You are hereBlogs / davidswanson's blog / Six Facts No War Supporter Knows

Six Facts No War Supporter Knows

By davidswanson - Posted on 23 July 2010

By David Swanson

This coming week, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on $33 billion for war. A majority of Americans opposes this, but a sizable minority of Americans supports it. No one who supports it can be aware of any of the following six facts.

1. For many months, probably years, at least the second largest and probably the largest source of revenue for the Taliban has been U.S. taxpayers. We are giving the Taliban our money instead of investing it in useful things at home or abroad. "WARLORD, INC.: Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan," is a report from the Majority Staff of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs in the U.S. House of Representatives. The report documents payoffs to the Taliban for safe passage of U.S. goods, payoffs very likely greater than the Taliban's profits from opium, its other big money maker. And this is neither new nor unknown to top U.S. officials. But it must be unknown to Americans supporting the war. You can't support a war where you're funding both sides unless you want both sides to lose. We lock people away for giving a pair of socks to the enemy, while our own government serves as chief financial sponsor.

2. Our top consumer of oil is the U.S. military. We don't just fight wars in areas of the globe that are coincidentally rich in oil, but fighting those wars is the single biggest way in which we burn oil. We pollute the air in the process of poisoning the earth with all variety of weaponry. According to the 2007 CIA World Fact Book, when oil consumption is broken down per capita, the U.S. military ranks fourth in the world, behind just three actual nations. There's no way to care about the environment while allowing the money that could create renewable energy to be spent instead on an operation whose destructiveness is rivaled only by BP. We could have 20 green energy jobs at $50 K each for what it costs to send one soldier to Afghanistan. We're fighting wars for the fuel to fight wars, even though the process is eating up the funds we could use to try to survive its side-effects.

3. Over half of every U.S. tax dollar is spent on wars, the military, and payments on debt for past wars and military spending. Here's a pie chart that breaks it down for you. If you're concerned about government spending, you can't just be concerned with the minority of it that is carefully funded with taxes and off-setting cuts elsewhere. You have to also consider the single biggest item, the one that takes up a majority of the budget, large chunks of which are routinely funded off the books, borrowed from China, and passed with so-called "emergency supplemental" bills of the sort now before the House of Representatives, the sole purpose of which is to keep the money outside the budget. Numerous economic studies have shown that investing in the military, even at home, does less for the economy than tax cuts, which do less for the economy than investing in education, energy, infrastructure, and other areas. Its wars or jobs, we can't have both. The labor movement has mostly (with some good exceptions) been silent on war spending, in part because jobs spending has been packaged into the same bill. Now it's not. Now the House is confronted with a bill that spends on war the money that is needed for jobs, for housing, for schools, for green energy, for retirement. Will advocates of these raise their voices this week?

4. A leading, and probably the leading, cause of death in the U.S. military is suicide. U.S. troops are killing themselves in record numbers. One central reason for this is likely that these troops have no idea what it is they are risking their lives, and taking others' lives, for. Can we expect them to know, when top officials in Washington don't? When the President's special representative to Afghanistan testified in the Senate recently, senators from both parties asked him repeatedly what the goal was, what success would look like, for what purpose the war went on. Richard Holbrooke had no answers. Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told the Los Angeles Times: "A lot of folks on both sides of the aisle think this effort is adrift. A lot of folks you'd consider the strongest hawks in the country are scratching their heads in concern." Corker complained that after listening for 90 minutes to Holbrooke he had "no earthly idea what our objectives are on the civilian front. So far, this has been an incredible waste of time."

5. The $33 billion about to be voted on cannot possibly be needed to continue the war in Afghanistan, because it is exclusively to be used for escalating that war. The President was publicly pressured by his generals several months ago to begin an escalation, but Congress has yet to fund it. To the extent that it has been begun unfunded, it can be undone. CNN reports: "Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned senators in June that military operations will need to be reduced for the rest of the year unless Congress approves additional funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan." This is nonsense. If this escalation funding were blocked, the war would remain at the level it was at before. And that's if the Pentagon respects the authority of the Congress. The other alternative, openly indicated by Gates, is that the Pentagon will fund the escalation out of its standard budget. Congressman Alan Grayson has a bill called "The War Is Making You Poor Act" which would require that wars be funded out of the military budget, which would eliminate federal taxes on the first $35,000 anyone earned and reduce the national debt. How horrible would that be?

