Change Forum... Civil Aviation Travel, Polls & Prefs Tech/Ops Aviation Hobby Aviation Photography Photography Feedback Trip Reports Military Av & Space Non-Aviation Site Related LIVE Chat My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search
 When Killing Iraqi Civilians Makes Economic Sense
 B747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted Tue Jun 10 2003 16:29:02 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2464 times:

 I received this article via email today and felt that I should share it here to see if anyone can poke holes in the logic. ========= Liberals often repeat idealistic cliches that every man is created equal and that one can never place a value on human life. This is patently untrue. Every human life has a value and that value differs depending on each human's productivity. Accordingly, let us do the math together and see just why the US-led war to liberate Iraq was the best thing for the world despite the extensive collateral damage to Iraqi civilians. The average GDP for an Iraqi civilian in 2002 was US\$2,500 and the average life expectancy was 66.31 years. The average current age of the Iraqi population was 19.22 years, meaning that an Iraqi had approximately 47.09 years of life left. Using these numbers, the average calculated value of an Iraqi human life is US\$117,725. Now, Iraq has 115 billion barrels of proven oil resources. The release of these oil resources onto the open market has a natural result of bringing oil prices down. Let us assume a conservative estimate of 30 million daily barrels released to the market, or 10.95 billion annual barrels of total sales. The following table gives a corelation between the oil price drop secured by liberating Iraq with the collateral damage of civilian lives that could be deemed expendable. Price drop (per barrel in US\$) over one year \$1.00 - 93,013 civilians \$1.50 - 139,520 civilians \$2.00 - 186,026 civilians Price drop (per barrel in US\$) over two years \$1.00 - 186,013 civilians \$1.50 - 279,040 civilians \$2.00 - 372,052 civilians Price drop (per barrel in US\$) over five years \$1.00 - 465,067 civilians \$1.50 - 697,600 civilians \$2.00 - 930,130 civilians Looking at the above, the United States could have afforded to kill almost 1 million Iraqi civilians and still come out ahead in the Iraqi liberation assuming a \$2 drop in oil proces for 5 years. This of course does not even factor in the economic benefits to US companies from the reconstruction efforts. Halliburton's contracts alone are worth enough to condone the collateral sacrifice of almost 6000 Iraqi civilians. Americans who criticize George Bush for ruining the economy with his war on Iraq should read this and realize that Bush is actually helping the US economy by killing Iraqis. Do you people still oppose the liberation of Iraq now that you have seen the tangible benefits that will put more money in your pocket? ============== Thoughts? Comments?
 Windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2364 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 16:50:00 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2429 times:

 What is your point??? How more square can one person be? There is no justification in killing for oil and money! After all Russia signed a contract with the Iraqi regime in the fall, to the rights of trade with the majority of Iraq's oils reserves... One of the opposing UN members and their reasons why not to go into Iraq... I am not really sure what your point is, I just think that the things you write can seem sarcastic, if it is then I think you are as narrow minded in bringing it into this forum as the article, and if you mean what you wrote, then again as narrow minded as the article... Not sure what your point is, if I just may repeat my confused statement... Boaz...
 "If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 B747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 16:57:13 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2434 times:

 I am not really sure what your point is I'm not trying to make a point, but simply sharing an article I received from someone who was trying to justify the liberation of Iraq. It does make interesting reading to see the invasion rationalized from an economic standpoint.
 Windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2364 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 17:09:31 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2426 times:

 "It does make interesting reading to see the invasion rationalized from an economic standpoint." You really think so? Still your answer doesn't clarify what your opinion is... Do you think that war is just if it's done in the name of money? That is just being a pirate, and I don't agree with that justifying anything... I did how ever think the war was necessary, but only when looking at an entirely different perspective... Boaz...
 "If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 17:11:31 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2421 times:

 This is just a harangue from either a morally depraved or uber-cynical individual. Although this kind of nonsense is not worthy of logical discussion, I point out that this person relies on correlation thus his argument is pretty much worthless. Correlation is not causation.
 Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 17:34:12 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2399 times:

 Why, N79969? Because you were FOR the war, and you see anything putting it in a bad ligght as "morally depraved or uber-cynical"? I do not know your position on the war, but I gather from what you said that that's the main reason why you think this is crap. I think it would make great justification for the GOP, and for Bush, since WMD's wasn't, uh, all it was cracked up to be.
 KROC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 17:57:24 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2383 times:

 Damn. I figured by the 6th post, Alpha 1 would show up crying about GWB and the WMD's. And in an acronym treat, he threw in the GOP too. Well done in blaming a just one part of the problem...as usual.
 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 18:06:48 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

 Alpha 1, When you are through with the usual self-righteous, morally indignant temper tantrum, (aka "I'm actually just a moderate") I suggest re-reading the original post and my reply and thinking about both for more than 2 seconds.
 Mbmbos From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2736 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 18:50:48 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2358 times:

 The article makes the assumption that a human life can only be measured in dollars. It also makes the assumption that the only thing we can glean from life's experiences is an increased ability to consume. This is the model you are following if you buy this argument.
 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 19:05:01 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2343 times:

 Actually there is no argument because he relies on correlation. (For a moment, let us dismiss the grotesque cynicism that motivated this e-mail) Correlation has no explanatory value whatsover. For instance, there is a well-known positive correlation between the size of a person's hands and mathematical aptitude. However there is no causal relationship between the two. The missing explantory variable is, of course, age. The original e-mail is pure, unadulterated BS dressed up as quasi-serious economic analysis for the easily-deceived eye. My guess is that it was written by a college upperclassmen or beginning grad student with a little bit of knowledge of econometrics, forecasting, or stats and a dislike for the United States. B747-437B, Frankly I was disappointed and surprised that you posted this stuff as a basis for a discussion. Your posts are usually consistently good. I would have guessed that you saw through this immediately.
 Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted Tue Jun 10 2003 19:53:54 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2310 times:

 There is a certain cynicism and irrationalism in the discussion (not that I doubt the current administrations propensity to factor in collateral deaths as just the "oh, well" factor). First of all, the valuation of lives is often done post-death in order to determine damages in a legal setting. This is done for many negligence cases, even those involving airplane disasters. However, valuation does not work both ways, i.e., the valuation of a deceased person in strict economic terms does not serve as grounds to kill a person based on a low valuation in light of some other public policy interest. Well, at least not in any Anglo-American system of justice (one that prevails in much of the world today). Secondly, there is no causal correlation between dead Iraqis and the price of oil dropping. The price of oil per barrel could have dropped \$ 2 with virtually no loss of life. Or the loss of just one life, aka, Mr. Hussein. Even if you apply this ludicrous correlation, it is not a linear one. The correlation between the Iraqi dead and the price of oil would plateau out after just a few deaths.
 Windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2364 posts, RR: 10 Reply 11, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 00:20:05 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

 N79969 you said it all! This E-mail is a strange one, to just make up a human life in dollars is a pervertial way of appreciating human life! This was NOT the aim for this war, if you ask me, but again I don't want to argue about this war, I was actually for the war, but not out of the US/GB leaders spoke of, I have my own reasons and conclusions and I would like to keep that for my self   Boaz...
 "If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21652 posts, RR: 53 Reply 12, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 03:00:45 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 05:40:02 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2226 times:

 Satire is supposed to be amusing though. The frightening thing is that some people actually entertain the idea it might be true. Further I think some want to believe it because such theories (no matter how absurd or, in this case, completely illogical) help them rationalize their deep hatred for the US or George Bush.
 Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 05:43:52 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2220 times:

 Satire is supposed to be amusing though. No, it doesn't have to be. It can be deadly serious, in a tongue-in-cheek way. And I found it very amusing; that's why I mused, sarcastically, why the GOP doesn't use it to justify the war. After all, it seems WMD's were an outright fabrication, so why something based in economics?
 Vafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 15 Reply 15, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 06:05:04 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2219 times:

 When you strip the article and take the bare plant of it all, it means....KILL IRAQIS FOR OIL!!! Let's not people
 I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 06:10:42 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2218 times:

 No Alpha 1, actually satire is supposed to be funny. There was nothing funny or amusing about that nut's e-mail. He or she is clearly a disturbed person at some level. So you were being sarcastic in your reply...yeah, okay. I believe you. Really. I do. Sure.
 Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 06:12:10 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2211 times:

 I still don't believe the notion that oil was the driving force behind the war. If it was, I wouldn't have paid \$1.53 yesterday for gas.   It was part of the equation, but not the main part of the equation. I just think it was a sarcastic back-hand at the whole premise of the war, mainly WMD's, and a sarcastic attempt to "create" another reason.
 Mandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 7562 posts, RR: 76 Reply 18, posted Wed Jun 11 2003 13:33:04 UTC (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2193 times:

 B747-437B, Do me a favour, don't send that to Dick Cheney or Rummie... Otherwise my country will be next !  N79969, I wonder, do you ever laugh at non-slapstick comedy ? Anyways, who cares what the reason for the war was... just rebuild the damn country and all will be forgotten  Mandala499
 When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 Sjc>sfo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted Thu Jun 12 2003 00:08:14 UTC (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2175 times:

 Mandala499- Bad form. While I still support the war for liberation (the only justification I ever supported it for) I don't think we can forget about what happened. Bush misled the American public, and should have to take responsibility for it (though he never will). History judges us not only by our achivements, but how those achievements are reached.
 N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted Thu Jun 12 2003 04:37:43 UTC (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2150 times:

 Mandala499, I don't see any deadpan humor here, perhaps the Bahasa translation of the e-mail is outrageously funny.
 Top Of Page Change Forum... Civil Aviation Travel, Polls & Prefs Tech/Ops Aviation Hobby Aviation Photography Photography Feedback Trip Reports Military Av & Space Non-Aviation Site Related LIVE Chat Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

 Similar topics: More similar topics...
U.S. Soldier Convicted Of Killing Iraqi Walks Free posted Fri Apr 1 2005 23:08:39 by KiwiNanday
Iraqi Civilians Understand Their Danger. posted Wed Apr 2 2003 06:58:07 by CX747
Iraqi Civilians Vs Israeli Civilians posted Wed Mar 26 2003 23:30:08 by Ryanb741
Blog Makes Excuses For Rape Of 14 Year Old Iraqi posted Mon Jul 17 2006 17:22:12 by Clickhappy
This Makes Sense, Musical Funbags. posted Fri Oct 14 2005 04:10:57 by Jetjack74
Why Gay Marriage Makes Sense posted Mon Mar 1 2004 22:58:59 by SFOintern
You Know Christmas Is Coming When... posted Sat Nov 25 2006 08:57:18 by Carmenlu15
Buddhist Monk Makes Himself Eunuch posted Thu Nov 23 2006 19:28:40 by Goldenshield
Rosie O'D Makes Ridiculous Homophobe Charge posted Wed Nov 22 2006 14:26:36 by 767Lover
Town Makes It Illegall To Display Foreign Flags posted Tue Nov 21 2006 16:19:04 by Alberchico