Dear Editor:
Many recent letter writers to The Jackson Herald have bandied back and forth over the value of the recent Presidential election. Many see this as victory after years of oppression; others see it as a severe blow to what it means to be an American.
LETTER: Comments on Presidential election
Conservatives understand why non-conservatives are happy with the outcome. Those who lean left obviously do not understand why I and others consider this a potential blow to liberty.
Every American has placed before them the opportunity to succeed as far as their desires and abilities will take them. This opportunity, when fulfilled, is what creates success. The field which you choose to pursue, the dollar amount that you end up with, are not what is important. What is important is that each American has this opportunity.
Remember when you were very young and your parents told you that when you grew up you could be anything that you wanted to be? They were basically right. You can be or do anything that a combination of your desires and your ability will allow for. Your parents did not lie to you. People who told you that you could not succeed because of ethnicity, economic status or any other made up excuse did lie to you.
It truly doesn’t matter who you are, what you look like, what your religion is or even where your parents were born. The United States of America is the one place on Earth where anyone can work hard and succeed. Anyone. Again — anyone. (Because of the anyone part of the success potential, diversity is created - just a side note.) Despite years of the left telling us how horrible we are as a nation and that most other countries don’t like us, this opportunity is what accounts for the droves of immigrants still coming to our shores. Welcome; work hard, succeed, and please help others do the same.
This opportunity is what is so valued by people who truly love this country. This is where we part ways in the realm of ideas with some of our fellow citizens. This Presidential election featured a candidate who stated repeatedly that he wants to impose higher taxes (which would be punitive) on higher achievers. He didn’t just want to use the money, but wants a higher tax out of a sense of fairness. So you work hard, do well, and have much of your life’s work taken away to achieve fairness. The excuse that “you can afford it” doesn’t make it right and you on the left know that. Way down deep, you know it.
The now famous line about spreading the wealth around was not just a throwaway line. This is where we see someone that doesn’t care how much a person has worked to achieve their own American Dream. This President-elect has already stated that he wants to remove a portion of that American Dream by limiting what you can achieve.
This will be refuted by small-minded people who will state that no one is saying what anyone can or can’t do. They fail to understand that the American Dream is to be able to accomplish whatever you set out to do; if that accomplishment is limited by the government, your opportunity is being limited.
This President-elect has set out to basically even the economic playing fields. This would require guaranteeing results of a person’s efforts. In real life, you can either guarantee opportunity, or you can guarantee outcomes. Not both. For those who don’t understand, it works like this. In order for me to guarantee what the outcome of your work will be, I would have to place restrictions on what your employer can and cannot do. This removes his or her guarantee of opportunity. You cannot have both.
America was founded on a principle of personal opportunity. If you don’t like that, and prefer the guaranteed outcome, you are unlike most all Americans who have come before you. If you prefer that a portion of a person’s life be taken from them and given to you, you are unlike most Americans who have gone before you. You supported a person who places a higher value on outcomes than opportunity. I will guarantee that your parents did not tell you that you that you could be anything that the government would help you to be.
When people vote, they typically vote for a candidate whose stated philosophy most nearly matches their own. Just over half of all voting Americans just stated that their philosophy is to limit opportunity and provide outcomes. This country cannot be expected to sustain that philosophy in action for very long. If even of a portion of the proposed new social programs are enacted, the cost will be staggering. Where will the money to pay for them come from? Will we continue to take larger and larger portions of people’s lives to pay for it all?
Someone is going to respond to this and say that I only care about the money. No, I care about the portion of a person’s life that it takes to earn that money. Those of you on the left who say that people have the right to speak out as long as they don’t disagree with you are about to get your ideals fulfilled. I would remind you that when you rob Peter to give to Paul, Peter will eventually get tired of that and go away. What will you do then, with no one to rob?
This is the reason that we see freedoms slipping away, liberty becoming something we pretend to value. We know what has happened to every other country that has followed the course we have begun, and it never turns out well. Never. You see, people who seek to have their American Dream provided by others could be called Paul. The rest of us are Peter.
Sincerely,
Michael A. Carroll,
Hoschton
Every American has placed before them the opportunity to succeed as far as their desires and abilities will take them. This opportunity, when fulfilled, is what creates success. The field which you choose to pursue, the dollar amount that you end up with, are not what is important. What is important is that each American has this opportunity.
Remember when you were very young and your parents told you that when you grew up you could be anything that you wanted to be? They were basically right. You can be or do anything that a combination of your desires and your ability will allow for. Your parents did not lie to you. People who told you that you could not succeed because of ethnicity, economic status or any other made up excuse did lie to you.
It truly doesn’t matter who you are, what you look like, what your religion is or even where your parents were born. The United States of America is the one place on Earth where anyone can work hard and succeed. Anyone. Again — anyone. (Because of the anyone part of the success potential, diversity is created - just a side note.) Despite years of the left telling us how horrible we are as a nation and that most other countries don’t like us, this opportunity is what accounts for the droves of immigrants still coming to our shores. Welcome; work hard, succeed, and please help others do the same.
