Wednesday, February 13, 2008

oh, and while i'm at it

let's talk about a very interesting thing that barack obaby said recently: he was speculating about where we'd be if we'd taken the two trillion dollars that this idiotic war might ultimately end up costing (i'm not sure exactly where he got that figure but hey, let's go with it) and applied it to all the domestic problems we're facing here at home--and he concluded that for that kinda coin we could fix every highway and bridge in the country, update every school, secure our borders, ports, airports and chemical plants against terrorist attacks and i don't remember what all else.

that got me to thinking, and after pondering for awhile the magnitude of the squandered opportunities of which the good senator spoke, i decided to do a little rough math, as follows:

$2,000,000,000,000 (cost of war) / 3,000,000,000 (americans) = $6,666.67

that's right, folks--if you wanna operate under the assumption that we as americans are individually and collectively responsible for the debts run up by our leaders on our behalf, then if the bill for this sorry war became due and payable tomorrow (a scenario not as far-fetched as you might think, btw), each and every citizen of this country would effectively be on the hook for an amount somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 fucking grand.

now, i've long maintained that if we'd had to conduct this war on a pay-as-you-go basis (or for that matter even had to experience the level of sacrifice endured by americans at home during the second world war), this war would've been a non-starter--and the neocons knew this as well. so they cleverly structured its financing in such a way that payment wouldn't come due for years after they themselves were long gone--i mean, it's easy to generate support for a war among the faithful if it's seemingly not costing 'em anything, right?

the problem is, that's not only an illusion, it's financial malfeasance verging on treason; the bush administration has sold our future down the river for nothing--hell, worse than nothing.

so the next time you come across a war supporter, forget all the usual (i.e., rational) arguments to which the kool-aid drinkers seem oblivious--instead, do the math for them and ask them if they would still feel the same patriotic fervor for "operation iraqi freedom" if they had to cough up their (and their spouse's and kids') share of its cost today.

and then laugh in their face when they lie.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I was against the war to begin with when it first began . I even debated in my high school class against it . I wanted to spend the money on domestic security and building a wall that would keep the illegals (and , terrorists) out .

I wouldn't mind carpet bombing Iraq every now and then to take out terrorist cells . I don't mind so much working on Afghanistan , that had to be done because the Taliban were OBVIOUSLY in league with the whole 9/11 thing . But Iraq is a quagmire . I always thought so and I still think so .

mkf said...

yeah, i never understood it either, bb--but me, i wasn't even for the war in afghanistan. i mean, as far as going in and taking out the taliban and reserving the right to go in for the same reason in the future should the need arise--yeah, i was all for that. but settle in and get involved in nation-building? please--if the fucking russians couldn't impose order on that region, what makes us think we could possibly do so?