Ya think?
I'm struck by the juxtaposition of a column written by Glenn Garvin in The Miami Herald, 3/26/2013 and Morning Joe same day same time.
"Wars end, but scars and costs last forever". I hardly ever agree with Mr. Garvin who reviews TV Series along with writing a more or less regular column on the editorial page for the newspaper. Mr. Garvin is going off on the cost of pensions to vets and their families and to illustrate the point we are still paying widows from WWI, WWII, and the Viet Nam War.
These pensions "cost" the government billions of dollars each year. And where there is government money involved there is fraud and undoubtedly some cheating on applications for assistance. Garvin is probably correct in his guess that costs to support vets will eventually exceed the cost of the wars themselves
At virtually the same time that I am reading this column there is a discussion going on about the long backlog of cases and waiting time for assistance from the VA for cases related to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and yes even some Agent Orange cases from the Viet Nam War on Morning Joe on MSNBC. The discussion there is on what can be done to shake up the bureaucracy regarding the long waits and what we owe vets for their service.
Mr. Garvin ends his column by talking about the real bottom line which is the physical and emotional costs of war. How do you write a check for those costs and maybe both political parties should not be so inclined to play cop in the Middle East or wherever.
Going to war is something that is hardly ever subject to any kind of cost/benefit analysis but it should be part of the discussion when developing defense budgets and policies. I, personally would also be skeptical of much political analysis of the need to go to war. The benefits are overstated and the costs are buried and the threats involved may be manufactured. Our elected representatives must do a better job in this area and cannot leave the entire decision making to the executive branch of government.
Analogies and similes and other figures of speech could be used to describe the tremendous amount of waste in lives and treasure used in wars but even that doesn't tell the real story.
I'm more than a little conflicted about this issue. I'm glad the Navy Seals were able to kill Osama Bin Laden but am dumbfounded by the amount of effort in money, time, and people involved in the effort, while other issues go by the wayside.
"Wars end, but scars and costs last forever". I hardly ever agree with Mr. Garvin who reviews TV Series along with writing a more or less regular column on the editorial page for the newspaper. Mr. Garvin is going off on the cost of pensions to vets and their families and to illustrate the point we are still paying widows from WWI, WWII, and the Viet Nam War.
These pensions "cost" the government billions of dollars each year. And where there is government money involved there is fraud and undoubtedly some cheating on applications for assistance. Garvin is probably correct in his guess that costs to support vets will eventually exceed the cost of the wars themselves
At virtually the same time that I am reading this column there is a discussion going on about the long backlog of cases and waiting time for assistance from the VA for cases related to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and yes even some Agent Orange cases from the Viet Nam War on Morning Joe on MSNBC. The discussion there is on what can be done to shake up the bureaucracy regarding the long waits and what we owe vets for their service.
Mr. Garvin ends his column by talking about the real bottom line which is the physical and emotional costs of war. How do you write a check for those costs and maybe both political parties should not be so inclined to play cop in the Middle East or wherever.
Going to war is something that is hardly ever subject to any kind of cost/benefit analysis but it should be part of the discussion when developing defense budgets and policies. I, personally would also be skeptical of much political analysis of the need to go to war. The benefits are overstated and the costs are buried and the threats involved may be manufactured. Our elected representatives must do a better job in this area and cannot leave the entire decision making to the executive branch of government.
Analogies and similes and other figures of speech could be used to describe the tremendous amount of waste in lives and treasure used in wars but even that doesn't tell the real story.
I'm more than a little conflicted about this issue. I'm glad the Navy Seals were able to kill Osama Bin Laden but am dumbfounded by the amount of effort in money, time, and people involved in the effort, while other issues go by the wayside.
Comments
Post a Comment