500 Billion

The cost of the war in Iraq is about to eclipse the 500 billion dollar mark. But what does that mean? Who among us really understands those kinds of numbers? I know I don’t have a clue as to how a figure like that impacts my life. Unfortunately, for too many of us it is some incomprehensible number in a sea of numbers.

According to this administration the cost of this war would be in the 50 billion dollar range, with the majority of the cost being recovered from the Iraqis. Most economists considered this figure to be a ridiculous understatement of the true cost, but again in the run up to this war the first casualty has always been the truth. Just as they underestimated the cost of this war in lives, reconstruction, and political capital, they also miscalculated the cost in dollars.

It is a known fact that the majority of people cannot get a handle on a figure like 500 billion, it is beyond the realm of our comprehension. It is usually beyond us to make sense of such large numbers, unless we relate them to other things or other numbers. How do we know if 500 billion is a lot of money? It sounds like a lot of money. To help get a grip on this large amount I found an example that might help. A group has put together a shopping spree comparison to help us manage this figure. The example is based on a shopper spending 20 dollars a second for 24 hours every day until the money is gone. It would take 792 years for our busy shopper to exhaust the 500 billion. This is spending 20 dollars a second, every day, for 24 hours a day. Or if you would like to see what the running cost of the war is and what we could be spending the money on instead check out Cost Of The War.

With the President and the Congress haggling over another war spending bill, the question at some point has to be asked, how much is enough? How much more money and lives are we willing to sacrifice for this man’s foolish venture at greatness. With no end in sight and no plan to bring about an end, how can we continue in good conscience to support this effort in silence? If we continue to not speak out, we are ourselves complicit in the continuing calamity that is now Iraq. Is there anyone left who is foolish enough to believe that we can solve this with more money and lives? If there are any who continue to believe, then left them volunteer to carry out this surge strategy. Anyone can be brave with someone else’s life; it is a far different animal to be willing to risk your own life for what you claim to believe in.

So what has our 500 billion bought us? Is Iraq any safer? Are we any safer? Have we improved the lives of the ordinary Iraqi’s?

A recent report concerning the reconstruction of Iraq has found that seven of the eight so called successful projects have been abandoned or are in disrepair.[1] These projects were supposed to represent our successes. These are the successes that the media is not reporting according to the administration. Well, if this is success I can’t wait to see the failures.

Unfortunately, our 500 billion has purchased little in the way of success or stability. Ordinary Iraqis have received little or no benefit from it. Iraq is less safe than under Saddam. This administration has managed to dispose of a dictator and make life worse for the Iraqi people. This is money well spent. Instead of helping to decrease the terrorist threat, we have managed to increase the threat. Their daily lives have deteriorated into a struggle just to survive. Those who have the means have left Iraq, placing a brain drain on this country when they desperately need their brightest and their best. So, even the projects we do create do not have the technical personnel to maintain them. They are in desperate need of maintenance and support personnel. The country is being run by sectarian bureaucrats and religious zealots that are more concerned with clan loyalty than rebuilding the sectarian society we helped to destroy.

It is time to make some hard choices about Iraq and nobody seems to want to make them. It is always more politically expedient to stay the course, but we can no longer afford such cowardice. Shall we wait for 3,000 more Americans to die, 40,000 more Iraqis to die, and 500 billion dollars more to be spent before we find the courage to end this outrage. Who among us has the courage to step forward and acknowledge a 500 billion mistake? Ooooops my bad! Until then, we will continue to send more troops, kill more Iraqis and spend more money. It appears we have more money than wisdom.

---

[1] http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0502/p99s01-duts.html

Read more!

We Don’t Need No Stinkin Lawyers

In an effort to continue to circumvent due process, this administration wants to limit access to the detainees in Guantanamo and their attorneys, attorneys which by the way they didn’t want them to have in the first place.

