March 19 this past week marked the 10th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq originally named Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL) later changed to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Just to note some of the “Shock and Awe” for our $3 trillion to $5 trillion dollar investment: 4,489 dead U.S. soldiers, 32,220 U.S. wounded. This does not include dead or wounded U.S. civilians or private contractors nor the 300,000 plus brain injury and PTSD cases.
On the Iraqi side: 1.4 million dead, 4.2 million injured and 4.5 million refugees out of a population of 24 million people. Cancer and birth defects are skyrocketing due to our use of munitions made with the toxic component depleted uranium.
I often wondered over the past 10 years what the $10 billion per month we were borrowing from other countries such as China to execute a war of choice would do for us at home concerning infrastructure, schools and health care. Sadly we will never know.
The architects of this war still say it was worth every dollar and drop of blood to overthrow Saddam Hussein, who was of little threat to his neighbors, and no threat to the U.S. George W. Bush said Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and Dick Cheney says he would do it all over again. Of course, neither Bush nor Cheney ever has or ever will experience real war. It’s no wonder active duty soldiers are killing themselves at a rate of one per day and veterans are killing themselves at 20 per day according the the Department of Defense. Shock and Awe indeed.
Charlie Osburn
Mesa
Abstract01 posted at 8:34 pm on Fri, Mar 22, 2013.
Yah, count up those less than five thousand dead soldiers, and less than 50 thousand wounded, and throw in the civilian casualties. Compare that to the toll of life in World War I or World War II, or even the American Civil War.
Now set that against the death toll of Russians during Lenin's and Stalin's reign. And remember Mao Tse Tung in China, Idi Amin in Uganda and Pol Pot in Cambodia, along with many other dictators.
Where is the greater cost? Is it in preserving life, liberty and the right to vote, or does it come from allowing the unfit to be in control?
I'd rather spend the money, than sacrifice the lives.
Abstract01 posted at 8:41 pm on Fri, Mar 22, 2013.
The writer speaks as though post-traumatic stress disorder is unique to this generation. It is not. I remember a few veterans of World War II and of the Korean conflict who were "not quite right in the head". I am sure that there were many more.
It is a blessing that we have the time and funding to study these afflictions. It is great that we can identify the activities that generate such maladies.
It would be even better if our society would develop ways to "toughen up" it's citizens, so that we could endure these stresses, and yet be able to function normally for the balance of our lives.
Abstract01 posted at 8:43 pm on Fri, Mar 22, 2013.
I would be interested to read the source material for the accusation that the United States was using "dirty bombs".
Rich posted at 9:46 pm on Fri, Mar 22, 2013.
The universal soldier is the problem, he is the evil that makes greater evils possible.
valleynative posted at 8:33 am on Sat, Mar 23, 2013.
Those of us for whom the Vietnam war is more than a few pages in the history books have a hard time taking seriously any argument based on a few thousand dead volunteer soldiers. It just tells us that you have no concept of the scale of real wars.
Statistically, our soldiers are safer in Iraq than if they had spent the same time driving on U.S. freeways.
The invasion of Iraq prevented Saddam from continuing his plans to rebuild his supply of chemical weapons and even more powerful missiles. The U.S. was about to lose access to the bases from which we patrolled the no-fly zone and enforced the weapons embargo, so both Gore and Bush were aware that whoever was elected President was probably going to have to invade, since Clinton's hopes of assassinating Saddam had fallen through.
sockratties posted at 8:52 am on Sat, Mar 23, 2013.
Charlie... You're right about the cost and the needless losses.
The Iraqi war was really about Bush Jr. thinking daddy didn't finish the job after Saddam’s Kuwaiti invasion (Desert Storm) and wanting to make sure the Bush legacy was intact. Both the president and congress were duped by the WMD farce and that’s all Bush needed to justify what he wanted all along.
The biggest mistake was taking our eye off of the ball and letting Afghanistan grow into a 10 plus year war. Perhaps if we had stuck to the original plan it would all be over by now.
Accuracy posted at 8:56 am on Sat, Mar 23, 2013.
Charlie Osburn says: “The architects of this war still say it was worth every dollar and drop of blood to overthrow Saddam Hussein”
Ten years have passed since the start of the Iraq War. Was invading the Muslim nation a smart decision? Most Americans say it was a mistake to send U.S. troops into Iraq.
While now, Al Qaeda's attacks and deadly car bombings continue to rock Baghdad and western Iraq. Violence by Al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq is evidence that insurgents remain a serious threat to Iraqis security and long-term stability.
truth posted at 2:34 pm on Sat, Mar 23, 2013.
Charlie, I agree with what you have stated, you have to overlook the nut cases who post in the Vent. If you took all the far right nut cases you would not have the brain cells of a gnat. The national survey would agree 90% with what you said, VERY GOOD REPORT.
truth posted at 2:38 pm on Sat, Mar 23, 2013.
If Rand Paul: wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorm. Rand Paul's filibuster may be remembered as the moment the GOP started backing away from the “hair-trigger hawkishness and absolute deference to executive power “ that characterized the Bush years. Paul has started a new-entra-party debate-one that may finally drag the Republicans into “the post-post-9/11 era.” The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal
Bluepoet posted at 9:53 am on Sun, Mar 24, 2013.
Charlie,
The statistics you quote, though certainly grim enough, have a high probability of being much lower than the actual. Admittedly, I am basing this on no hard data, but I believe the government lies about casualty statistics, as part of the PR of conducting war ops...
What fuels this belief? As a teenager, I lived in Clark Air Base, Phillippines, during the height of the Vietnam War (1965-66). The base had the largest hospital in SE Asia, at the time. It was a huge base--15 miles, from the airfield to the main gate... I recall the bodies coming in, from Nam, on their way back home. There were so many that the hospital was overrun, the hangars overrun, and, at one point, they closed down the school, just for space to put the coffins! All the while, AFR (armed forces radio) had regular reports of "light casualties".
Nowadays, they don't even allow broadcasts of the caskets coming in...it's considered tasteless and even violating. But, mostly, it's to keep us all insulated from the "war of the voluntary".
Was it all worth it? I don't know, and there are probably few who really do know enough to make an informed opinion. All most of us have is impressions and notions of it all...what I do know is that there's a lot of brave men and women who will serve. It remains my hope that there's enough of them, at the higher ranks, calling the shots. It also remains my fear that altruism in war stopped, around 1945.
USMC69 posted at 2:20 pm on Wed, Mar 27, 2013.
Thank you all for commenting on my letter. While the number of U.S. casualties in Iraq are small compared to other conflicts/wars we have been in, my point is this was an unnecessary war sold to us by the Bush administration. There were many people who knew Iraq had no WMDs such as fomer marine and weapons inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter and some CIA anylists. Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, comander of U.S. forces in the middle east new Iraq was contained and was opposed to invading.I am a former marine 69-71 and yes, for me the Viet Nam war is "more than a few pages in the history books" and was at the White House on March 19, 2003 with 500 other veterans with a petition signed by over 3,000 veterans and active duty personel to try and stop the invasion. We were turned away at the door. I do believe in defending ourselves, but invading another country because, according to the Bush Doctrine, they might some day in the future attack us is insane. On the point by Abstract01 about dirty bombs, we use white phosphorous, cluster bombs which are banned by over 20 other countries and a new type of napalm. You can google depleted uranium and see it is used in munitions and equipment such as tanks to harden the steel and is very toxic. I am all in favor of going after those who attacked us on 9-11 but this diversion from that mission was and is still a waste.