Do you agree that every cent spent on the Iraq occupation could save lives here at home?

Question

It was just announced that the government wants to cut backk Tri-care. That is the medical treatment for military that are retired because of health or age as well as war wounds.

I did not start out to word this question in a way that it could be read in several ways and answered depending on the answerers zeal for a political parties line of logic, but it appears to have had that effect.

Answer 1

Definately. Not just on healthcare, but on education and to enforce bridges and help rebuild New Orleans. Too much time, money and lives have been wasted in Iraq, when there's a big list of domestic issues that need to be taken care of.

Answer 2

Of course it would have but it wouldn't have anyway. It wouldn't have spent it where it should have even if it was at home. As with any war, they have a blank check signed by us the american public. We go into wars on the cries of injustice, opression or what have you....as the war goes and the people become disillusioned or want out then they play the guilt card. Then riding on the backs of our wonderful soldiers we are looped into financing more and more of it because we beleive the idea that if we don't then our soldiers will suffer. And by that time perhaps they will. So the ones who have agendas that include war, win. If there was no war then they wouldn"t let loose of the money anyway for programs like you are talking about. If they do, it wouldn"t be what should be spent. The percentage would probably be pretty small compared to what is being spent on the war. I am not saying that war isn't necessary at times or that our soldiers are at any time at fault but leaders are another story. Just like almost every other community in this country we have buried our share of soldiers who gave thier lives. I have stood with mothers next to thier son's graves and sobbed with them. I have two sons myself. And many neices and nephews who are serving. I think most know or love someone who is a part of this. I don't know what the answer is and I realize that looking back and saying this was wrong is easy. I can only add my wishes to other"s that are crying for it to end soon. BUt I doubt that it will.....Sad.....

Answer 3

Had it been sanctioned by UN(May be the sanction was obtained 'under duress', it would not have been an occupation but it has been there defying the world opinion and non-cooperation of even the closest allies. And moreover none of the reasons whey it was launched have turned out to be well founded.The mere plea of the citizens not to leave is due to the fact that by occupying and inflicting all sorts of demages USA has not left the Iraquees in a very unenviable situation where while they hate the occupation they re afraid that the post-vacation period will be The deluge.The best way out would be for stationing a Peace Keepig Force,preferably of Arabic forces for the time being.

Answer 4

In the short term yes; in the long term, quite the opposite. There is more then enough money in the treasury to take care of our own but with the pork and so many wasteful domestic programs, the money doesn't get spent where it is most needed. One has to remember that even with the additional 1% spending due to the Iraq war, the military budget is only 4% of the GNP. The big spenders are the entitlement programs; they dwarf the military budget and could do so much more good if they were drastically redesigned.

Answer 5

More important than lives, is saving the infrastructure. We could build new bridges, and reconstruct the Interstate Highway System, which has been obsolete for the past 30 years. We could create a modern national passenger rail system, similar to the advanced countries of Europe and Japan. This will not happen, because the U.S. Government is owned and controlled by corporate criminals.

Answer 6

Difficult question. Undoubtedly the US should never have gone into Iraq in the first place. However having gone in and destabilised the region the US has an obligation to remain there until the area has good strong govt again Of course that may be another 20 years.... If the US were to withdraw tomorrow I have no doubt the world would have a potential catastrophe on its hands 10 years down the track. What level of money spent is an issue I can't answer. It may be - as is invariably the case - that the money could be spent more wisely than is the case now.

Answer 7

Of course! Any right thinking American would agree that we have done a world of good as far as protecting our citizens by putting a heavy dent in and deterring the insurgents.. including Al Queada and the Taliban. If we would go into Pakistan and take out bin Laden, that would certainly produce a world of good! What happened to "not worrying about offending certain countries or people in time of war?" The situation in regards to Pakistan shold and needs to change!

Answer 8

No, people who believe that are brainwashed, or they put party ahead of country. The war in Afghanistan is another matter, however, but we have bungled that too, since we placed most of our troops in Iraq.

Answer 9

I whole heartedly agree.

Lets see, since we have invaded Iraq
Gas prices Up
Health Care costs Up
Money to treat veterans Down
Civil Liberties, truncated

We're fighting them over there so we can have our Constitutional rights can be stripped over here.

Answer 10

The money being spent in Iraq IS saving lives in the US by not allowing the terrorists bring their death and destruction to this country, as they did on 9-11.