Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Freedom is Never Free

MJG
edited May 2013 in Off-Topic
Hi Guys,

Using one measure, the price of freedom is approximately two million and eight hundred thousand. I purposely wrote it in words so that you linger on that number. That is 2.8 million total American military casualties who died or were wounded or are missing for all our conflicts starting with the Revolutionary War. Roughly half those numbers register deaths (1.3 million) while the other half (1.5 million) is mostly wounded.

The three most costly battles were the Civil War at a cost of 625,000 lives, followed by the two major 20th century conflicts at a 406,000 and 117,000 death price tag for World War II and World War I, respectively. Including the wounded would double these numbers.

These statistics are ghastly, but are a partial payment for freedom. As President John F. Kennedy famously said: “The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”

Indeed the cost is staggering, but the other option is totally unacceptable. These global events and their world changing impacts must always be examined in context and perspective. The war deaths of 1.3 million, and a complete casualty count of 2.8 million are huge, devastating numbers, but they pale when contrasted against tragic happenings and decisions we annually accept without blinking an eye, and yet could control.

My eye popping comparative statistic is that associated with abortion rates in the US since Rowe v. Wade (1973). Without specifically calculating the precise value, the average annual abortion rate has been approximately one million abortions per year since 1973. The yearly data show a low value of 616,000 abortions in 1973 and a peak level of 1,429,000 reported in 1990. These statistics are from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The current value is in the 800,000 range and is trend-wise dropping.

Since Rowe v. Wade over 40 million abortions have been performed. That’s 40 million lost chances for another Albert Einstein or Bill Gates. I never imagined the scope and cost of this close Supreme Court decision.

My simple takeaway from the CDC reports is that for every 3-year cumulative period, we choose to abort roughly the same number of potential US citizens that were killed or wounded in the entire 200-plus years of our Nation’s historical wars. Our annualized war casualty rate is a blip compared to the abortion statistics. I did not anticipate the magnitude asymmetry of the two statistical data sets.

That’s a sad commentary. If we’re so willing to accept the current abortion environment, then perhaps our composite war death toll should not be interpreted as so bad a price. It is the price of freedom. Of course, here we are comparing death rates having high, defendable moral implications with a more controversial individualistic moral decision. Surely not an easy or meaningful comparison, but interesting nevertheless.

And our war casualty rates will certainly increase over time given the large body of Muslims who subscribe to the newer, aggressive portions of the Koran. Islamic scholars have opined that the newer parts of the Koran abrogate the older segments. Unfortunately, the older sections are the more peaceful units, whereas the more recent writings are more aggressive, more political, and more militant. These newer elements advocate fight instead of flight as part of a religious, political, and economic overarching doctrine. We will need a strong military over the long-term given this dire threat.

And China enters into this equation also. Lots of potential military adventures on our horizon.

So on this upcoming Memorial Day, I take particular pride in saluting all our military establishments. They have forever served with courage, with honor and with distinction. They will continue to do so with our firm support. Please do so. Our Nation’s flag will fly high over my home on this and every Memorial Day thanks to our military.

Also, if possible, please provide some financial support for our returning veterans. They’ll need jobs. For those who have returned wounded, they’ll need even more. The Wounded Warriors program is inexpensive and does excellent work. Our family donates; I encourage you to consider doing so also.

Happy Memorial Day everyone.

Best regards.

Comments

  • edited May 2013
    That's one hell of a salute to Veteran's; for the sake of statistics, you choose to drag Rowe v. Wade into the discussion.
    I do believe you need to head to a theological discussion board.

    Geeeeeeeeshhh !!!

    From a Viet Nam era veteran, who lost too many friends and family in that mess.

    Catch
  • From a civilian, who was JUST young enough to miss the Vietnam War draft: Let us revere the supreme sacrifice offered by so many who have died in uniform, AND those whose lives have been forever taken from them in a figurative sense, due to their injuries, in uniform. It seems to me, having made the study of history a constant exercise, that WW II was the most recent WORTHY conflict our forces have been engaged in. But a G.I does not get to choose where he or she might be sent. I will conclude with a quotation from a USMC Major General: https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/945003_544226475619541_1914046051_n.jpg
  • Put in the quote, then the link after it. It is too important to omit.