The Justice Department has asked a federal court to impose these tighter restrictions on the attorneys. They argue that it is a breach in security to have them meeting so much with their clients and also to be able to view classified documents. These classified documents are the ones being using to prove the status of the detainees. This is eerily similar to the run up to the war strategy. The strategy where the administration would plant a story in the media and then quote the story later as proof of their quote’s authenticity, better known as a circular argument and propaganda.

Imagine being on trial for your life and the judge saying, “You are meeting too often with your lawyer and he cannot see the evidence against you.” When did America stop being America? Was it September 11, 2001? If it was, then all those people died in vain and we have made a mockery of their memorial. While I personally consider lawyers one step up from earthworm on the food chain, if I were fighting for my life in a court of law, I would probably have one. Are not the fundamental rights of being a human being reserved for those people in our control, but outside of our borders as well? One wise American said that there are certain rights that are inalienable, they belong to everyone. The true test of a democracy is not how it treats its allies, but how it treats its enemies. The world is watching us to see if those noble words we espouse real or just something we put on cereal boxes.

If these men are who we say they are, then won’t that come out in a trial with or without attorneys? Can the attorneys make evidence disappear? Either justice works or it doesn’t and if it doesn’t then lets dispense with the formalities and start executing these men now. That would be more humane than what they are receiving now.

Let’s be clear, this isn’t about lawyers or national security risks. This new strategy is about keeping dirty laundry in the hamper. This administration does not want its ugly secrets to become public and by keeping these attorneys at bay they can hope to continue their campaign of terror. Some of these attorneys have brought to light much of the information we have of the deplorable conditions found at Guantanamo, exposing this dark place to the light of morality. By doing so, they have now become “enablers of the terrorists” and therefore security risks. This argument has just about worn thin, anyone who does not fall in and goose step to the administration’s beat is at best naïve and at worse a terrorist sympathizer. The exercise of our democratic rights should not come with questions of our patriotism or our feelings about terrorists. Torture or terrorists should not be the framework of the argument. One should be able to disagree with one and not be accepting of the other. This is not the 3^rd grade playground; we are adults who have the capacity to see the world in more shades than these. So, according to the Bush administration we don’t need no stinkin lawyers!

Read more!

The Occupation Of America

America’s urban centers are under siege. They have been for a number of years. They are just as much under siege as any other occupied city in the world. Our cities are war zones complete with their own sectarian violence. There is another war we are losing, but this war no one talks about.

In 1971, a war was declared by then President Richard Nixon. The war was the “War on Drugs”. The goal of this war was “to interfere with the production and distribution of a substance to the extent that the cost to the end user exceeds the value of the product, resulting in a widespread discontinuation of use”. This sounds pretty straight forward and seems a worthy goal. In other words, we want to make using drugs so expensive that few if anyone will want to use them. Every President since Nixon has signed on to the theory that the “abuse of illicit substances is America’s public enemy number one.” We now even have a “Drug Czar” to prosecute this war.

When this war was declared I was in high school and at that time most drugs were either too difficult or too expensive to get save marijuana. The cost of an eighth of an ounce of cocaine (better known as an eight ball) was between $300-$350. Today after 36 years of the “war on drugs” that same eight ball is available on most corners in America for less than $100. Not only has the price gone down, but the purity has gone up. This price phenomenon is true for all the most prevalent drugs being used today, except of course those being sold to Medicaid. No one will admit it, but the war on drugs has had the reverse of its intended effect. So rather than lowering drug usage, it has in fact increased drug usage.

The cost of carrying on this war has been astronomical in terms of financial and human cost. The federal government estimated that the cost in the year 2005 alone was 12 billion dollars to wage this war. This does not include the cost to incarcerate the offenders (which averages about 1 million Americans a year), more than a quarter of whom are for simple marijuana possession at a cost of 30 billion dollars. It also does not include the cost of police protection (9.1 billion), the court costs (4.5 billion), and the cost of federal and state corrections (11 billion). For the year of 1995, the estimated cost was about 45 billion dollars for these other factors.

