Some Numbers to Drive Home Our Military Superiority

We have 11 aircraft carriers. Did you know that? Do you know how big an aircraft carrier is? They run on nuclear generators, and house up the 5,700 people. They are floating cities, equipped with the firepower to launch an all out war, all on their own. And we have 11 of them...

USS Ronald Reagan - Nimitz Class Star Destroy... er Super Carrier

A natural question might be, how many aircraft carriers do others have? Well, to begin with, it appears building and maintaining an aircraft carrier is a pretty big job. So far, out of the 195 countries in the world only 5 have aircraft carriers; the United States, Britain, France, Italy and Russia (although China is considering building one). France has one, Italy has two, Britain has Two and Russia has one. We have 11.

We have nearly twice as many carriers as the rest of the world combined has. We could lose 6 and still have as many as the rest of the world. Its clear we can reduce the size of our defense spending without increasing the risk to our country. Each costs 4.5 billion dollars. Think of how many kids that could put through college.

Listen, I love aircraft carriers, I hope my enthusiasm for the technology and sheer scope of them is clear; but it is important to understand what we're spending our resources on. We don't need to fight ANY of the countries that have aircraft carriers. France, the UK and Italy are close allies. And any war with Russia would be short and nuclear.

In short, we have a Navy that is not necessary for the world as it is. That is fat we can trim. It is better spent on domestic investments, like health-care or rebuilding infrastructure.

Largest Deficit in US History -- Without Adding War Costs

Some great highlights from an AP story on MSNBC regarding the amassing crisis of the deficit.

"The next president will inherit a record budget deficit of $482 billion, according to a new Bush administration estimate released Monday."

"But the numbers could go even higher if the economy performs worse than the White House predicts."

"The administration actually underestimates the deficit, however, since it leaves out about $80 billion in war costs. In a break from tradition — and in violation of new mandates from Congress — the White House did not include its full estimate of war costs."

Just to be clear, your government spent much more money than it took in, fudged the numbers so it wouldn't look as bad and despite the deception the budget was still the worst in history.

Reminds me of these charming graphs, be sure to remember this the next time someone tries perpetuate the myth of republican economic conservatism.

Obama Going to Iraq

An MSNBC Story contains this snippet about Obama's plans,

"Under heavy pressure from McCain, who criticized his failure to visit Iraq since 2006, Obama plans to travel to Iraq and Afghanistan. The dates have not been announced for security reasons but the trip is expected within the next month."

I'm glad he's going to Iraq to see the conditions on the ground, but I am more than a little worried about his safety. The Illinois Senator is the spearhead of a political movement sure to change the status quo. As such, he has no shortage of enemies. With perhaps 126,000 mercenaries in Iraq, I can imagine a few bad apples capable of such a deed. There is consolation in the fact that he will undoubtedly be under the protection of the US Army the greatest fighting force in the history of the world.

Let's hope these fears are unfounded.

New Blog

I have a new religion and politics blog, Jesusillin check it out
http://jesusillin.blogspot.com/

Blog back online, at least until December

Another quarter at UCI another class where I'm required to keep a blog. Lucky me I have this little thing. So expect pretty frequent updates from here on out until December.

Update: Greg Palast Responds to Criticism

Greg Palast has already responded, it seems I've been under a rock. He basically argues that all anyone can do with all the raw data is fact check it to death and do exactly what he and the BBC is doing. He's not a rouge blogger with no credentials, he's an investigative reporter with the best news agency in the world. He goes on to say that large portions of the evidence and investigative work are laid out in his book and none of that was disputed because none of it was considered. For now I'm placing my trust in Greg Palast. If he's over selling himself, it's a bold gambit.

Controversy Over Palast Claims

the community over at Daily Kos is having a heated debate regarding the validity of Greg Palast's claims. Some people, perhaps more rational than me, have argued for a bit of scepticism since Greg Palast has only produced dozens of the "500 e-mails" and only 1800 of the "tens of thousands" of names on "Caging Lists". I don't think this is meant to downplay the seriousness of this accusation, its merely meant to demand evidence before judgement, a worthy sentiment.