6. War would be the greatest evil on earth even if it were free. Watch this new video of a man whose father was shot and killed while sleeping in bed. More of our tax dollars at work. How many of these stories of what our military does can we write off? Our drones kill both civilians and "insurgents," as do our night raids and check points. Or, maybe not the check points. General Stanley McChrystal said that of the amazing number of people we've killed at check points, none of them have been any threat. And the damage lasts in the places we destroy. Look at this new report on the damage done to the children of Fallujah. This is not because U.S. soldiers aren't brave or their parents didn't raise them well. It's because these wars don't involve pairs of armies on battlefields. We're occupying countries where the enemies look like everyone except us.

Well, maybe our representatives know all of this and still fund wars because people who fund them tell them to. But what can we do about it? We vote whenever there's an election, or at least some of us do. Isn't that our role? What does this have to do with elections? It should have everything to do with them. When we call our congress members this week we should not just ask them to vote No on war money, we should demand it, and we should let them know that we will work to unelect them, even replacing them with someone worse (since you can't get much worse), if they vote for this money. And we should spend August rewarding and punishing accordingly. Here are 88 candidates for Congress this year who have committed to not voting a dime for these wars. They are from every party and political inclination. They should be supported.

If this war funding can be blocked for another week it will be blocked until mid-September and perhaps for good. If we can get closer to doing that than we have before, we will have something to build on. Just holding a straightforward vote in which war opponents vote No and war supporters vote Yes, no matter how close or far we are from winning, will identify who needs to keep their job and who doesn't. If most of the Yes votes are Republican, we will be able to confront the President with the opposition of his own party. We're moving toward peace.

Get resources from
FCNL has a toll-free number to call your representative: 1-888-493-5443. Use it.

Quote: "1. For many months, probably years, at least the second largest and probably the largest source of revenue for the Taliban has been U.S. taxpayers."

Note: There's a link for a related petition people can add their names to in this following article. Actually, the article refers to this as "a statement being circulated among peace activists for transmission to the Senate and the U.S. Congress". People who agree with the statement are asked to join, sign, and individually send their signed copy to their senators. That sounds like a petition to me, except that it wouldn't be of the kind with many signatures on one copy of the statement or appeal.

"Reports That Pentagon Funding of Taliban is "Unintentional" Are Wrong"

by Ralph Lopez, WarIsACrime,, July 24, 2010, originally July 22nd

There's a very little that I believe to disagree with in that article, but this may also be due to wording, only.

One thing I do disagree with, however, is calling the Taliban "the enemy" when speaking of the foreign forces in Afghanistan. Mark Twain referred to US forces in the Philippines as "assassins". It's unfortunately what they are today in Afghanistan and Iraq, and everywhere else they are placed for US global empire. The Taliban are resistance fighters, not enemy.

Now if there are Afghans who consider the Taliban enemy because of their harsh Sharia Law practices and beliefs, then this is between them; not between the west and the Taliban.

i don't think people are enemies
i think they're people

Quote: "4. A leading, and probably the leading, cause of death in the U.S. military is suicide".

That is simultaneously tragic and funny in a very dark way; incredibly dark.

It's [very] unfortunate that people easily believe politicians and military recruiters, as well as commanders.

Quote: "U.S. troops are killing themselves in record numbers".

That has a link to the following article for an MSNBC report.

"Extremely Sad but not Unexpected News", July 16th

Quoting from the excerpt in that page:

"Suicides for the first half of the year are up 12 percent over 2009. In June, 32 soldiers are believed to have committed suicide, including 21 on active duty".

12% over 2009 doesn't tell us anything really significant unless we are also told what the number of suicides in 2009 were. 12% more than one is 1.12. 12% more than 100 is 112. 12% more than 1,000 is 1,120. 12% more than 10,000 is 10,120. 120 more than 10,000 is significant, but not earth-shatteringly.

Statistics regularly are mis-presented or -stated and people need to be on guard about statistics, because they can be used for purporses of deception and, therefore, manipulation (of minds and therefore conduct).

However, 32 US soldier suicides in one month is definitely NOT good at all. That this includes 21 who committed suicide while on active duty is an important indicator, I believe; but the mere or sole fact that 32 US troops of these wars committed suicide in one month is already BAD, shocking. It's many, or certainly seems to be.

