Wait a minute. . . if we weren't spending with wanton abandon -- whether on the creative destruction of Iraq or the constructive re-creation of our troops -- who knows? The funds for a national health-care program might magically appear. No more casualties in Iraq, no more "sickos" at home.
Russ Wellen is the nuclear deproliferation editor for OpEdNews. He's also on the staffs of Freezerbox and Scholars & Rogues.
"It's hard to tell people not to smoke when you have a cigarette dangling from your mouth." -- Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
also Americans as people have a tendency to ' acknowledge the success of the crooks'. That is we all know that Bush & Co are crooks and they have their Iraq for looting. As they have it why bother making noises- everyone has something to loot, right?
Of course, there are young people dying there but it is their problem. Of course, Iraqi people die all the time but.. they die anyway(!). Of course... well, everyone is for himself and we all doubt that any money would be allocated for healthcare. In the Clinton times there was a suprlus but instead of spending money at home our ' cigar' president launched war in Jugoslavia. Nooo.. Americans know that here whoever has something- loots it. That simple.
Surely dumb and surely stupid but ALL people ( not just Americans) think that way.
by
Mark Sashine (53 articles, 19 quicklinks, 249 diaries, 3570 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 8:11:00 AM
kinda cures you of any illusions. Americans are not 'excessively worse' than anone else- it is just that they SAY they are much better than anyone else. Of course, no all of them say that but the loudest voices are heard the most.
by
Mark Sashine (53 articles, 19 quicklinks, 249 diaries, 3570 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 9:54:06 AM
I can't even beleive that some people are as ignorant as and would write that the best option is to let the soldiers die. If you had watched the entire program and knew anything or did an research about the CSHs you would know that they care for American soldiers, Iraqi citizen's and even insurgents. Whoever walks (or is carried) through their doors. They are there to save lives regardless of their political views or opinion on the war. At this point many of the hospitals see more Iraqi patients injured by Iraqis than they do American soldiers.
That is the purpose of a combat support hospital. It is not a testing ground for new medical techniques. Often they don't they need and exactly what they need and have to rig something up with what they have. I have no issue with you expressing your opinion of the war but don't use the combat support hospitals to make your point. You can not use the word enabling when lives are involved. It's not that cut and dry and I think that by doing so you just prove your ignorance and you take credibility away from the rest of your article.
by
Carrie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 9:51:00 AM
with the article and particulary I did not find any 'ignorance'. It was not an author who made financial statements but the 60 minutes and the people quoted. They just calmly stated the obvious since Ceasar- that the war does not know the limits. But we here are the taxpayers and we give that money. Thus as taxpayers we can and should wonder about.. cost, you know. If insurance companies can worry about how our health costs we can worry about who uses our money and how and why. If you are afraid of cynicism- please, relisten to Bush addresses from time to time. He uses much more callous language and he really does not care for anything.
And no onew wants the soldiers to die, especially those of us who want them back here, all alive and well.
by
Mark Sashine (53 articles, 19 quicklinks, 249 diaries, 3570 comments)
on Monday, July 9, 2007 at 10:03:28 AM