This opportunity is what is so valued by people who truly love this country. This is where we part ways in the realm of ideas with some of our fellow citizens. This Presidential election featured a candidate who stated repeatedly that he wants to impose higher taxes (which would be punitive) on higher achievers. He didn’t just want to use the money, but wants a higher tax out of a sense of fairness. So you work hard, do well, and have much of your life’s work taken away to achieve fairness. The excuse that “you can afford it” doesn’t make it right and you on the left know that. Way down deep, you know it.
The now famous line about spreading the wealth around was not just a throwaway line. This is where we see someone that doesn’t care how much a person has worked to achieve their own American Dream. This President-elect has already stated that he wants to remove a portion of that American Dream by limiting what you can achieve.
This will be refuted by small-minded people who will state that no one is saying what anyone can or can’t do. They fail to understand that the American Dream is to be able to accomplish whatever you set out to do; if that accomplishment is limited by the government, your opportunity is being limited.
This President-elect has set out to basically even the economic playing fields. This would require guaranteeing results of a person’s efforts. In real life, you can either guarantee opportunity, or you can guarantee outcomes. Not both. For those who don’t understand, it works like this. In order for me to guarantee what the outcome of your work will be, I would have to place restrictions on what your employer can and cannot do. This removes his or her guarantee of opportunity. You cannot have both.
America was founded on a principle of personal opportunity. If you don’t like that, and prefer the guaranteed outcome, you are unlike most all Americans who have come before you. If you prefer that a portion of a person’s life be taken from them and given to you, you are unlike most Americans who have gone before you. You supported a person who places a higher value on outcomes than opportunity. I will guarantee that your parents did not tell you that you that you could be anything that the government would help you to be.
When people vote, they typically vote for a candidate whose stated philosophy most nearly matches their own. Just over half of all voting Americans just stated that their philosophy is to limit opportunity and provide outcomes. This country cannot be expected to sustain that philosophy in action for very long. If even of a portion of the proposed new social programs are enacted, the cost will be staggering. Where will the money to pay for them come from? Will we continue to take larger and larger portions of people’s lives to pay for it all?
Someone is going to respond to this and say that I only care about the money. No, I care about the portion of a person’s life that it takes to earn that money. Those of you on the left who say that people have the right to speak out as long as they don’t disagree with you are about to get your ideals fulfilled. I would remind you that when you rob Peter to give to Paul, Peter will eventually get tired of that and go away. What will you do then, with no one to rob?
This is the reason that we see freedoms slipping away, liberty becoming something we pretend to value. We know what has happened to every other country that has followed the course we have begun, and it never turns out well. Never. You see, people who seek to have their American Dream provided by others could be called Paul. The rest of us are Peter.
Sincerely,
Michael A. Carroll,
Hoschton
To get to the main point of your letter. The president elect wants higher income people to pay more of a fair share of income taxes. Stopping a few rich people from using as many tax loopholes and off shore tax schemes will not bring this country crashing down. If having to pay a slight bit more tax on the fruits of your efforts deters you from even attempting to succeed, I would say your drive to succeed wasn't very strong to begin with.
Not everyone is born with the same opportunities. Some are too poverty-stricken to go to higher education even though, given the opportunity, they could succeed. We need liberal programs like student loans, grants and job retraining. What we must avoid is the welfare state. Opportunities yes, outcomes, no.
We do need healthcare reform. Personally, I have trouble making the co-payments. What's wrong with setting up a system where everyone gets basic healthcare? My only beef is the system can not be universal because we can't afford to give botox injections to everyone. There will always be a multi-tiered system or it won't work. Rich people will always have better healthcare and there's nothing wrong with that. We will never be able to afford to provide plastic surgery for the masses.
We are neither right nor left. We are not liberal nor conservative. We are not capitalists nor are we socialists. We are Americans with some serious problems to overcome. Obama won. It's over. The Democrats have strong majorities in both houses of Congress. The American people have spoken. I don't like it either but we can hold their feet to the fire for two years.
I just hope that we can look at our fellow countrymen with kindness and the readiness to offer him opportunities to grow and pay more taxes down the road like everyone else. If he succeeds, we all succeed.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world. Fully 50% of all prisoners in the United States are incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses. We pay somewhere in the range of $40,000.00 per prisoner to house these people. It doesn't take a CPA to figure out this is a lot of money going to waste. Put these people to work doing something!
The French Revolution was genocide. It is not the American way.
We have lots of challenges. Let's not make our ideology "the only way." Let's think outside the box. We need new answers to new problems.
Those who voted Democrat, I won't tell you I told you so because I just did.
Republicans suck too.
I only wish everyone can understand that the rich people pay over 90% of the federal tax.
Now as a note: in regards to the comment that there are people that cannot overcome their situation because they are born into such poverty - you are wrong, I have worked with inner city kids most of my adult life. I have seen kids who's parents for whatever reasons coould not provide for them still be able to work their way into college thru hardwork.
next- regarding the comment about conservatives leading the country down a socialist path over the last 8 years: You need to look up the definition of socialism, then take a look at your situation. Odds are it was better 2 years ago than it is now, right? WHat changed? Congress was taken over by your liberal buddies and they run the country- not the President.
lastly, bash Wal-mart - I bet you still shop there don't you?
