# Conservatives Overwhelmingly Oppose Healthcare for 9/11 Workers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 1, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816 "2010-08-01T20:05:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/141 "2010-08-03T03:57:27Z")
Except that under Islamic _sharia_ law, which the Democrats are determined to foist upon an unwilling America… ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/142 "2010-08-03T04:04:54Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > How would an illegal immigrant get this health care in the end? > > Ok, let’s say that this bill passes without any amendments. Juan Gonzalez was a 9/11 worker and applies for benefits. While checking his employment history, the feds discover that he is an illegal immigrant! > > So, isn’t he deported instead of receiving health care? > > I’ve never understood this aspect of any of these “denial of X to illegal immigrants”. Once they are found to be illegals, don’t any benefits immediately cease and they go to a detention facility to await deportment? In the instant case, that’s a pretty good point- although people rarely get deported if agencies other than ICE catch them. They’d just be denied benefits. In more general terms, government agencies/schools/medical providers/whatever may be prevented by statute (or practicality, or even just procedure) from investigating whether recipients of certain benefits are present illegally. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/143 "2010-08-03T04:28:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why not? What are the dollars associated with regime change in Iraq? How many people did Saddam and his sons torture in 1998, and how much money do you assign to each? > [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Listen to [Christopher Hitchens’ account of life in Iraq under Saddam Hussein](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eaEuf5Z6yA&feature=PlayList&p=2E6E8ED5FFC37162&playnext=1&index=37), based upon his first hand observations after having been there, and perhaps you’ll begin to get an idea as to why some of us feel that the Iraqi populace is much, much better off now than it was under Hussein, despite the Iraqi casualties that were an unavoidable result of the war and which we took considerable pains to minimize. Are you two actually defending spending $736 billion to improve the lives of Iraqis, in Iraq; while simultaneously decrying spending $7 billion, some fraction of which may or may not pay for medical care for foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11? Seriously? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/144 "2010-08-03T04:57:03Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > The illegal Immigrant amendment was bullshit. It had no place in the bill. You want to prevent waste there are other areas that need it more and better ways to do it in this bill. Reduce the amount and narrow the criteria for recipients if you need do but get something done. The illegal immigrant amendment wasn’t intended to prevent waste, it was intended to guarantee that illegal immigrants don’t benefit from government spending. So that was its place in the bill. If you think that illegal immigrants shouldn’t get benefits, if you’re passing a law providing people with benefits, you need to include a provision to exclude illegal immigrants, because otherwise they will. Now, you may think they should, but there are those who think they shouldn’t, and that’s one of the provisions of the Republican party. There’s a similar provision in the health care bill that got passed. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/145 "2010-08-03T05:02:46Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > The illegal immigrant amendment wasn’t intended to prevent waste, it was intended to guarantee that illegal immigrants don’t benefit from government spending. So that was its place in the bill. If you think that illegal immigrants shouldn’t get benefits, if you’re passing a law providing people with benefits, you need to include a provision to exclude illegal immigrants, because otherwise they will. Now, you may think they should, but there are those who think they shouldn’t, and that’s one of the provisions of the Republican party. There’s a similar provision in the health care bill that got passed. Cite that there are illegal immigrants who would/could benefit from this, and justification for the party of “Christian values” leaving the poorest and weakest among us out in the cold? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/146 "2010-08-03T05:10:01Z")
How many illegal immigrants do you think are likely to expose themselves to any investigation at all? A claim for medical benefits pretty much demands some documentation, no? So how many such illegals are you expecting will try to sneak into the pie, and risk deportation? If an illegal immigrant is denied benefits, what’s he gonna do, sue in Federal Court? I wouldn’t give much for his chances, what do you think? Maybe with a liberal activist judge applying _sharia_ law? ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/147 "2010-08-03T05:39:28Z")