    I just returned from visiting my 98 yo father who held his best Army friend in his arms as he died from a sniper's bullet in Italy, and I missed the photo op as his 7 month old great grand-daughter smiled at him this afternoon. Life goes on for the survivors; my brother is named for his friend.

    He won't talk about the war, but I remember overhearing my mother and him discussing memories at night when I was a child and supposed to be asleep. He spoke of the heroism of the Nesei soldiers in that combat area. Costs a lot of blood to buy your family's freedom from the camps.

    As I approach my dotage (my children will assure you this is an overly optimistic verb), I realize that many of our wars have had commercial foundations. This may seem simplistic, but it's a late night ramble. Revolutionary: control of taxation. Civil: the economics of slavery. Spanish-American: new bully on the block. WWI: harder to figure that one; might have been idealism, but idealism is always suspect. May have been the British manipulating opinion. (And it was their empire). WWII: the Japanese wanted their economic empire (we'd have gotten in if the British were going to lose their possessions, I suspect, but Pearl Harbor left no option.) Granada?: Reagan's unrecognized dementia? Admittedly not much economic incentive, unless one considers Caribbean medical schools. Panama: Gee, was there a canal issue? Operation Iraq Liberation - check the acronym (yes, I stole it).
  • MJG, what the heck was that about? A well deserved tribute and acknowledgment of America's war dead and wounded with a controversial sprinkle of abortion numbers thrown into the middle of your post. Then ending with "Happy Memorial Day everyone". To quote Ctach22, "Geeeeeeeeshhh !!!"

    Well, like Max's life-timing, the Viet Nam draft was waining down by the time I was eligible, but on behalf of my father (WWII) and brother (VN) and many more family members, thanks for the actual Memorial Day tribute. Just wish you didn't dilute your tribute with an unrelated controversial topic.
  • edited May 2013
    Reply to @MikeM: Agree with your sentiments Mike. To MJG's credit, he's employing an old teaching trick here - throw in something completely off the wall near end of lecture just to see if class's paying attention. Just wish he'd find another place to put it. ... Salute to all our veterans. If you caught the Pres touring Moore yesterday, the U.S. flag flying high atop the rubble no doubt brought a tear to many eye. Regards
  • Reply to @catch22: This is a case where you and I are in the same boat. Stealing from rono, peace.
  • Reply to @hank: More like pandering for attention. Not worth dignifying with a response.

    Another veteran.
  • edited May 2013
    Reply to @Old_Joe: I thought the title: "Freedom is Never Free" both meaningful and appropriate. Had Catch & Mike not objected, wouldn't have looked at post further. (Hence my remark). ... Far be it from me to object to off-topic content. If that were a crime, they'd lock me up & throw away the keys - though the placement here was curious - and that's what I think the hubub is about. Good to hear from you OJ. Hope all had a pleasant weekend.
  • Hi Guys,

    Thank you all for taking time to read and reply to my post.

    After rereading my posting a few days after its submittal, I concur with those of you who were perplexed by its overemphasis on the comparison between the US abortion rate and the US war casualty statistics. You deserve an explanation; I think I have one, at least a partial clarification.

    I initially setout to thank our military for its loyal and reliable service with a single warning about the dangers of the militant Muslim Jihad movement to encourage continued financial and public support of our military. Those sections of the Koran written after Mohammad went to Medina advocate slaying the infidels. It’s a real long-term, dangerous problem because of huge religious numbers.

    By the way, that is a little self-congratulatory since I served in the military; go Army.

    I wrote the Memorial Day remembrance on Sunday. As I was composing the piece I was simultaneously researching the war casualty statistics. This may seem harsh, but I was pleasantly surprised by what I interpreted as the comparatively low figures. I had expected the body-count to be far more brutal.