I have one question for you- if you owned a small business and had to pay your workers, pay for materials and pay the taxes, then you had an opportunity to get your materials somewhere else cheaper, from people who will work for less money (because their envirnonment requires less money for them to survive) and your taxes are much less - what would you do? Would you be patriotic and say "YES, let's pay more and keep all our operations right here so we can pay more and make less!
I sincerely hope we can look at this situation 1 year from now and say that this election has let us all put our selves and the nation in a better situation than we are now.
In parting, there is a comic political rendering you should all look at. And then remember "In God We Trust". Go to: www.cagle.com/politicalcartoons/pccartoons/archives/fitzsimmons.asp?Action=GetImage
Everyone always wants to blame and there is blame enough to go around but an intelligent look at our problems will reveal to the non-partisan on-looker that our problems have roots in both parties and treating the problem will be better than simply changing parties. Replacing one big spending executive with another big-spending executive will not help. If we don't stop the easy lending we will be in a bigger mess down the road.
If you want to be serious in this conversation how about siting one reason why we're in the mess we're in rather than just say it's George Bush's fault? That is an uneducated answer.
European socialism doesn't work. People in Europe (I've been there) live in little apartments with little cars and everyone is about the same and their unemployment rate is very high and there is very little hope of the individual to rise up beyond his circumstances. (do you remember the riots in France a couple of years ago?) For those happy to make $20,000.00 per year and live in boxy apartments with no hope for better, this would be fine but have you seen the homes Americans prefer? And the cars Americans prefer? We are not Europeans. We are not socialists although admittedly there is no such thing as pure capitalism. We do know that pure socialism has failed. Even a bailout won't help socialists as the motive for working hard has been removed. (Some on the left call this greed. I prefer to call it desire to better ourselves.) I like big cars and a big home. I don't like cheap wine and I want my kids to have the best the world has to offer.
A little note: Have you all noticed since the housing bubble crashed and the easy lending slowed, the price of gasoline is down greater than 50%. Easy money leads to speculation, i.e. higher commodity prices. Metal prices are going down too. We are in a correction period sometimes known as a recession. Riding a bubble always leads to this problem. The bigger the bubble the bigger the recession. I for one am ready to get off the bubble and return to sane economics. But I am concerned that the Democrats are building a bigger bubble.
Taxes are unpleasant and unfair. We all know this. And our friends in government work hard to keep it that way. The only thing about taxes that all Americans agree on is that someone else should pay them.
Perhaps we can learn something by examining how much we pay in taxes, who pays them and how our tax payments have changed in the last 20 years or so. We can do this pretty easily, thanks to the Internal Revenue Service.
Every year it examines all the returns that are filed and analyzes changes in the patterns of tax payments. The latest year for which the data are complete is 2005. The basic data are available in the imaginatively titled work "Individual Income Tax Rates and Shares, 2005." Here are the key lessons of that data:
Historically, it's same-old, same-old. In 2005, those of us who paid income taxes paid, collectively, 13.6 percent of our income. Some paid more. Some paid less. But the average burden wasn't exactly overwhelming.
In fact, for all the drama about the Bush tax cuts, the reality is that our tax burden is about the same today as it was before Bill Clinton was elected president. In the seven years before B.C., our average tax rate was 13.86 percent. In 1992, we paid taxes at an average rate of 13.7 percent – about the same as we are paying now.
During the eight years Mr. Clinton was in office, the average tax rate rose from 14.1 percent (1993) to 16.1 percent (2000). In the Bush years since, the average tax rate has declined from 15.2 percent to 13.6 percent.
Do you see high drama here? Do you see gigantic change?
Today, fewer people pay income taxes. In 1986, Americans filed 103 million federal income tax returns. Of those, 84 million had to pay some taxes. That's 81.5 percent of all returns. By the time Mr. Clinton took office, the percentage of filers paying taxes had declined to 75 percent. During the Bush years, the percentage of filers who paid taxes continued to decline. It fell to only 67.4 percent in 2005.
This is not a minor number. In 2005, 134 million American households filed tax returns. Only 90 million of them paid any taxes. While the number of households filing returns rose by 5 million, the number of households actually paying income taxes fell by 6 million. Basically, 11 million lower-income households don't have to pay income taxes that would have had to pay taxes before the Bush tax cuts.
Of course, the federal income tax isn't the only tax we pay. Anyone who works pays the employment tax, a stiff 15.3 percent of wage income. Republicans tend to forget this.
Today, the rich pay more, the poor pay less. Bush tax rate cuts notwithstanding, those with high incomes pay at much higher marginal tax rates than those with lower incomes. They also pay much more of the total tax bill, a reality that has escaped Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Only 953,000 taxpayers – about 1 percent of the total who paid taxes – paid at the top 35 percent tax rate in 2005. They paid $315.4 billion in taxes on their $1,094 billion in income.
The most common tax rate is 15 percent, which is paid by 54.4 million taxpayers. This means the typical taxpayer pays at less than half the tax rate of the top earners.
