Yesterday and today, diaries have been posted (both here and at dkos) suggesting that impeachment is unnecessary. The arguement that is being made against impeachment is that it is more important to weaken the republican party through realignment. Impeachment is often portrayed as a vengeance, as opposed to bringing the corrupt in this admisistration to justice.
I do not agree with the reasoning of the latter who hold this view.
My reasoning is listed below:
First of all, I have very serious doubts as to whether or not this country could survive the remainder of bush’s term as president. My reasons are as follows:
- those who lost family and loved ones in Iraq.
- the people of Iraq that have been killed in the name of oil.
- those who died in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
- those in this country who have been harmed by all of the cuts in social programs.
- those who blindly follow the lines that are in the media on a regular basis.
- the environment.
- changes in God-knows-how-many regulations by this administration that repeatedly screw people over and benefit the rich.
- the standing and perception of this country by the rest of the world.
And, most importantly, the rights that are guaranteed to all under the First Amendment. Specifically, the censorship of the “coverage” of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
I will now take this a step further and provide some details re: the amount that has been spent on the invasion and occupation of Iraq (as of August of this year)
According to the BBC, the United States has spent more per month in Iraq than fighting the war in Vietnam, making Iraq the most expensive war in 60 years.
The report by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF), called The Iraq Quagmire, calculates the cost of current military operations in Iraq at $5.6bn (£3.1bn) every month. The report put costs in Iraq at $500m (£278m) a month more than in Vietnam, adjusted for inflation.
By comparison, the eight-year campaign in Vietnam cost on average $5.1bn (£2.8bn) a month.
And, the report also states that there are fewer troops in Iraq and the waepons systems are more expensive.
Now, another question: Why hasn’t this information been on the front page of every newspaper in this country??
Also,
co-author of the report, Erik Leaver told the BBC costs in Iraq had spiralled since 2003 because the US had not been well-prepared.
“We have deployed now roughly one million troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the numbers just keep going up and up,” he said.
“We are going to continue to see costs not only from the fighting now but also from the health care of these soldiers and veterans when they come home.”
Thomas Donnelly, of the AEI, claims that result of the Iraq war is more important than its cost in dollars.
“The more valued criticism is whether the Bush administration is winning the war and prosecuting it in a successful way,”
“So what price victory? I would say that $5bn a month is certainly something I would be willing to pay.”
“When it [the Iraq war] is compared to the overall size of the American economy, it’s really a drop in the bucket, certainly by historical standards.”
Also, by historical standards, the costs of both health care and vocational rehabilitation have increased dramatically.
Final question: If a representative of the American Enterprise Institute is willing to pay higher taxes why the hell are the repubs intent on shoving so many tax cuts through?