Dick Smothers: "Our government is asking us, as citizens, to refrain from traveling to foreign lands."
Tommy Smothers: (turning to face the camera) "OK, all you guys in Vietnam, come on home!"
The Smothers Brothers, circa 1968
A few years ago, I was talking with a co-worker about the Iraq War, and I compared it to the Vietnam War.
I grew up during the Vietnam War, and, while I didn't understand everything that was happening at the time, I understood enough. I saw the nightly news reports from Vietnam and the weekly casualty reports, and I saw the accounts of the protests that took place all across America. My father was a college professor, and there were certainly many demonstrations against the war on the campus where he taught.
My co-worker was a supporter of the Bush administration, and I'm not really sure what he thought of my comments about the similarities I saw between those two conflicts. But another co-worker was sitting a few feet away, and I saw her nodding in agreement when I said that I felt America had been drawn into something that was likely to get worse.
I was reminded of this conversation yesterday. I happened to be listening to my radio, and someone called in to a conservative talk show host. The caller was complaining about how billions of dollars were being spent on Iraq yet so many lawmakers were digging in their heels when it came to helping people here at home. And, for that matter, the caller said, the government wasn't providing enough help for Iraq War veterans when they finally came home — many of whom have been maimed in service to their country.
Perhaps a large part of the public's skepticism stems from the fact that the reasons for the war keep changing. The Associated Press reports that 4,245 Americans have been killed in Iraq — but the first casualty of a war is always the truth.
When American troops invaded Iraq, the justification was the presumed existence of weapons of mass destruction in that country. It didn't take long for Saddam Hussein to be overthrown, but, during the lengthy occupation of Iraq, no evidence of these weapons has been found.
Since the original reason for the war was discredited, the Bush administration had to provide other reasons so the public would not believe it had been misled. At various times in the last six years, Americans have been told that Iraq was involved in the September 11 attacks (which has never been proven), that the war was intended to end human rights abuses (which never explained why torture was used at places like Abu Ghraib prison) and, ultimately, that the war was intended to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq (whether it has done so is a matter of debate).
The Center for Public Integrity reported last month that "President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials ... made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."
Many people believe the war was started primarily to secure Iraq's rich oil reserves for the West.
If the true purpose for the war is unclear, the high cost is not, although there is some misunderstanding of the amount.
The caller I heard on the radio yesterday claimed that the cost was $900 billion — which would exceed the amount of the economic stimulus package that was recently signed into law. But that figure is incorrect, according to the tabulation by the National Priorities Project. According to the running total at the NPP website, the cost of the Iraq War — as of today — is not quite $600 billion, although it is close.
But one of the interesting things one can do at the website is break the figure down. What else could be done with the money that has been spent?
I did a quick check to see what the financial trade-off is for taxpayers in the town where I went to college — Fayetteville, Ark. Fayetteville has a population of 72,208, which is probably double what it was when I went to school there 30 years ago.
"Taxpayers in Fayetteville, Arkansas will pay $130 million for total Iraq war spending approved to date," the site reported.
For that money, a full year of health care could be provided for 85,938 people or renewable electricity could be provided for 108,591 homes. The latter would be especially important these days, since a severe ice storm this winter disrupted electricity in many north Arkansas communities.
Fayetteville is the home of the University of Arkansas, so education was an important part of the community when I was in school there (and I presume it still is). That $130 million could have paid the salaries of 2,545 music and arts teachers or funded college scholarships for 22,376 students (which exceeds the university's total enrollment).
Nearly 22,000 spots in Head Start could have been paid for, or the annual salaries of 2,720 elementary school teachers could have been paid.
It's a matter of speculation, I suppose, how much of a role the spending on the war has played in the current economic calamity. But, without the war gobbling up $600 billion and counting, how bad do you suppose things would be today?
No comments:
Post a Comment