It is clear that the problem is far bigger than 3 illegal immigrants. The law is stupid as written (anyone working any ammount of time in the 2 years after), but also, if it specifically gave benefits to illegals (who could benefit without being explicitly mentioned) it could open a can of worm vis a vis equal treatment and demands for similar regulations all over the place. [quote=“Cisco, post:145, topic:548816”] > [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Cite that there are illegal immigrants who would/could benefit from this, and justification for the party of “Christian values” leaving the poorest and weakest among us out in the cold? You can only help so many poor. You shold be able to choose which destitutes you want to help. You may want to prevent “good intentions” from actually harming more than benefitting. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/148 "2010-08-03T05:53:02Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > Cite that there are illegal immigrants who would/could benefit from this, and justification for the party of “Christian values” leaving the poorest and weakest among us out in the cold? I have no idea if there are illegal immigrants who could benefit from this or not. I assume there are, because otherwise, there’s no reason for any Democrat to object to a provision not allowing them to benefit, but I have no idea. In terms of justification, I’m not sure why you’re asking me. I’d assume that either the Republicans don’t see their attitude about illegal immigration as contradicting their “Christian values”, or that they do see it as contradictory but realize that there’s a lot of anti-illegal immigrant sentiment in the county that they feel that they can politically benefit from, and that gaining such political support is more important to them than “Christian values”. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/149 "2010-08-03T05:57:03Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > I’m not sure why you’re asking me. I was more putting it out there to anybody who wanted to answer, because I’ve already asked in this thread and was responded to by crickets. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/150 "2010-08-03T13:14:28Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > It is clear that the problem is far bigger than 3 illegal immigrants. The law is stupid as written (anyone working any ammount of time in the 2 years after), but also, if it specifically gave benefits to illegals (who could benefit without being explicitly mentioned) it could open a can of worm vis a vis equal treatment and demands for similar regulations all over the place. It didn’t specifically grant benefits to illegals. It just didn’t specifically exclude them. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/151 "2010-08-03T13:32:30Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Are you two actually defending spending $736 billion to improve the lives of Iraqis, in Iraq; while simultaneously decrying spending $7 billion, some fraction of which may or may not pay for medical care for foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11? > > Seriously? Yes. Now you do the math. Go ahead. First tell me how much each life murdered by Uday Hussein is owrth. Actually, let’s start even [easier: this 14-year-old girl.](http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/147P57.htm) How much money is it worth to prevent her attack? $10? $20? Tell me, and we can start counting from there. And also: why are you saying that the bill is for “foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11?” That’s not what the law actually said, is it? It provided benefits to anyone who worked in the area of lower Manhattan, for a period of two years after the attack, for even one hour, selling hot dogs or painting tourist souveiners. So why did you make that claim about the law? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/152 "2010-08-03T13:49:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And also: why are you saying that the bill is for “foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11?” That’s not what the law actually said, is it? It provided benefits to anyone who worked in the area of lower Manhattan, for a period of two years after the attack, for even one hour, selling hot dogs or painting tourist souveiners. No, it didn’t. It offered initial health evaluations to such people, subject to the following limitations: > [@](#): > > Benefits for an initial health evaluation under this part for a screening-eligible WTC survivor shall consist only of a single medical initial health evaluation consistent with initial health evaluation protocols described in paragraph (1). Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as preventing such an individual from seeking additional medical initial health evaluations at the expense of the individual. It only guarantees _treatment_ to such people found to be suffering from the following conditions: > [@](#): > > ‘(b) List of WTC-Related Health Conditions for Survivors- The list of health conditions for screening-eligible WTC survivors and certified-eligible WTC survivors consists of the following: > > ‘(1) AERODIGESTIVE DISORDERS- > > ‘(A) Interstitial lung diseases. > > ‘(B) Chronic respiratory disorder–fumes/vapors. > > ‘(C) Asthma. > > ‘(D) Reactive airways dysfunction syndrome (RADS). > > ‘(E) WTC-exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). > > ‘(F) Chronic cough syndrome. > > ‘(G) Upper airway hyperreactivity. > > ‘(H) Chronic rhinosinusitis. > > ‘(I) Chronic nasopharyngitis. > > ‘(J) Chronic laryngitis. > > ‘(K) Gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD). > > ‘(L) Sleep apnea exacerbated by or related to a condition described in a previous clause. > > ‘(2) MENTAL HEALTH