The second most common tax rate is 10 percent. About 25.5 million taxpayers pay at that rate. This group pays taxes at one-third the rate paid by the highest-income taxpayers. So of the two-thirds of all households that pay anything in income taxes, about three-quarters pay at 15 percent or less.
Among the remaining 25 percent of taxpayers:
• 22 million households pay income taxes at marginal rates of 25 percent.
• 3.7 million pay at 28 percent.
• 1.5 million pay at 33 percent.
In 2000, the top 25 percent of all taxpaying filers paid a whopping 83.6 percent of all income taxes. By 2005, they paid 85.6 percent of all taxes. So in spite of tax rate cuts for the well-off, the share of taxes paid by the well-off has risen.
What does this all mean?
Simple. When political talk turns to tax "fairness," none of the politicians mention where a high income begins. So I thought you might want to know. You were in the top 25 percent of taxpayers in 2005 if your taxable income exceeded $61,055.
Millions of Americans have no idea what fat cats they are.
Until this year the deficit has not been historically high when comparing the GDP vs the deficit. It is the percentage of GDP that makes the deficit high. But they don't teach that in the govt run schools. Admittedly, since the Democrats took over Congress the deficit is unacceptably high. (bit you!) All money starts with Congress, not the president. I know, they don't teach that in high school either.
Haliburton was the only company capable of doing the job in Iraq and there has never been any criminal complaint against them. Just because the Democrat talking points deride Haliburton doesn't make it true. The Democrats think that lying about something long enough and hard enough will fool the American electorate. The only reason Dems are in office is disgust with the Republican party, not because they deserve it.
Blackwater is a private organization that protects Americans in Iraq. I know the leftists hate it when Americans are protected.
Here's a message to regular Joes: Don't be a regular Joe. It takes more than 40 hours a week to make a decent living.
Spreading the wealth: I know of no honest way for the govt to do this. Rewarding failure will inevitably bring more failure.
Due to blogs like this and the internet in general you people on the left no longer have a monopoly on news. The American people are more informed now and they will keep the Dems to the center. (bit you again) I can't wait until the Dems try to pass the Fairness Doctrine to shut us up. That will end their rein.
Spent & Approved War-Spending - About $600 billion of US taxpayers' funds. In June 2008, President Bush signed a bill approving about 200 billion more for 2008, which brings the cumulative total to close to $800 billion.
U.S. Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion in 2008
U.S. Spending per Second - $5,000 in 2008
Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)
Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.
Missing - $1 billion in tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces. (Per CBS News on Dec 6, 2007.)
Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings
Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported - $1.4 billion
Amount paid to KBR, a former Halliburton division, to supply U.S. military in Iraq with food, fuel, housing and other items - $20 billion
Portion of the $20 billion paid to KBR that Pentagon auditors deem "questionable or supportable" - $3.2 billion
***
Yep. Spread the Wealth to those that really deserve it. And fill the mideast with our weaponry. That's another great idea, Libservative.
For decades we have watched the Middle East from the sidelines until Sept 11, 2001. At least George W. tried to do something about the situation there. History will show that we planted a democracy in the center of that wretched place. That's more than any other administration has been able to do in that area. Millions were freed from an evil dictatorship.
At least we won the war which is more than I can say if there were a Democrat in the White House.
There were bookkeeping problems in Vietnam, Korea, WWII and probably the Revolutionary War.
The Congress approved the war and the president carried it out.
Thanks for giving us Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha and the whole horrid gang. I'm sure they'll do a jam up job.
We should have focused on Al-Quida and capturing Bin Laden. Instead we went after Sadam Hussein in revenge for something he was not part of. Now we are sitting in a mess with no clear solution, worse off than when we started. And nearly 1 trillion dollars wasted from our money that could have been wisely spent here on the problems of real Americans. Bush and Cheney are war criminals, and should be treated as such. To think that we should not tax ourselves for these outrageous expenses, just leaves our kids to pay for our mistakes. If you support the war, as it sounds like you do, then you should be prepared to pay the full expense that Bush has incurred. don't put it off on your kids and their kids. How do you suppose we should pay for this fiasco? With tax cuts for the rich? I'd like to hear your solution to the economic crisis that takes into account our misguided expenditures in Iraq.
I will address your Democrat talking points one by one:
There is always collateral damage in war and innocent lives are always lost but you will never be able to demonstrate to me that 100,000 "innocent lives" were lost. Don't insult my intelligence.
I disagree. The war had much to do with 911. Sadam Hussein was an enemy regime that shot at our fighters every day. He paid families of "martyred" terrorists in Israel, our closest ally. (Americans have been killed in Israel by these monsters) The planners of the atrocities of 911 are known to have met with Iraqi intelligence officers before the crime. Were they having tea only?
Our reputation in the world is damaged. Yes, it is. No doubt. The prime minister of France at the time was Jaques Chirac. He was being paid under the table by Saddam Hussein out of his profits from the "oil for food" UN program that allowed Iraq to sell only enough oil to pay for food and medicine for its people. The people were starving, being raped and had very poor medical care at the expense of our friends, the French. If you're upset that the French don't like us please don't blame George Bush. They never liked us and never will. We liberated them from the Nazis and they don't appreciate it. Why do you think being nice now will help? Jaques Chirac was angry because he lost his golden goose that laid his golden eggs.