Then of course there is the human cost. The United States has a higher proportion of its citizens incarcerated than any other country in the world. Think about that for a minute, the country that is to represent freedom and democracy in the world has more people locked up than any other. The majority of whom are for drug arrests and the majority of them are people of color. There have been untold millions of families who have been torn apart or destroyed because of a simple drug possession charge. Many of those arrested are young men of color, who then become convicted felons which will greatly reduce any chance they may have for a productive life. Our current drug policy is creating a permanent underclass. To make matters worse these drug laws are not being written or prosecuted equally across racial lines.

In a war you must have an army to carry out the operations against the enemy. We have militarized our police forces. They no longer police our streets they are now like occupying armies complete with armored vehicles, helicopters, and assault weapons and tactics. As a result there is no longer policing of our neighborhoods; instead we have paramilitary operations aimed at the under-class of our society. We have, due to the feelings of alienation from being occupied and oppressed, people who no longer trust or appreciate those sworn to protect them. We now have young men killing indiscriminately not only one another, but anyone unfortunate enough to get caught in the crossfire. In an effort to get quick results we have targeted the symptom and not the problems for drug abuse.

Drug usage is a problem in human nature. People have always used drugs and always will; no government at any time or place has ever been able to control human nature. All we have to do is look at alcohol and tobacco consumption and how the government’s efforts to control them have worked. What is the answer to the drug problem? I don’t know, but I know if this were the war in Iraq we would be discussing a redeployment strategy.

Read more!

If Not Affirmative Action, Then What?

I am not nor have I ever been a proponent of free rides for anyone. It was taught me and I truly believe that if given a fair opportunity I can compete with anyone. The issue becomes "a fair opportunity". What constitutes a fair opportunity? This is the issue that has divided this country and will continue to do so until we reach a consensus of what a fair opportunity entails.

For example, it used to be fair for over 3oo years in this country for white males to be the only ones to fully experience the freedom that this country provided. They were the only ones who could own property, they were the only ones to vote, and they were the only ones to attend school. This arrangement was considered fair at the time. Any other race or gender was not considered worthy to partake of these privileges. So for 300 years, you have one group that has exclusive rights to all the economic, educational, and political resources available. This group prospers and generates opportunities for others in this group to do likewise. Now granted everyone in this group may not be personally involved in the subjugation of the other groups, but they are reaping the benefits of this subjugation. They have less competition for the available resources thereby increasing their chances of success. I do not want to delve into the emotionalism of this issue, but merely the factualism of it.

So now after these 300 years of complete monopoly, we want to say, "You know what, we were wrong, let's start all over with a clean slate." We will make the playing field level from now on. None of these other factors will have any influence on our decision making. You have been given inferior education, job training, and representation in the past, but today we are even. It is wrong to discriminate against anyone and we will no longer stand for it. We will now let you compete with us on an even plane. We won't hold your inferior schools, economic circumstances, or past discrimination against you, we just want to be fair today. Even though, for many years members of your group were indiscriminately subjected to this institutionalized racism that was supported by the majority of our citizens and those who did not support it still benefitted from this system, we want to be fair today. But today it is unfair to use race as a criteria even for making up for past injustices. We will just pretend those "little indiscretions of the past 300 years" didn't happen. Live and let live. Forgive and forget. If you work hard you can make up the difference in no time. The problem with trying to right past wrongs is that there is never anyone to take responsibility for them. Each generation points to some past generation as the culprit, but this isn't about blame. It is about how we as a society can move forward into the future with a system that will help to overcome this 300 year head start in a fair and equitable way. It's funny how we used the court system to make up for women's rights and there was no large scale outcry of reverse discrimination. Is this fair?

I don't have the answer. I am open to any suggestions. But until we begin to tackle this issue head on there can be no justice. I do not propose "free rides" or "lowering standards" as alternatives. Instead of lowering the standards for any group we should figure out a way to raise the standards for that group to fairly compete. This will require an investment in time and money on the one side and an investment in hard work and effort on the other side. There will be no system that everyone agrees with. Any system will hurt some group. But we should be able to come up with a system that hurts the fewest people while at the same time ensures the most success.

