and stop listening to too much opinionated journalism and start to think for themselves. On that congress issue- i do not even want to start because the disgenuity is too much...

  4. Debra LeCompte profile image57
    Debra LeCompteposted 7 years ago

    Because if might affect the promotion possibilities of some officers and politicians, scare the day lights out of the American public to realize how at risk not only America, but the entire world is, and how necessary war is.  Further, it is going to cost not only the lives of our sons and daughters, but those of all the 44 Coalition Forces nations.