• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Cost of Iraq war could top $2 trillion: study

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Lucifer Box
    It's interesting isn't it that some of the biggest medical breakthroughs in history have come from war?
    I fail to see any breakthroughs from Iraq war apart from pockets of close business friends of Mr Bush.

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by AtW
      I fail to see any breakthroughs from Iraq war apart from pockets of close business friends of Mr Bush.
      Not forgetting Mr Blairs lucrative guaranteed US lecture circuit tour after he legs it from the UK.

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by AtW
        I fail to see any breakthroughs from Iraq war apart from pockets of close business friends of Mr Bush.
        Do you read any medical journals?

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Lucifer Box
          Do you read any medical journals?
          No - but if anything significant was developed then it would have been in popular press and TV.

          $2 trillion is about $333 per person in the whole world - barely enough for a night out in London, but it could eliminate famine and save millions of people who would otherwise certainly die.

          Now please provide information about medical breakthroughs from those jurnals, but please skip those that refer to improved version of Viagra.

          Comment


            #25
            I'm sure you are absolutely correct.

            Comment


              #26
              What's all this about dismembered troops? They were all home by Christmas 2003, as scheduled in Tony Blair's Grand Plan.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by AtW
                No - but if anything significant was developed then it would have been in popular press and TV.

                $2 trillion is about $333 per person in the whole world - barely enough for a night out in London, but it could eliminate famine and save millions of people who would otherwise certainly die.

                Now please provide information about medical breakthroughs from those jurnals, but please skip those that refer to improved version of Viagra.
                Surely if that money were to be used to help cure gayness then the world would be a better place. There is some literature on finding the gay gene - what if we could identity and eradicate the Labor gene too - surely that would be worth the money as well.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by Jabberwocky
                  Surely if that money were to be used to help cure gayness then the world would be a better place. There is some literature on finding the gay gene - what if we could identity and eradicate the Labor gene too - surely that would be worth the money as well.
                  Aye JW

                  Yet surely the cherry on the cake would be the eradication of the HR gene ?

                  Now theres a noble cause ....

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Speaking of which I wonder how many of the pro war folks prior to the conflict still think it was all worthwhile ?
                    In retrospect Alf, that's a thought-provoking question, and I think I will have to hang my head in shame and say, ok mate...it wasn't worthwhile was it ?

                    All that effort, all those lives, and for what ? A complete mess.

                    Looking back on it now, I can see that the only sensible and cost-effective solution would have been to nuke the place off the face of the earth.

                    I think that would have saved countless lives on our side, and sent an unequivocal warning to the rest of the dodgy terrorist nations that the US mean business.

                    For the price of some decent large nukes, they would have had plenty of pocket change left to develop a cure for aids or cancer, which they then present with the other hand.

                    No point being big and powerful, if you don't temper it with something nice as well.
                    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

                    C.S. Lewis

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by Board Game Geek
                      Looking back on it now, I can see that the only sensible and cost-effective solution would have been to nuke the place off the face of the earth.
                      Precision strike on Saddam would have done the job - or a team of assassins. All totalitarian states have way too much weight placed in a single person whose assasination can change a lot.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X