The world cheered for Obama because they always cheer for things that weaken America. We are hated sir. Before, during, and after the Iraqi war. Get used to it.
I think Iraq will be fine in the long run. Unlike the Vietnamese who still have no say in their govt. because the Democrats cut off all aid to South Vietnam causing a military collapse and showing the whole world that we could not be trusted to support our friends. I went to school with a child of a South Vietnamese Colonel who spent 7 years in hard labor at the end of the war. His mother had to raise 5 kids with no father. Thank you Democrats. The Dems tried this same trick with Iraq but thankfully we have now gotten things under control where it's too late for them to cause another lost war. But if I were an American ally I would still be nervous by the way the lefties almost caused us to pull out of Iraq and giving it to Iran to spread more terror.
I know it's hard for Dems to believe, but it is possible to look for Bin Laden and fight two wars at the same time. (chew bubble gum and walk at the same time) We did defeat Germany, Italy and Japan at the same time. Trust me, my friend, Bin Laden worries every day for his life. He is not on vacation in Cancun.
The trillion dollars that will eventually be spent on Iraq was spent, not only in Iraq but here at home building vehicles, ships, and planes putting real Americans to work. It was not designed for a jobs program but it is not like giving China a trillion dollars for their trinkets like we are doing now every time we buy an electronic product, i.e. blackberries, cell phones, flat-panel tv's. These purchases do more harm to our country than building armaments for war here in the US.
We're not sitting in a mess. What are you talking about? Bush and Cheney are not war criminals. Your hysterical comments erode your credibility.
We have been running a deficit since President Jackson. (contrary to popular, Jerry Springer-type belief, we did not have a budget surplus during the Clinton years) We have rarely paid our bills in our lifetime. In fact, right now we're probably about to pay off the Vietnam War. We're always behind. We run deficits to grow the economy and that gives us the ability to pay more debt. It's like a business borrowing money to make more money. (as longt as you're growing this is ok) Herbert Hoover tried to balance the budget when the stock market crashed and he caused millions to lose their jobs. Deficits are sometimes necessary but are always necessary in dire economic times like we're in now.
You asked for my opinions for getting out of our current economic mess. Here goes. Stop the easy lending mandated by liberals in congress. Require a 700 credit score to get a mortgage and require 5% down. This will hurt for awhile but eventually it will return us to fiscal responsibility. Fix all existing mortgages at 5% now to stem the bleeding. Outlaw adjustable mortgages. Remove all capital gains taxes. This will encourage investing. Investing creates jobs. Governments do not create jobs without costing jobs. Investors risk their own money to create a better life for themselves. Poor people never provide jobs to anyone. For the poor there should always be help to prevent homelessness and starvation. Any more support than this leads to people living off the govt. It's human nature. Eliminate all payroll taxes and go to the fair tax as described in Niel Bortz's book. And watch the economy grow.
My prediction: Obama's programs will work temporarily until the govt-paid jobs evaporate as they always do. These programs will re-ignite inflation to double digits. This will eventually lead us to the recession again in worse shape than the first. Let's be honest with ourselves. We have caused this problem. Start buying American. Start making decent American cars and other products. Compete with the world and work hard. Stop being cry babies. Support the president during times of war. He needs your support. Your blind criticism has only led to a longer war, emboldening our enemies. George Bush, amazingly, won this war without your support. I'm impressed with this fact. (as you should be)
Here's a sampling of statistics from several independent organizations who have looked into the situation:
1) Iraqi Health Ministry casualty survey for the World Health Organization: In January 2008 the Iraqi health minister, Dr Salih Mahdi Motlab Al-Hasanawi, reported the results of the "Iraq Family Health Survey" across Iraq which was carried out in 2006 and 2007. It estimated 151,000 violence-related Iraqi deaths (in a range from 104,000 to 223,000 deaths) from March 2003 through June 2006 as a result of the American led war in Iraq. This was out of a total of 400,000 excess deaths estimated due to all aspects of the war.
2)Opinion Research Business (ORB) survey conducted August 12-19, 2007 estimated 1,033,000 violent deaths due to the Iraq War. The range given was 946,000 to 1,120,000 deaths. ORB reported that 48% died from a gunshot wound, 20% from the impact of a car bomb, 9% from U.S. aerial bombardment, 6% as a result of an accident and 6% from another blast/ordnance.
3)The Lancet (a well respected British medical journal) study calculated 654,965 excess deaths through the end of June 2006. The estimate is for all excess violent and nonviolent deaths. That count also includes those due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer health care, etc. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 95% confidence interval) were estimated to be due to violence. 31% of those were attributed to the Coalition forces, 24% to others, 46% unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56%), car bomb (13%), other explosion/ordnance (14%), air strike (13%), accident (2%), unknown (2%). A copy of a death certificate was available for a high proportion of the reported deaths.
Again, I'm not trying to insult your intelligence, but please understand that Iraqi lives are just as important in God's eyes as American lives. We undermine any sense of moral righteousness when we participate in such violence and murder.
