If the money spent on the Iraq war was pummped into education would we be safer?

United States
May 18, 2008 6:52am CST
It seems that all this war has done, is lessen our security. Wouldn't it be better to avoid war, and spread education. On that note, simply having taken the 400+ billion spent on Iraq and putting it towards helping provide safe drinking water world-wide would have been much more to our benefit. What do you think?
3 people like this
5 responses
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
18 May 08
Oh yeah... this lessened our security a whole bunch. I mean like, look at all of the attacks that we have had since 9-11, what's it been, like one a day? I can't help but laugh every time I see a post like this... do you REALLY think Congress would spend the money on education that doesn't educate in the first place? They would just use it for more pork spending, like maybe another bridge to nowhere or get another library or street named after them... or in Pelosi's case requisition a 757 for her personal use so she doesn't have to deal with airport security when she goes home. Not more secure you say?... That's rich considering that while we are fighting the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan that means that they are not attacking us here at home. Just how would safe drinking water world wide enhance our security? What would that even have to do with us, and what would it matter as the money would still be spent? I think you have been listening to too many liberals and pacifists who would rather be defeated and slaves than do what's right.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
Oh and about the drinking water, it might make people less pissed about our over consumption of the worlds resources, and create a greater sense of balance. When people have food, water, shelter, security, they are far less likely to want to go blow themselves, and others up in the name of injustice and suppression.
• United States
18 May 08
It must be remembered that Embassies are considered to be US soil, just as American holdings, bases, and other interests are. Here are some examples.... http://factsofisrael.com/blog/archives/000367.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/cron.html http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/chronology.html You will notice several dates in the time frame that you mentioned. If you don't like my intensity, then I would remind you that we have been at war with terrorists since at least 1979... why is it that people get mad when we finally start shooting back? As life is precious, so is freedom and the protection of it. These poeple want to destroy us and hate everything that we stand for just because we do not believe the same way they do. We can't afford NOT to fight back. As to the water... countries that we have helped so far have always turned against us... I personally don't care how pissed at us any of them get.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
I am not mad that you are finally "shooting back", See this is how we further the discussion! I think it's great, but to your point..... Absolutely you are correct. U.S. Embassies are considered American soil. I had neglected to take them into account, good on you for calling me on that. My reference to feeling angered by your intensity rested on your personal accusations about liberals and pacifists. A pacifist is someone that does nothing, I have never suggested that we do nothing about the situation. To you point that we have been at war since the '79.... This furthers an aspect of what I believe. What we have been doing and are doing isn't working. We have decreased our security (on a long term level)by adding fuel to the fire. Inadvertently killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's has given many times that number a perception that we are evil. If you consider the perception of someone that has had an air-strike kill their innocent family members, you might see how this could be possible. As I am not a pacifist, I would suggest, not ignoring the threat, but approaching it in a different manner, one that will not multiply the number of our enemies. Our foreign policies have been a disaster for years. Providing humanitarian aid in efforts to ensure safe water accross the globe is like campaigning before the primary. Set a good impression with the people. You can hardle rustle up and recruit a bunch of terrorists because America gave them safe water... that was my point.
@mark17779 (667)
18 May 08
If the American's and British did not intervene when they did then thing's could of got worse than they were and then may of had no choice but to enter conflict if Saddam did actually have nuclear weapon's. The price of thing's could of esculated even higher.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
I do understand your point mark, however it has been acknowledged that Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons, and more so that intelligence that was cited to support the idea that he was seeking them, or trying to acquire them was unreliable, and fabricated. The Niger uranium fiasco is a prime example. The document was a forgery, if a critical look had been preformed on that intelligence it would have been obvious it was a fake document. In fact it was obvious to many.
18 May 08
Yeah maybe now they realise they didn't have the nuclear weapon ability but at the time you didn't know and a decsion had to be made. Saddam had allready proved what a lunatic he was and the goverment could not afford to call his bluff I suppose. It's easy for me to say, yes going to war was a good idea as I don't have family/friend's over there but im glad they did go in a way as it could have/has/would save potentially more live's than what has unfortunately allready been lost.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
I think you are neglecting the responsibility of the government to have decisive evidence, that is reliable. There are witnesses and pieces of evidence that are thrown out everyday in court because they are week, coming from an unreliable source, or have been planted. The reason why the we felt so strongly about the need for war is because the evidence that would have been thrown out in a court-room was fed to us by our administrative government, while the evidence and witnesses that would have held up in court were ignored. If you do some research on this you will see what I mean. I don't think you can excuse people for being wrong on such an important subject, when they haven't fully done there job in investigating it. I am giving you a plus for contribution, though I don't necessarily agree with your comments. I hate it when people minus you just because they don't agree!
@gewcew23 (8011)
• United States
18 May 08
The hugh problem with your arguement is that the 400+billion is being barrowed from other countries. Which the USA will have to pay back some day. The USA does not have the money to give other people in this world water. Not the USA's business to help any other country. USA is not the only country in this world.
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
You do have a great point in that we are borrowing that money. Bottom line for me is that it is being spent unwisely, I'd prefer it spent wisely, or not at all.
1 person likes this
@soccermom (3200)
• United States
18 May 08
I agree Cole. From education comes knowledge and from knowledge comes power. I would have liked to see all that money spent on our own soil. Maybe take that money and put it into some serious research on alternative fuels. I'm of the mindset that we never would've set foot over there if there was no oil, and also that Al Quida in Afghanistan was a bigger threat than Hussein in Iraq ever was. All this war did was cause the taxpayers for something that I can't see benefitted us. Clean drinking water is a great idea too, or how about spending some of that money on a real crisis in Darfur? The "what could we have done?" is endless...
1 person likes this
• United States
18 May 08
I started to feel bad about not replying to your post. It is right up the alley of my thinking, that is why I haven't yet. I totally agree with you, and thanks for posting so that we might further the understanding of what has gone on the last 8 years.
@kykidd (6818)
• United States
19 May 08
I think there is a lot of money wasted in government. Not only on war, but what about campaigns. If the politicians were to keep all of the money they spent on their campaign, they would have a lot more than they will make for the rest of their life once they get into office.