The Most Expensive Arrest and Execution Ever--Worth It?

[chefmike]

The Most Expensive Arrest and Execution Ever--Worth It?
Mark Green

Reading of Saddam's execution tonight, I'm reminded of all those debates over consumer regulation I've had with smart conservatives -- most memorably Antonin Scalia several times in the '70s. Sure safer cars and cleaner air are good things, BUT AT WHAT COST? Because there's "no such thing as a free lunch," Green, where is your cost-benefit analysis?

So before Bush & Co. do their version of a Terrell Owens dance in the end zone, it would be good if they first did a cost-benefit analysis of the capture and execution of Saddam. Let's see: the BENEFIT: -- he's gone; the COST -- up to 600,000 dead Iraqis according to a careful Johns Hopkins study; 3000 dead Americans; 20,000+ maimed and wounded Americans; an out-of-pocket cost of $400 biliion, toward a likely total cost of ( counting debt service, disability care etc.) of $2 trillion over time; a war lasting longer than WWII -- and, oh yes, a rise in terrorism and terrorists as well as the plunge of popularity of the U.S. around the world, making it far harder to organize coalitions to fight such international scourges as terrorism, global warming, AIDS etc.

Other than George, Laura and Barney, is there anyone who really thinks that this cost-benefit ratio was worth it? Where can I read apologies from Wolfowitz, Feith, Kristol, Perle for willfully ignoring these monumental costs to our blood, treasure and name?

And this is no mere after-action report, with 20-20 hindsight. Folks like Zinni, Scowcroft and so many others chronicled in Tom Ricks's book Fiasco warned of such plausible costs but two consequential armchair warriors -- Bush and Cheney -- weren't counting. Any argument can sound convincing if you ignore the costs and exaggerate the benefits. And when Congress in a pre-war hearing asked about the costs of a first-ever American invasion and occupation of a Muslim country, Rumsfeld blithly said they were "unknowable" -- and the Congress, a pathetic West Wing of this White House, in effect said "ok."

In terms of lives lost, monies spent, good will squandered, terrorists multiplied, can readers please let me know if there's ever been a deliberate decision with a worse cost-benefit ratio in American history than the arrest and execution of Sadam Hussein? Perhaps experts at the American Enterprise Institute and Heritage Foundation, who specialize in demanding such calculations before government regulatory decisions are made, could now provide an answer to a question they apparently never asked before March 19, 2003.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-g...t_b_37441.html

[Kurdy M]

This the way to do this.
https://tips.fbi.gov/
Time and placem is here and then led the feds do their job, they will quickly find out who the person behind chefmike is.
Good riddens.

[BrendaQG]

Totally not worth it. Just pure unadluterated victors justice...He lost a war so now he is dead. Medieval style victors justice and noting more.

[White_Male_Canada]

The Most Expensive Arrest and Execution Ever--Worth It?
Mark Green



the COST -- up to 600,000 dead Iraqis according to a careful Johns Hopkins study; 3000 dead Americans; 20,000+ maimed and wounded Americans; an out-of-pocket cost of $400 biliion, toward a likely total cost of ( counting debt service, disability care etc.) of $2 trillion over time; a war lasting longer than WWII -- and, oh yes, a rise in terrorism and terrorists as well as the plunge of popularity of the U.S. around the world, making it far harder to organize coalitions to fight such international scourges as terrorism, global warming, AIDS etc.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-g...t_b_37441.html

More op-ed bullshit from the fluffington post.

The 600,000 dead number is pure bullshit propaganda that had been exposed as a lie long ago.

In 2005 numbers WWII cost 3.1 Trillion dollars (Harvard/Yale, includes not only the military cost but also such things as veterans' benefits and additional interest on the federal debt.) Iraq is pegged at about .5 trillion which is less than Korea. And Korea is not considered a victory.

Today's defense budget is about 4 percent of gross domestic product, the nation's output of goods and services. That compares with 6.2 percent in the 1980s, 9.4 percent in 1960 (Vietnam), 14.2 percent in 1953 (Korea), and 38 percent in 1944 (World War II).

3 Trillion dollars,was it worth it to get Hitler?

[chefmike]

This the way to do this.
https://tips.fbi.gov/
Time and placem is here and then led the feds do their job, they will quickly find out who the person behind chefmike is.
Good riddens.

LMFAO...

Thats right-Kurdy. had been banned under another moniker. I remember the same lingo and jobberish and crap.

http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...r=asc&start=30

[chefmike]

And Turdy aka Aeden aka pissboy-

I deleted your first PM without reading it, I'll probably just foward the next one to the mods(as well as post it here)...

Aeden was also known for sending childish, nasty PM's to people when his feelings were hurt. That is until the mods told him to cease, and as you know he(YOU) was banned not long after that. But first he(YOU) had an hilarious public meltdown, like the one that you're having now! :P