CONDITIONS- > > ‘(A) Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). > > ‘(B) Major depressive disorder. > > ‘(C) Panic disorder. > > ‘(D) Generalized anxiety disorder. > > ‘(E) Anxiety disorder (not otherwise specified). > > ‘(F) Depression (not otherwise specified). > > ‘(G) Acute stress disorder. > > ‘(H) Dysthymic disorder. > > ‘(I) Adjustment disorder. > > ‘(J) Substance abuse. > > ‘(3) ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS- Any cancer (or type of cancer) or other condition added to the list in section 3312(a)(3) pursuant to paragraph (5) or (6) of section 3312(a), as such provisions are applied under subsection (a) with respect to certified-eligible WTC survivors. Oh, and how many people do you think worked in lower Manhattan between September 12, 2001 and September 11, 2003? Bet you it’s more than 25,000. > [@](#): > > The total number of individuals not described in paragraph (1)(A)(i) who may be certified as certified-eligible WTC survivors under paragraph (2)(B) shall not exceed 25,000 at any time. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/153 "2010-08-03T14:07:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > And also: why are you saying that the bill is for “foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11?” That’s not what the law actually said, is it? It provided benefits to anyone who worked in the area of lower Manhattan, for a period of two years after the attack, for even one hour, selling hot dogs or painting tourist souveiners. > > No, it didn’t. It offered initial health evaluations to such people, subject to the following limitations: Is an health screening not a benefit? > [@](#): > > It only guarantees _treatment_ to such people found to be suffering from the following conditions: Yes. And if a person dropped by to install an new sign in a candy store in Battery Park, two years after the attack, and spent an hour doing it, and happens for unrelated reasons to have asthma, he may claim benefits here. Yes? > [@](#): > > Oh, and how many people do you think worked in lower Manhattan between September 12, 2001 and September 11, 2003? Bet you it’s more than 25,000. > > > [@](#): > > > > The total number of individuals not described in paragraph (1)(A)(i) who may be certified as certified-eligible WTC survivors under paragraph (2)(B) shall not exceed 25,000 at any time. Even better. The jerk who worked an hour on the sign and has chronic asthma gets benefits, but the newspaper vendor who worked outside Building One and got a lungful of ash can’t… because he’s number 25,001 to qualify. Another reason to rework this bill. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/154 "2010-08-03T14:13:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It didn’t specifically grant benefits to illegals. It just didn’t specifically exclude them. I know, that’s why I used the third conditional. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/155 "2010-08-03T14:17:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now you do the math. Go ahead. First tell me how much each life murdered by Uday Hussein is owrth. Actually, let’s start even [easier: this 14-year-old girl.](http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/147P57.htm) How much money is it worth to prevent her attack? $10? $20? > > Tell me, and we can start counting from there. It’s your argument; you tell me what you think the facts are that support it. > [@](#): > > And also: why are you saying that the bill is for “foreigners who worked in this country to clean up the World Trade Center site after 9/11?” That’s not what the law actually said, is it? It provided benefits to anyone who worked in the area of lower Manhattan, for a period of two years after the attack, for even one hour, selling hot dogs or painting tourist souveiners. > > So why did you make that claim about the law? One of the concerns that opponents cite about this bill is that it doesn’t specifically exclude illegal immigrants, which is the point I’m addressing. The broad scope of who is elligible is another, but that’s not what I’m getting at. Further, I said that some fraction of the money for this bill may or may not be spent on foreigners. I don’t know if there were any illegal immigrants who worked at the WTC site. Opponents of the bill seem to think that the mere possibility of such is reason enough to vote it down. Why I am trying to get at is this: Why is the U.S. government justified in helping some foreigners (via the Iraq War), and not others (as may be covered under this bill)? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/156 "2010-08-03T14:18:21Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > > [@cosmosdan](#): > > > > The illegal Immigrant amendment was bullshit. It had no place in the bill. You want to prevent waste there are other areas that need it more and better ways to do it in this bill. Reduce the amount and narrow the criteria for recipients if you need do but get something done. > > The illegal immigrant amendment wasn’t intended to prevent waste, it was intended to guarantee that illegal immigrants don’t benefit from government spending. So that was its place in the bill. If you think that illegal immigrants shouldn’t get benefits, if you’re passing a law providing people with benefits, you need to include a provision to exclude illegal immigrants, because otherwise they will. Now, you may think they should, but there are those who think they shouldn’t, and that’s one of the provisions of