    Earlier the same week I joined my wife and attended a presentation at our local library that was delivered by a representative of some female Pro-Life action group. I was not anticipating a balanced presentation; I was not disappointed. But the statistics shocked me. The numbers absolutely stunned me at the time, and they are still invading my peace of mind.

    The quoted abortion rate levels were so high that I initially denied their accuracy, and defaulted to the Internet for verification. The values were accurately summarized. Since the abortion rate has averaged one million per year since the Supreme Court decision, and since the US birth rate is about four million annually, as a society, we formally accept a lawful 20 % degradation to our population growth.

    I do not here argue the societal or the moral issues or implications of that decision. These are beyond my competency. I do not even argue the economic impact of this decision although I recognize that demographic growth contributes a full one-third to the GDP growth picture. I also recognize that the current US birth rate per family is below the 2.1 population neutral level. These data influence economics and economic considerations and are within my competency wheelhouse.

    It was my perceived disparity between the US war statistics and the freshly introduced abortion statistics that distorted my submittal. I still believe that a juxtaposition of these data sets serves a useful contrasting purpose. But I clearly overemphasized the abortion data to the detriment of the main purpose for my posting. The unexpected magnitude of the abortion rate data is still dominating and disturbing my thinking.

    Unlike the female half of our population, I fail to successfully multitask. It always amazes me how well our Better-Halves handle a diffuse assignment set. Personally, I am much more linear and focus more narrowly. When writing to pay tribute to our troops, I couldn’t put the abortion statistics mentally away. So they were integrated into my post.

    My posting goal was to simply honor our military, both past and present. The extended inclusion of the abortion data diluted that purpose since I fully understand its controversial character.

    Sorry for the commingling of the two separate subjects. I often do that while searching for patterns and correlations in the economics and investment worlds.

    Today, and likely tomorrow, I’m more haunted by the abortion rate data than I am about the war casualty data.

    Best Wishes.
  • edited May 2013
    Reply to @MJG: Thanks for the explanation MJG. I'm prone to the same type of co-mingling on occasion - so do understand how that can happen. Often, I start out to say one thing and end up with another (originally unintended) message. This era of instant communications has its pitfalls. Take care.
  • MJG

    I do not think you were wrong in your way of thinking. People need to wake up to the fact that one death is no more important than another. We get all weepy over people shot with a handgun but gloss over the abortions. That's what the media and the democrats want, plain and simple. I grieved for all those that died on 9/11/01due to the terrorist attacks but I also felt sorry for the families that also lost loved one on that day but their death had nothing to do with terrorist attacks.

    Thanks for serving your country.

    Maybe the forum for your opinion is wrong but that deep down feeling that something else is more troubling is absolutely right on.

    Art
  • Reply to @Art: I beg to differ but the decision to abort or not is strictly a personal decision. It most definitely is not a political decision and politics should play no role. I have no idea whatsoever what goes on in the hearts, minds and lives of those who struggle with that decision and I doubt that you or anyone else who's never had to go down that road does either.
  • I agree. Then why does the government fund abortion clinics? Our government is to big and intrusive.

    Art
  • Reply to @MJG: I don't believe for a minute that you didn't calculate your post to be controversial. There was no mistake in commingling thoughts. You are analytical and articulate and you wouldn't mix the two topics unless you meant to do so. Others may buy your rebuttal, but I read no explanation here, only the self absorbency and the need for more attention.

    You actually stated the true reason for your initial post in the last sentence of your your reply.

    My path forward is not to open this discussion again.


  • edited May 2013
    Reply to @MikeM: I understand where you're coming from Mike. I generally enjoy engaging MJG and others on issues. I'll also poke fun at style when I think it obscures rather than illuminates - as is sometimes the case with MJG. However, intent and motive are more difficult to pin down or engage on. I won't go there. You have - and you're certainly entitled to. I thought his reply sounded contrite and well intended. Not sure what else anybody wants. We're outa here too. ... Enough's enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.