Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Mark Penn Much Much worse than I thought says Ari Berman

Take it away Anne.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

No; I am willing to turn to Hillary Clinton in a moment, if only I find a sense of the need to leave Iraq completely and immediately; immediately now or when there is another president. With Clinton willing to sponsor a bill withdrawing the president's authority to wage war in Iraq, I am heartened.

Bill Clinton has also been speaking, though too mildly, against the occupation of Iraq, and Bill will always be Hillary's prime counselor.

I am willing to support any candidate who is firm on our leaving Iraq immediately and completely.

anne

Anonymous said...

What then has Iraq meant materially; directly and indirectly?

Notice that the direct material cost of the war in and occupation of Iraq was $564 billion through fiscal 2006, and will be $754 billion through fiscal 2007. We are now spending more than $15.8 billion a month on Iraq. However, this is nowhere close to the material cost of Iraq which by October 2006 had included more than 100,000 disability grants to returned soldiers. Traumatic brain injuries alone have just been found running at 17.8% of returned soldiers. We have a war and occupation whose material costs will fly above $2 trillion.

anne

Anonymous said...

As terrible as American casualties have been in the needless lunacy of occupied Iraq, so Iraqi casualties have been terrible. More than 4 years, we have listened to absurd claims about occupying Iraq for the sake of the Iraqis, we broke it we bought it sort of absurdity, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties later there is only reason to leave Iraq for our sake and for the sake of Iraqis. But, there is no sign of leaving and Republican presidential candidates wander about yowling about those who would have us "surrender."

anne

Anonymous said...

Though we are rightfully warned that the choice during a time of war is not guns and butter but lives and butter, nonetheless we are squandering more than $15.8 billion a month directly on occupying Iraq as well as squandering lives there and here by default.

Remember when I repeatedly complained about using $8 billion a month as the amount of spending on Iraq. Well, notice carefully that we have gone from $8 billion a month in fiscal 2005 to $15.8 billion in fiscal 2007.

Thinking of the direct material cost of Iraq, after repeating the drastic increase in costs these last 2 years, from $8 billion a month in 2005 to more than $15.8 billion a month in 2007, I realize how little I understand about what this means. Can we even conceive of the roar such an increase, almost a doubling of cost beyond real imagination in 2 years, would bring were we able to sanely consider what occupying Iraq has brought us and the Iraqis?

anne

Anonymous said...

Also, we now have a Congress that has voted for pay-as-you-go spending. So more spending on any program has to come from taxes or less spending elsewhere. That means $190 billion more spending on Iraq and $190 billion less spending elsewhere. Notice I am not beginning to count the fearsome additional spending needs simply for medical care for our soldiers. How cheap then is this war and occupation, anyway?

anne