I'd like to point out a recently developed frame that appeared in a letter to the journal "Science" a week ago. A scientist was pointing out the funding shortfalls in alternative energy research (in this case, fusion) in terms of "IWDs" or "Iraqi War Days", which he pegged at $190 million per day. This was done matter-of-factly, as if all government spending is related to the cost of the W's deliberate misadventure. As I have had letters published in "Science", I well know they are carefully chosen and often involve exchanges between the editors and the letter writer for consise and clear communication. Allowing a casual reference to IWDs was deliberate and hopefully a sign of editorial policy.
Here in San Francisco at a weekly science entertainment nightclub act (
'The Ask Dr. Hal Show' at
12 Galaxies in the Mission), I deliver a brief space science report. Two years ago I began relating the cost of various space missions in terms of war costs. For example, I've reported that the cost of the current Cassini Mission to Saturn, from it's inception about 20 years ago to now, 8 years after launch and over two years in orbit around Saturn, has cost about 2.5 weeks of the Iraq War. A similar amount of space science funding has been cut in the next 3 years of NASA's budgets.
Of all the counts we see from this war, from numbers of dead military and civilians, to the amount of oil being pumped, to the billions gone missing to war profiteers, I encourage the frequent use of IWDs in relating what we could have bought with an equivalent amount of national treasure.