If not affirmative action, then what?

Read more!

Political Courage

I know to look at the headline is to see an incredible oxymoron. How can anyone put political and courage in the same sentence? I believe that the time has come where we must demand courage from our elected officials.

What is courage? I define courage as the following: courage is not, never being afraid, that is foolishness. Courage is even though I am terrified I am going to go on anyway, in spite of my fear. I am going to do this thing, because it is the right thing to do and damn the consequences. There are not many of us with that kind of courage, so it is not surprising that we are not seeing it from our elected officials. Remember, they are merely a reflection of us. However, having said that, it is precisely this type of courage that our troops require of us all at this moment. The time for moral victories and rhetoric has passed. Either we want to end this war or we don’t. We must be clear as a nation; do we think we can win this war? If the answer is no, then we must do what needs to be done regardless of the consequences. If we answer no, then we have a moral imperative to find the best and most humane way to end this. This is no longer about some political “pissing” contest or who is the most resolute in their convictions, it is about life and death.

It has become self-evident that we cannot expect this President or this administration to end this war on their own accord. It also appears that the Republicans have chosen to place party over country and that is a mistake that history will judge very harshly. How can we believe that the same people, who used criminal tactics to get us into this war, will now find the error of their ways and relent to the inevitable. It is not going to happen. We, the American people must and should make plain in no uncertain terms that we want this war to end. We must let this President and his cronies know that we have lost confidence in his leadership and in his word. Up until now there have been no consequences to this Presidents intransigence on this issue. It is now time to bring it to a head, it is time to have the debate we should have had 4 years ago. This debate will not take place unless our elected officials stand firm on the bill they have sent to the President. If he chooses to veto it, then we must continue to resend it until he gets the message. Now, here is where courage comes in. It will be easy to say at that point, “We did our part and he vetoed it” and then concede to the funding without any clear time table for action. We must give the Congress the will and the courage to stand strong in the face of their fear. They will not unless we stand with them. We must contact our lawmakers and let them know that they have our support in this fight. And we must contact those who are supporting this war and let them know that this is not the will of the people.

I have included the links to the Congress and Senate homepage. On these pages you will find links to email your congressman and senator. Let’s encourage them to stand strong on this issue and to not succumb to the bullying tactics that have become synonymous with this administration. The lives of our troops and the lives of the Iraqis are in our hands. When the vote is cast for truth, will you be there? When history finally closes this chapter will you be able to say you stood on the side of action? Or were you too busy watching American Idol to save our troops? The time is now to instead of supporting our troops, let’s begin to save some of them. And our brave service people count on you? Courage!

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Read more!

Mission Accomplished?

It was four years ago that President Bush landed on the aircraft carrier with the infamous “Mission Accomplished” banner and announced the end of major hostilities in Iraq. I remember the day exactly, I was over my folk’s house and we were discussing what the President had just done. I had hinted that it was for the upcoming election to be run as commercials with the President all decked out in his flight suit landing on the carrier. You know all the things he was suppose to do in the Guard and didn’t, but that is another story.

That was truly a Karl Rove moment. Everything appeared so rosy and bright for Iraq and for us. Unfortunately, it was exactly at the moment that we lost Iraq. It was at the height of their arrogance that the deal was sealed. Because they had not done their homework, which seems to be a recurring theme for the President, this administration believed and still does that liberation is about military force. Whoever has the most sophisticated weaponry and the most troops wins. Well, four years later we continue to pour in more sophisticated weaponry and more troops and we are no closer to accomplishing the mission.

Which leads me to a question that we should have asked four years ago, what was the mission? Was our mission to disarm Saddam of his “weapons of mass destruction”? Was our mission to enact regime change? Was our mission to liberate the Iraqi people? Was our mission to bring democracy to the Middle East? Was our mission to secure the rights to permanent military bases and oil concessions? What exactly was our mission Mr. President and what is our mission today?

