Tuesday, March 01, 2005

What has cost 10 troop lives, 100 citizen lives and $1 billion? Answer: A lie.

A post on our favorite message board by lh beetle, reposted here because it is important for people to know this.


As we are approaching the second anniversary of the War on Iraq, this is only the current measurable status of each lie the Bush Administration told to America to justify the War. The War will cost Americans and the World much more. And this War has and will cost in ways we cannot measure yet.

I am performing this analysis on President’s Day, a day celebrating two Presidents that are known for their honesty, Washington and Lincoln. It dismays and disappoints me to no end that our current President and his Administration seem to take great cynical pride in misleading American Citizens. It is complete opposite of these two great Presidents’ legacies.

This is the method used to calculate the cost of each lie told by the Bush Administration. In the buildup of the Iraq Invasion, principles of the Administration made 161 misleading statements. The Special Investigations Division of the U.S. House of Representatives compiled a database of statements about Iraq made by President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary Don Rumsfeld, Secretary Colin Powell, and National Security Advisor Condi Rice. The misleading statements can be divided into four categories. The five officials made statements that claimed that Iraq posed an urgent threat; that exaggerated Iraq’s nuclear activities; that overstated Iraq’s chemical and biological weapon capabilities; and that misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al Taeda(1).

The database is summarized in the March 16, 2004, Iraq on the Record, The Bush Administration’s Public Statements on Iraq, United States House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Minority Staff, Special Investigations Division(1).

Based on information that has been exposed since the March 16, 2004, Iraq on the Record report, many if not all of these “misleading statements” were known to be basically lies when made. Only a lawyer, a politician or an apologist would think otherwise.

If these principles would have told the truth that Iraq did not pose an urgent threat; that Iraq nuclear activities were nil; that the chemical and biological weapons were thought to be mostly destroyed; and Iraq did not really have ties to al Qaeda, then we would not have invaded Iraq. There would have been no public support for the attack on Iraq(2,3,4,5,6).

Just imagine if the principles would have been honest about and promoted the work of the UN Inspectors. The Inspectors’ work proved to be successful. The Inspectors had requested more time, if given more time there would have been no war(7).

The Iraq lies are not the typical “white lies” that attempt to avoid a politician’s embarrassing personal behavior. Instead these lies have great impact. As of February 21, 2005, there has been documented or estimated:
1654 Military Fatalities (coalition forces)(8),
10740 Wounded in Action(8),
16,000-18,000 Iraqi Civilians reported killed by military intervention(9), and
$155 billion estimated currently spent on the War on Iraq by United States(10).

Therefore analyzing this information each lie cost:
10 Military lives,
67 Wounded in Action,
100 Iraqi civilians killed, and
$1 billion spent(11).

These are powerful lies.

Some of our fellow citizens seem to think it is okay to mislead people if the ends justify the means. I believe the morality of this war can be debated forever. But here is the best article I have read related to the morality (or lack thereof) of this war.
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040531&s=savoy
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040531&s=savoy

This analysis should be shared. So if you too are outraged by this information or this analysis, please forward it to everyone you know. It needs to be debated wether you agree or not.

One last question, what would have happened to you if you lied and it cost 10 lives and $1billion? Would you have been fired or jailed? Maybe both?

Sincerely,
An Honest American

Reference Web Sites and Footnote
1. http://democrats.reform.house.gov/IraqOnTh..._record_rep.pdf, http://democrats.reform.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/
2. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...,351165,00.html
3. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/09/08/ritter.iraq/
4. http://www.counterpunch.org/mcgovern06232003.html
5. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/...ain577975.shtml
6. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...2¬Found=true
7. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895882,00.html
8. http://icasualties.org/oif/
9. http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
10. http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar/index.html
11. For math ease I used an estimated $161 billion for the calculation. This is the estimated amount that will be spent by the Second Anniversary of the invasion, March 19, 2005. An estimated $6 billion above normal military budget is being spent each month on the War. This is a very conservative estimate.

Flash video of those who paid the ultimate sacrifice.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/fallen2.gif
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/fallen.gif

13 Comments:

At 3/01/2005 11:02 AM , Blogger Michael Moore-on said...

ALL liberal lies generated by ALL liberal rags and mouthpieces ALL conveniently arranged and packaged to support a narrow liberal view. Then again, what did I expect? Next...

 
At 3/01/2005 11:23 AM , Blogger KyndCulture said...

Moore-on, I see that your two remaining brain cells have moved to different time zones again.... yawn.

 
At 3/01/2005 11:49 AM , Blogger Dacktyl said...

Oh my God, this moron displays such a pathological need support his Führer that no truth can penetrate his sick mind. That's a good fascist.

Here's a good link for you moron:
http://www.thirdreich.net/Thought_They_Were_Free.html

 
At 3/01/2005 12:26 PM , Blogger Michael Moore-on said...

kynd, I took a vitamin today. dacktyl, one word...syntax.

 
At 3/02/2005 11:05 AM , Blogger Dr.K said...

When I count to three Moore-on, you will awaken and realize that just because an article is unflattering about Bush, it doesn't make it Liberal.
1

2

3

Wake up!!

 
At 3/02/2005 12:00 PM , Blogger Michael Moore-on said...

dr.k, I tried to wake up but your aptly named blog put me right back to sleep. ZZZzzzzzz

 
At 3/03/2005 12:00 AM , Blogger Foreverastudent said...

I've recently become ambivalent towards the war in Iraq. I'm a self described liberal and up until this point have fully been against the war.