Resistance forces would struggle to be able to kill this many US troops per month, but the US govt has an easy way to do this by deceiving citizens into unwittingly accepting to serve in wars that are not at all for the reasons that the political "leadership" has publicly stated.

I can go on at length, but will cut this short. The US military is a deadly and wrongful organization (say) to join.

Mark Twain referred to the US military in the US war on the Philippines and Spain as "assassins" and he was right. But while that's still true today, we can't really say that all US citizens who've served and still serve in the present wars for empire realize what they're really serving for. Many or enough of them don't realize what these wars today are really about, so these troops are assassins in a sense, but not while they realize it.

To be a true, real assassin, one must know or realize that he or she is acting as an assassin and therefore murderer.

I don't think that most US troops realized that this is what they were and are really used for; deceptively. If I'm mistaken about that, then reality is much darker than I thought it was.

12% more than 10,000 is 11,200, not 10,120. People do indeed need to be on guard about statistics.

I wrote too quickly or at least should have double-checked my numbers.

And 12% more than 10,000 US military suicides would be a large increase. 12% more than 100 would not be a large increase and might possibly be an expectable or statistically normal fluctuation, say. If 1,000 committed suicide in 2009, then 120 more doing this in 2010 is serious. But I doubt that the numbers are anywhere near that high.

I've read that the military suicide rate due to the present wars is not historically high for US soldiers, but don't know if this is true or not. And I also read an article in which the writer said something like the military suicide rate is not particularly high when compared to civilian suicide rates in the U.S. That is also something I can't say to be either true or false. However, I did read some article or report several years ago that specified rates of suicides in the US, perhaps not all states, but some and the highest rate was in the state of either Washington or Oregon. The rate there was said to be 10% or 10.x% and mostly due to the climate. I think the piece said that the lack of sunny days was the apparent (if not certain) explanation.

But that high rate was only matched by the province of Quebec in Canada, where the reason for the high rate of suicide was economic and for only farmers.

Putting aside those two high and abnormal rates, I wonder what the military suicide rate is like compared to the average civilian suicide rate and what the military suicide rates this year and since the present wars were started are like compared to historical suicide rates in the U.S. military.

This sort of information is needed when speaking of the suicide rate in the U.S. military being high. Maybe there is reason to panic or be shocked, but we would not know unless provided with the additionally needed statistics.

Quote: "5. The $33 billion about to be voted on cannot possibly be needed to continue the war in Afghanistan, because it is exclusively to be used for escalating that war".

Great. We need this hellbent war to be stopped and they steal taxpayer dollars to make the war worse than it already hellbent is.

Quote: "One central reason for this is likely that these troops have no idea what it is they are risking their lives, and taking others' lives, for".

I think that that is very likely. But while it's very likely, this might also be only a matter of apparence. It's very possible that a serious number of citizens enlisted to become soldiers even while already having had some awareness that the US is extremely criminal because of economic desperation and not realizing the full extent of accepting to serve under criminal and treachorous political and military "leadership".

I'll repeat that in a different format.

*) It's very possible that a serious number of citizens enlisted to become soldiers even while already having had some awareness that the US is extremely criminal;

*) [because] of economic desperation and not realizing the full extent of accepting to serve under criminal and treachorous political and military "leadership".

Economic desperation is a fact of reality and it can cause otherwise moral and considerably moral persons to make bad decisions or choices. It can blind them to or from important reality. It can cause them to act with haste.

Citizens literally duped into unwittingly serving for criminal "leadership" are only guilty of being badly [naive]; and that really is not their fault. They were "trained" to be this way by a dumbed down, brainwashed, ... society. Some citizens might serve while realizing that they're serving a treachorous political and military leaderships and these citizens certainly would not be duped about this; but they would be traitors and there should not be a square inch in the country for them to be able to rest.

When I say "literally duped", I do mean only citizens who were and are literally fooled.

That unfortunately is what the societies in the US and other western countries are. Only [individuals] stand out. There are many [indivduals], but we wouldn't know this if we only paid attention to politicians, military commanders, and corporate media.

Speaking Events



August 2-6: Peace and Democracy Conference at Democracy Convention in Minneapolis, Minn.


September 22-24: No War 2017 at American University in Washington, D.C.


October 28: Peace and Justice Studies Association Conference

Find more events here.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.