Comments on: 100 billion we don’t have

By: TR

TR — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:14:25 +0000

Where’s Socrates when you need him?

By: Carl Nelson

Carl Nelson — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:48:37 +0000

Hello #3, are you just nitpicking for fun or do you have some responsible data as a basis for hinting that the DOD figures could be seriously inflated? It should be relatively easy to find peacetime death and injury rates that would have happened anyway and should be subtracted from casualty rates attributable to the specific war. What do you think the DOD standard is for counting an injury?

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 04:00:19 +0000

#1 use of casualty figures is disengenous at best. “Thirty thousand plus”. Please. So you are going to lump the guy who got his foot run over by a Humvee in the same group as someone killed in combat so the numbers look worse? Pretty transparent, and pretty lame.

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:07:29 +0000

So one wrong supports another?
Or if Bush can waste money, my guy can too?

You know I don’t support how we did Iraq or Afghanistan. And I won’t ask you how come you aren’t so eager to be “preventive” when it comes to our national security.

In any event you are comparing apples and oranges… this commitment is forever. Wars end eventually.

By: Carl Nelson

Carl Nelson — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:00:52 +0000

And the several hundred billions and thirty plus thousand Americans killed and wounded we spent letting loose chaos in Iraq was something we could well afford in a noble cause? “All tied to a fake crisis?”