January 16, 2006
As Sir George pointed out, for the projections of cost to be accurate, we would have to spend approximately $2 BILLION a year per (current number) wounded veteran for the next 35 years. I know that health care is expensive, (boy, don't I know it after undergoing a sextuple bypass!) but I would think that a $2 million per vet per year figure would be an unreasonably high estimate, much less a $2 billion figure.
They also cite a "slowing of the US economy" WHAT slowing? Last month all the leading economic indicators showed a rise in all areas...
They say that "the rise in oil prices is directly attributal to the war"....Sir George points out that the difference in production in Iraq was only 180,000 barrels lower than this same time last year; which on the world market isn't even a drop in the bucket. Of course, these are economists, so they don't have to provide evidence of their contentions, all the rest of us should just assume that it's gospel truth, working arcane manipulations of numbers that turn out results of past figures into something 71 times greater.
They furthur show that they don't have any conception of what they are talking about when they accuse the US of using depleted uranium bombs in Iraq...seems that they know of a sooper sekrit ordnance™ that the soldiers that use it don't. There is NO SUCH THING as a "depleted uranium bomb".
Furthur, the effects that they ascribe to DU have been shown not to exist in study after study. But, as in the case of all those afflicted with BDS, facts have little to do with their rhetoric. It takes roughly 3 tons of DU per acre to raise the normal background radiation on a given area by .002%. it would take roughly 150,000 rounds of DU PER acre to reach that level...even a raging moonbat should see the absurdity of the possibility of that.
In fact, DU is THREE times less radioactive in the U-235 ( the dangerous fraction) than occurs in NATURAL Uranium that is present in most soils. DU is used in place of lead as shielding in some Hospital x-ray facilities because it's density per ounce allows for thinner shields and it's ability to STOP radiation from passing through it. See large numbers of techs coming down with radiation poisoning?
It's used in the armor plating of some tanks and the ballast weights in some fighter aircraft...see thousands of soldiers and pilots coming down with radiation poisoning? Hundreds? ONE?
Radioactivity is the Boogyman of the uninformed...tell someone that something is "radioactive" and they flee the spot shrieking in terror. It's taylor made for the hysterical meme crowd, since so few people are really informed about it.
Yes the Iraq war IS a costly endeavor, ALL war is costly; both in terms of lives and treasure, but the cost in not seeing it through to the end would be much higher, and asertions such as those made by the authors of the article only serves to muddy the water to the greater detriment of us all.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
02:34 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 544 words, total size 3 kb.
January 13, 2006
But DOES he really deserve that gravitas? Marc Morano and Randy Hall seem to think they have found evidence that Murtha is more like another Democratic "war hero", and doesn't deserve the medals that he received.
Mr. Murtha, unlike the other poseur, DID volunteer for service in Viet Nam, and he deserves recognition for that, but if it can be proven that he doesn't deserve the extra recognition for service that those medals represent, he shows that he too, was thinking of a future political career when he gamed the system to get them...but at least he didn't use them to avoid furthur military service.
Are the charges legitimate? I can't say, there isn't enough information as yet to be certain, but one thing that does lend credence to the charges is Mr. Murtha's refusal to release his military records that could answer the question one way or another to both sides satisfaction. What do you have to hide Mr. Murtha?
Release your records and prove the other side wrong, and you increase your standing as a critic of the war.
I do respect Mr. Murtha's service, but his current statments belie everything that that service stood for, and the fact he won't settle this question as easily as he could only further lessens the respect for that service that he should be accrued. Prior service only extends so far, present actions can eiter enhance that respect, or destroy it. For myself, I don't care whether the charges are true or not; Mr. Murtha's statements destroyed any respect that I felt due him.
He has let partisian politics taint what was a good record.
"Once a Marine;ALWAYS a Marine" is the Corps' (unofficial) proud credo, but I think they would like to make an exception in Rep. Murtha's case.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
09:51 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 2 kb.
January 12, 2006
Close your eyes and make this image: It's blazing summer heat in Ar Ramadi, and the Marines have just finished an important anti-insurgent operation. A CNN reporter is "embedded", and has been covering the action, and his cameraman has just gotten a video of a Marine sniper making a kill with his M-24 sniper rifle.
The CNN reporter waits until the Marine and his spotter have stood down, and he goes up to the sniper and sticks the microphone in the sniper's grimy face. "What do you feel when you kill an enemy freedom fighter like that?" the reporter asks the Marine.
The Marine squints some dust from his eyes, looks the reporter up and down, and says, "Recoil, sir."
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
12:29 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.
January 08, 2006
The look on Murthas face says it all.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
04:14 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.
January 06, 2006
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
04:51 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.
January 02, 2006
WW1 had Sgt York, WW2: Audie Murphy, Viet Nam:Carlos Hathcock.
Now Iraq has Sgt Gilliland. One man with a rifle, and the skill to use it effectively, CAN make a difference.
Operational security (and I'm SURE personal preference) aside, we need to know about heroes like Sg. Gilliland. The MSM talks "quagmire" and without anything other than causelty statistics and insurgent Islamofacist attacks being reported, it's hard to keep the morale here at home up. It's an unfortunate fact of life that we need our heroes. I'm sure that Sgt. Gililand considers himself anything BUT a hero...probably more along the lines of a hired gun, in the service of his country, yes; but nothing more than a hired killer. But he IS a hero in that his particular skill saves far more lives than he takes.
I hope he takes comfort in that fact in the years to come when the inevitable pangs of conscience crop up. The snipers job is a particularly callous one. You can respect the enemy, but you can't give him the chance to "fight fair"; you hunt him, find him, and kill him as expeditiously as possible. No romance, no honor, just murder; but murder in the cause of a higher calling, saving lives.
Lives of your fellow servicemen and civilians.
Posted by: Delftsman3 at
03:46 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.
47 queries taking 0.0459 seconds, 134 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.