Until we know what the mission is we cannot know if it has or will ever be accomplished. It appears right now that our main mission is to support our troops. Well, that to me is sort of like saying, “Do you support Iowa or Rhode Island?” The question or mission is not whether we support the troops; the question should be why our troops there are? By framing the question in patriotism this administration has framed the answer. If you want to control the answer you do it by the questions you allow to be asked.

If we really supported the troops we would want them to have a mission they can accomplish and a plan to get them home. At this time we have neither of those, but we support the troops. Because of the bullying tactics of this administration and the atmosphere of “McCarthyism” that they have created, they have in effect silenced all critics with the “unpatriotic or soft on terrorism” label. We, the people must rise above this demagoguery and foolish rhetoric and begin to hold this President accountable for this debacle. They have everyone afraid to admit that this mission is beyond our scope to repair. They say this is defeatist talk. They said the same things about Vietnam and all the rally behind the flag boys rhetoric did not change the circumstances on the ground. We are actually harming our troops and the Iraqi’s by prolonging this occupation. We cannot wait for this President to acknowledge he has made a mistake. This goes against everything he has shown us about his character. We have a better chance of pigs flying than for this President to admit he was wrong.

We are at a crossroads as a nation. We are at one of those pivotal moments in human history when we get to decide who we are as a nation and as a people. Do we believe in those principles we espouse? Continuing to support a failed policy based on lies is not patriotism, it is tyranny. Before we can teach others democracy maybe we should have a refresher course ourselves. We may not be able to save democracy in Iraq, but we can begin to save our democracy here in America. Let’s make that our mission for today.

Read more!

Welcome To Presidential Politics

Senator Barack Obama is getting his first real taste of the scrutiny that comes with seeking the most powerful job in the free world. The reporters are starting to investigate his relationships to any past and present backers. The party is just starting!

The Chicago Sun Times reports that a Mr. Antoin "Tony'' Rezko, a reputed “slum lord” is a political supporter and friend of Senator Obama. They state that Mr. Rezko was one of the senator’s first financial backers with a 2,000 donation in 1995. The criticism stems from a couple of real estate deals involving the senator and Mr. Rezko.

“Over the years, Rezko, Mahru, their wives and businesses have given more than $50,000 to Obama's campaign funds, records show. And Rezko has helped raise millions more.

Rezko was among the people Obama appointed to serve on his U.S. Senate campaign finance committee, the Sun-Times reported in 2003. The committee raised more than $14 million, according to Federal Election Commission records, helping send Obama to Washington in 2004.

As a U.S. senator, Obama grew closer to Rezko.

Two years ago, Obama bought a mansion on the South Side, in the Kenwood neighborhood, from a doctor. On the same day, Rezko's wife, Rita Rezko, bought the vacant lot next door from the same seller. The doctor had listed the properties for sale together. He sold the house to Obama for $300,000 below the asking price. The doctor got his asking price on the lot from Rezko's wife.

Last year, Rita Rezko sold a strip of that vacant lot to Obama for $104,500 -- a deal Obama later apologized for, acknowledging that people might think he got a favor from Rezko. Obama called the episode "boneheaded'' and a "mistake.''

At the time Obama bought that strip of land, it had been reported that Rezko was under federal investigation for influence-peddling involving the administration of Blagojevich, whose campaign also received Rezko's financial support.

Rezko has since been indicted for allegedly demanding kickbacks from companies seeking state business under Blagojevich. Rezko's trial has been postponed while investigators sort through his finances.”[1]

Whether these charges are true or how they will play out for the senator is up to the courts and the electorate, but it demonstrates that when you venture into presidential politics the scrutiny and the inspections get a lot more detailed. I don’t think anyone can prepare themselves for this type of public undressing. I wish the senator well and I hope he is prepared, because it is going to be a long 9 months until Iowa and the other candidates haven’t even begun to weigh in yet. Welcome to the big leagues senator!

---

[1] http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

Read more!