Perhaps with Barack Obama as president, we can re-establish our integrity and the principles for which we stand. May God bless us all and bring real peace to the world.
The truely sad thing is, as you have illustrated, is that people sit around taking stock in these "independent studies" and believing them!
You've thrown out some pretty hefty numbers there but I have to wonder where are the "independant" studies to estimate the number of people who would have died if Saddam had been left in power? Why are the liberals and left wing media not asking / inquiring into these numbers? How easily we all forget about the mass graves discovered after the liberation. How easily we all forget about what Saddam did to his own people, remember the Kurdish masacre, and if left unchecked how many more would have fell victim to this regime? Again I'll ask why you and others aren't asking this question.
And since you've brought God & morals into this. What kind of God do you worship that would say "do nothing", "take no action", "don't worry about your brothers over there"?? If we are all in Gods hands and he is in control why do you question the actions he has put into play? Do you put your self above God to know more than he and say that what took place in Iraq was right or wrong? Isn't it Mr. Odahma's own statement "we are our brothers keeper"? If he truely means this then why is he in such a hurry to leave a country that is clearly at stake? Wouldn't Iraq be an excellent place to start a new image for America by staying to help rebuild instead of cutting and running for cover only to let the country fall into civil war & caos?
Maybe we should all stop looking at the polls and statistics and start thinking for ourselves.
The Iraqi Health Ministry is an official department of the Iraq government that we support. ORB and The Lancet are well respected international organizations with a very high reputation for fairness and accuracy. Other than Fox News, who would you believe when it comes to the tally of the dead in Iraq? There are numerous studies that have indicated very large numbers of the innocent have died in Iraq. Do you not believe that?
Tim you also asked: . . . where are the "independant" studies to estimate the number of people who would have died if Saddam had been left in power?" That's an idiotic question. Why is no one answering the question "how many people would die if the entire world blew up?" Or how many people would die if Bush could be president for 12 years? Because all of these are unanswerable hypothetical questions.
But killing innocent people is wrong according to my bible. And we have done just that in Iraq in retaliation for Al Qaida operatives, mostly Saudi's, attacking the U.S. That's well documented and a big reason why the Muslim world holds Bush in such low esteem. Worst President Ever! What a legacy.
In every war William, there are collateral deaths but I haven't seen one word of newspaper print that suggested the number of innocents killed that you claim. Could you please site one newspaper article and then perhaps we can discuss this?
Saddam Hussein was in violation of several UN security council orders. Security council resolutions are binding on that country. They are not like regular UN resolutions that have no teeth. For example, Israel has never been in violation of a UN security council resolution but Israel has been in violation of other UN resolutions. (mostly Arab propaganda)
Did you know that the US Congress authorized all of the military action in Iraq? This was not an illegal war. The president did not go in alone. There was great bipartisan support and in fact there was popular support for cleaning out the Middle East a bit after 911.
Technically this war was illegal under the UN charter. But so was our war in Serbia, prosecuted by Mr. Clinton. We had NO UN authorization for either war.
George Bush won't be president much longer and by the choices Mr. Obama is making I would gather that he intends to follow many of Mr. Bush's national security policies. The difference will be that conservatives don't criticize the president in time of war as they have a little bit of class.
you asked: "Could you please site [sic] one newspaper article and then perhaps we can discuss this?"
Here's just one. It's from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Public Health News, and was also reported in a Los Angeles Times article in Novmeber 2004. (There are many other newspaper articles out there with this same information.)
------
October 28, 2004
Iraqi Civilian Deaths Increase Dramatically After Invasion
Updated 2006 Iraq mortality study
Civilian deaths have risen dramatically in Iraq since the country was invaded in March 2003, according to a survey conducted by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Columbia University School of Nursing and Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The researchers found that the majority of deaths were attributed to violence, which were primarily the result of military actions by Coalition forces. Most of those killed by Coalition forces were women and children. However, the researchers stressed that they found no evidence of improper conduct by the Coalition soldiers.
The survey is the first countrywide attempt to calculate the number of civilian deaths in Iraq since the war began. The United States military does not keep records on civilian deaths and record keeping by the Iraq Ministry of Health is limited. The study is published in the October 29, 2004, online edition of The Lancet.
“Our findings need to be independently verified with a larger sample group. However, I think our survey demonstrates the importance of collecting civilian casualty information during a war and that it can be done,” said lead author Les Roberts, PhD, an associate with the Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for International Emergency, Disaster and Refugee Studies.
The researchers conducted their survey in September 2004. They randomly selected 33 neighborhoods of 30 homes from across Iraq and interviewed the residents about the number and ages of the people living in each home. Over 7,800 Iraqis were included. Residents were questioned about the number of births and deaths that occurred in the household since January 2002. Information was also collected about the causes and circumstances of each death. When possible, the deaths were verified with a death certificate or other documentation.
The researchers compared the mortality rate among civilians in Iraq during the 14.6 months prior to the March 2003 invasion with the 17.8 month period following the invasion. The sample group reported 46 deaths prior to the March 2003 and 142 deaths following the invasion. The results were calculated twice, both with and without information from the city of Falluja. The researchers felt the excessive violence from combat in Falluja could skew the overall mortality rates. Excluding information from Falluja, they estimate that 100,000 more Iraqis died than would have been expected had the invasion not occurred. Eighty-four percent of the violent deaths were reported to be caused by the actions of Coalition forces and 95 percent of those deaths were due to air strikes and artillery.