the Republican party. There’s a similar provision in the health care bill that got passed. Under a general heading of waste, spending money in areas they shouldn’t qualifies as waste, but I see your point. It wouldn’t qualify as waste to someone who believes illegal immigrants should get health care. Still, It seems like a serious complication just to target illegal immigrants. How do you sort through thousands of applicants in NYC to know if they are legal or not? As someone said, it’s priorities and IMO also being realistic about the work involved in applying such an amendment. Are you willing to exclude real citizens who have a hard time proving their citizenship? How much cost are you adding to the bill by making such a demand? There are costs associated with researching citizenship. Any way you look at it it seems incredibly and obviously impractical to implement in real world terms. IMO that makes it bullshit and unnecessary. Starting from a basic premise, “We don’t want government money spent on illegal immigrants” you still have to decide on how to execute real world programs and the costs. You also have to consider potential harm done to actual citizens in a mixed culture. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/157 "2010-08-03T14:19:23Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > > It didn’t specifically grant benefits to illegals. It just didn’t specifically exclude them. > > I know, that’s why I used the third conditional. So WFT is the point of introducing an argument against the bill that you explicitly know is not true? ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/158 "2010-08-03T14:21:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > First tell me how much each life murdered by Uday Hussein is owrth. Actually, let’s start even [easier: this 14-year-old girl.](http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/147P57.htm) How much money is it worth to prevent her attack? $10? $20? > > Tell me, and we can start counting from there. The war in Iraq was in no way started because of anything Uday Hussein did and it had nothing to do with any 14 year old Iraqi girls. It was started because Saddam had WMDs in the areas north, south, east and west of Bahgdad and he was going to use them at any second. So spare us the goal-post-moving glurgy bullshit about how it was all a mercy mission to save the poor mistreated Iraqi teenagers. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/159 "2010-08-03T14:35:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes. > > Now you do the math. Go ahead. First tell me how much each life murdered by Uday Hussein is owrth. Actually, let’s start even [easier: this 14-year-old girl.](http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/147P57.htm) How much money is it worth to prevent her attack? $10? $20? Do you think mthe Iraqi’s getting killed and maimed by American soilders and bombs were grateful they weren’t being killed by Saddam? Remember the videos of [Ali](http://www.thefreelibrary.com/God+bless+this+child%3B+GULF+WAR+2%3A+NEW+HOPE+AS+U.S.+FLIES+INJURED+BOY...-a0100103559)? Should he be grateful his arms were blown off by the good guys? Considering the thousands of Iraqi’s we’ve killed and maimed emotional pleas about 14 year old girls won’t be very convincing. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/160 "2010-08-03T15:00:47Z")
> [@Jack Batty](#): > > The war in Iraq was in no way started because of anything Uday Hussein did and it had nothing to do with any 14 year old Iraqi girls. It was started because Saddam had WMDs in the areas north, south, east and west of Bahgdad and he was going to use them at any second. > > So spare us the goal-post-moving glurgy bullshit about how it was all a mercy mission to save the poor mistreated Iraqi teenagers. Neither of us has said it was a mission to save innocent Iraqi teenagers. That is how people of your ilk choose to phrase things in an effort to your opponents look silly. :rolleyes: What we are saying is that freeing millions of Iraq citizens from having to live with the attrocities committed by Hussein and his sons and having to live with the 24/7 fear that results is one of the reasons that the war has been worth the cost, both in terms of money and casualties. No one has said that freeing Iraqi citizens from Husein’s reign of terror is the sole reason for the war, but it’s certainly one of the reasons and it is for these reasons that ‘competent’ people can find both the war and its price tag reasonable and worthwhile. And **cosmosdan** , this is one of those occasions where unfortunately you have to break a few eggs in order to make an omelet. Despite the casualties that have occurred to Iraqis because of the war, far fewer people died overall during the war than were dying or being killed by Hussein and his policies before the war, and millions and millions of Iraqi citizens now and in the future no longer have to live in fear of Hussein, his sons and his henchmen. We take casualties in every war because we know they’re necessary for the greater outcome, and the same holds true for the Iraqi citizens who’ve unfortuantely been killed or injured in the war. The deaths of thousands of Iraqis is the unfortunate price necessary to allow millions to live free of Hussein’s arbitrary and random reign of torture, rape, murder, intimidation and the constant, constant fear that its citizens had to live wth. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816.md?page=9)