I'd first like to say though that I agree wholeheartedly with your criticism of the administration's mendacity. The complete lack of and WMDs in Iraq makes a mockery of our government and our intelligence. Bush's team basically had most of the world fooled into thinking Hussein was halfway towards having a weapon.

Bush also duped is with regard to the ties between terrorist groups and Iraq. Anyone who has read the 9/11 commission report knows that there were no links between Al Qaeda and Hussein's government, despite Bush's assertion that you cannot distinguish between Saddam and Al Qaeda. I consider this offense much more egregious, since you can explain the lack of WMDs on bad intelligence, but the claim that Iraq had links with terrorist groups was an outright lie and Bush and his administration knew that.

With that said, I've come across what appears to be a little bit of hypocrisy on my part and on the part of many others who are against the war as well. I think it's fair to say that most of those who are against the war are on the left or at least lean towards the left.

But what kind of values do liberals have? We believe in equality, freedom, and liberty for everyone, that power shouldn't rest in the hands of the powerful and rich few. We are troubled when we hear about thousands of children dying in Africa each year, just as was are troubled about the safety of our senior citizens in our fight to save social security.

I say this because of our reaction to post-invasion Iraq. Our troops uncover mass graves, and yet we as liberals cry out "No WMDs!" so loud that we do not hear. Torture chambers are discovered, and we complain of the lack of any terrorist ties with the former regime. Iraqi citizens share their tales of horror about Saddam's government, then turn out in droves in the face of death threats to create a new, free Iraq. We as liberals only respond that the monetary costs of the war were too high to bare, and only give our tepid approval of the election.

I recently watched Hotel Rwanda, a fantastic and moving movie about one many who saved hundreds of people during the Rwandan genocide. Nearly a million people were slaughtered in that event because many Western powers including the United States and Europe refused to intervene.

Many who watch that movie say to themselves "never again". And yet here we are today at the tipping point in Iraq, in which we can establish a free and open government in Iraq where a brutal dictatorship existed before, and we talk about it as if it is some sort of atrocity.

It strikes me as very odd that the Republican Party is promoting freedom and equality for the people of Iraq, while the Democratic Party, which espouses those same values, blows off the Iraqi's plight.

I believe my stance has changed. I still stand very opposed to this administration's practices and handling of this war. But in the end, if the people of Iraq end up with a country where they can enjoy freedom and liberty as we do, I will have to say that we did a good thing.

 
At 3/03/2005 6:27 AM , Blogger beetle said...

Foreverastudent

I understand what you are saying. It would be great if Iraq was to become free democratic society, but do you really think that is the goal now or ever?

It is really changing the justification for the war to frame it in a way more acceptable to the American public.

Goals include:
build military bases;
cause instability so we can stay for a long time;
secure and privatize resources including oil;
open new markets that are dominated by western coporations.

The idealist optimistic part of me wants to go along with what you said, but what makes you think they are now telling the truth?
maybe you are just optimistic too.

 
At 3/03/2005 6:32 AM , Blogger Michael Moore-on said...

For once, just this once, I can almost sit across from a liberal, have a conversation and not puke in my Wheaties. If he's for real, and not some conservative holding himself out to be a liberal, then I agree with half his rant.

Throughout this blog, (and I admit, I've been around here awhile) the plight of the Iraqi people sans WMD's has never been discussed with much vigor. The atrocities levied against them buried for tastier arguments blinded by hate for a particular political view. The recent developments in Lebanon have gone unnoticed. The Iraqi and Afghanistan ELECTIONS summarily dismissed as shams. If you look at what good has come from this post 9/11 war, without ideological peepers on, then a free Iraq, Afghanistan, now possibly Lebanon HAS to top the list. Not to mention others (possibly seeing the writing on the wall) have agreed to start talking again. Israel and the PLO (if Syria can keep out of it) MAY actually agree on a cesae fire and something of a coexistence with each other.

So where am I going with all this? Political differences have their place, God knows I sometimes like it, People like foreverastudent (if he's for real) give me hope, not that we are particularly right (calm down Lib) but that there are rational people on both sides not totally clouded by party loyalty.

 
At 3/03/2005 8:00 AM , Blogger ProgressivePatriot said...

Yes forever Iraq will get the country they want but, not until the US terror machine leaves. Syria is soon to be invaded because, bushitler needs to contol it, in order, to give Israel a clear shot at Iran.
The US terrorism is far from over in the Midlle East but, the US is, however, covertly abandoning the idea of victory.

 
At 3/03/2005 11:26 AM , Blogger beetle said...

foreverstudent, I would try to answer some of the questions you posed but the best article relating to do the ends justify lying to go war is this one:
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040531&s=savoy
It analyzes the war point by point and well the war was immoral no matter how you frame it. In concept, Iraq is better without Saddam but geez at the costs paid by all the dead women and children killed by us? or could we have taken out Saddam without breaking the whole country?

 
At 3/03/2005 4:03 PM , Blogger halcyon67 said...

ALL liberal lies generated by ALL liberal rags and mouthpieces ALL conveniently arranged and packaged to support a narrow liberal view. Then again, what did I expect? Next...
^^Where are the following then Moron: WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, URANIUM ENRICHMENT TUBES, AL-AQEDA-SADDAM/IRAQ, SADDAM-9/11, 9/11-IRAQ, GOOD INTELLIGENCE, OSAMA BIN LADEN, AL-QAEDA-IRAQ LINKS? Huh? Or is that just a product of my left wing imagination? If anything the above are ignorant and baseless assumptions coated with rightwing lunacy.

 
At 3/04/2005 3:57 PM , Blogger Michael Moore-on said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home