“There is a real necessity for accurate monitoring of civilian deaths during combat situations. Otherwise it is impossible to know the extent of the problems civilians may be facing or how to protect them,” explained study co-author Gilbert Burnham, MD, associate professor of International Health at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and director of the Center for International, Disaster and Refugee Studies.
There have been so many variables and changes in this war. We had the initial invasion that probably killed more than 30,000 Iraqis fighting our military. Then the war became a quasi civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites and of course both would shoot at us on occasion. Then Al Qaida got heavily involved. Then the Sunni's got sick of Al Qaida. Al Sadr was constantly stirring up trouble until the surge when he felt it was wise to go on a prolonged vacation in Iran.
The article was written from a public health perspective and yes, many Iraqis have died as a result of the war. No doubt. The reasons are less clear.
I stand by my statement that war is messy. It's hard to say who was to blame for each death during any particular phase of the war. In the Kurdish areas where we were welcomed there was far less violence but then they started trouble across their border with Turkey. I think we did quite well considering all of the circumstances.
The guy that threw his shoes at George Bush would be dead today under Saddam Hussein but he lives because he now lives in a better place.
In hindsight I would not have invaded but then hindsight is always 20-20. The reason I would not have invaded was not the same as your reasons though. I think those people in that area of the world are generations from behaving like civilized people. They don't know what to do with freedom when it's handed to them on a silver platter. God called Ishmael a wild-ass of a man. Truly, a better description of the Arabs in that part of the world, has never been uttered. Ishmael is like an undomesticated animal. Decapitations, torture, violations of common decency in wartime is nothing for these barbarians. If democracy fails in Iraq it will be because of these problems and not anything we did or did not do.
Thanks for the article.
The Iraqis now have a real chance for a peaceful democracy. Saddam Hussein is hanged. His son's rape rooms are closed. The people all have sattelite TV now. The people vote. They now can judge for themselves on matters, not just live in fear of a dictator.
In hindsight I would not have invaded Iraq due to the cost in American lives and treasure but it's impossible to un-ring the bell.
It was bloody but we won an important victory in Iraq. We did not conquer. We liberated millions of Iraqis. That is no small thing in the middle of that wretched area. Iraq will now always be a strategic ally in the heart of the Middle East.
As for criminals that fight without uniforms or nations, I do not care what happens to them as a result of their criminal behavior. I don't want to make friends with them. To save American lives I would do whatever necessary to extract information from them. Best to allow the CIA to do the dirty work and then deny it. These are the same criminals that cooked thousands of our people in the WTC. Hundreds jumped to their deaths to prevent being burned instead. Sorry. I'll save my tears. If these criminals were captured wearing their country's uniform then they would be protected under the Geneva Conventions. These men kill women and children to advance terror. I don't care about opinions of whether they were mistreated. They don't deserve mercy. They are worse than the Nazis.
No doubt, war sucks. We probably will not make that mistake for another generation but this is not the time to throw in the towel.
I'm optimistic about Obama too. I didn't vote for him. I think he'll be lucky to survive what is already becoming his administration's first scandal with the Illinois governor trying to sell his Senate seat. We don't need a weak president right now. I hope he doesn't go down because of this.
General who probed Abu Ghraib says Bush officials committed war crimes
By Warren P. Strobel | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — The Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison accused the Bush administration Wednesday of committing "war crimes" and called for those responsible to be held to account.
The remarks by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who's now retired, came in a new report that found that U.S. personnel tortured and abused detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, using beatings, electrical shocks, sexual humiliation and other cruel practices.
"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," Taguba wrote. "The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."
A bipartisan Senate report released today says that former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other top Bush administration officials are directly responsible for abuses of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and charges that decisions by those officials led to serious offenses against prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere.
"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," the panel concludes. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."
The report, released by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and based on a nearly two-year investigation, said that both the policies and resulting controversies tarnished the reputation of the United States and undermined national security. "Those efforts damaged our ability to collect accurate intelligence that could save lives, strengthened the hand of our enemies, and compromised our moral authority," it said.
"The Committee's report details the inexcusable link between abusive interrogation techniques used by our enemies who ignored the Geneva Conventions and interrogation policy for detainees in U.S. custody," McCain, himself a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, said in a statement. "These policies are wrong and must never be repeated."
The true genesis of the decision to use coercive techniques, the report said, was a memo signed by President Bush on Feb. 7, 2002, declaring that the Geneva Convention's standards for humane treatment did not apply to captured al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters.
"It is particularly troubling that senior officials approved the use of interrogation techniques that were originally designed to simulate abusive tactics used by our enemies against our own soldiers and that were modeled, in part, on tactics used by the Communist Chinese to elicit false confessions from U.S. military personnel," the report said.
The panel members cited the views of Gen. David H. Petraeus, now the head of U.S. Central Command, who in a May, 2007 letter to his troops said humane treatment of prisoners allows Americans to occupy the moral high ground.
"Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right," wrote Petraeus, who at the time was the top U.S. commander in Iraq. "Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy."
I guess that Generals Petraeus and Taguba, and Senator McCain are just spouting "Democrat" talking points, since apparently the four of us feel the same way about this criminal behavior.
Libservative: This is my last post on this topic. The facts speak for themselves. To respond to one other point you questioned earlier -- I was in Iraq for two years, up until March of 2007.I led the 1st platoon of Delta company (1st battalion, 325th airborne infantry regiment). There were 16 guys in the platoon not including me. I lived in a tent with 7 of them, my platoon sergeant, section sergeants, and the medic. The rest of my guys lived in the neighboring tent with the two interpreters attached to our platoon. We lived on Forward Operating Base (FOB) Justice in the Kadamiyah district of Northwest Baghdad. In March of 2007 we returned to Fort Bragg, NC. I don't know how to prove that to you. I am not going to ask you to prove to me that you have a brain, as that would be a dauntless task.
Libservative, feel free to bloviate away!
Also thanks for straightening me out on the torture of those poor terrrorists.
The next time they plan to kill you or yours we will be careful not to offend them by even asking them to stop.
Moral high ground? Do you feel the terrorists now have the moral high ground?
We agree to disagree. A soldier from a country, wearing his uniform fighting against the US is entitled to protections of the Geneva Convention which no one follows except for us in this war on terror. Without a uniform they are war criminals and should be treated as such. (hanging)
The new Obama administration will torture terrorists. Only you will not read about it in the newspapers because he will want to be "perceived" as a nice guy. And if you think it will be any different you are dillusional.
No, we're not terrorists. We have enough moral high ground for this cowboy.
It seems that your truth is what you want it to be, not necessarily a fact on the ground.
It seems to me, that you readily dismiss any facts that demonstrably refute what you assert. I just don't see why you can't accept the truth. This is not to say that all Americans are evil. It is only to say that there are Americans acting in our name, that have acted as terrorists and murderers -- something that you don't seem to accept. Very convenient for you, but it hardly wins the debate, as the examples are very real and what you proport is merely hypothesis. -Charles
Is Pakistan reponsible for Bin Laden because he lives there? Is Saudi Arabia responsible for what Bin Laden does because he is Saudi Arabian?
There have been flase accusations against our soldiers too and were found later to be untrue. Even Democrat Congressman Jack Murtha from Pennsylvania said our guys killed innocents and then of course we found out it was not true. (anything to get elected)
I remember the last pacifist president we had. Jimmy Carter did nothing when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. And he did nothing when Iran violated internation law and took our diplomats hostage for 444 days which finally brought down his wretched presidency. There is two sides to every coin. Jimmy Carter was no more loved than George Bush. Even George Bush won a second term.
This is an ugly world. The last time we were isolationists was between the world wars. During that time Germany took all of mainland Europe. Japan took most of China and finally attacked us.
We worry too much about our image and not enough about common sense defense strategies and supporting our president in time of war. That is what is disgraceful about us.
"When wise men argue with fools, you can't tell the difference." And, "You can't reason with insanity."
However, with these stanch redneck liberals, rather than insanity, it may be more apt to say utter ignorance, or perhaps even pure stupidy.
Why bother? Judging by their "pseudo-logic", they're products of our modern media, and their daddys wus probably Democrats, so that's what they be. Talk NASCAR and Dale Jr, they would be more likely to understand that.
God didn't get us into this mess, WE did, (collectively, as a society), so don't go changing His words or meaning to suit your predicament. God would not have us killing each other, period.
Wake up and smell the stinch coming from Washington. It's the smell of the politicians printing more money and filling there own pocket with sweetheart deals and fat retirement plans.
As long as our politicians are more interested in doing what is right for THEM and not what is right for the COUNTRY that stinch will get stronger and stronger.
All I can say is if you have a chance to help your children decide which foreign language to study, CHINESE might come in handy for them.
They will either have to move to China to get jobs or they will be working for them here in the US. After they buy up the rest of our financial and manufacturing sectors I look for them to lobby their friends in Washington to take over the healthcare system.
Meantime the politicians won't do anything because they are only interested in getting re-elected.
I have a great idea let's give all the politicians in Washington an retirement plan. Say 50 million bucks a piece when they leave.
It'll save us billions and at least we'll get a new line of crooks lined up to become our new leaders in Washington.
When the planet implodes, we will have fulfilled the destiny we seem in such a desperate hurry to reach. I'm on the outside looking in. I don't know what that destiny is, I just know the crowd is out of control and I'm being swept along with it, wherever it is going. And even though I'm trapped in the mass, I refuse to justify what is going on by trying to convince myself or anyone else that God approves of our behavior.
Now, you are my brother and I love you. I wish you peace.
I think you underestimate the power of God. Nothing happens that He didn't already know was going to happen. Both Jews and Christians know that a Messiah is coming when Israel's enemies surround him and there is no hope without His direct intervention. Being carried along with the masses is a good picture. But some of us know where the masses are going.
Not my will but His will be done.
I am very glad that you are very happy in your knowledge. Bless your heart.