Remember the Costs of 9/11

September 16, 2009
Jim Arkedis

A new Washington Post/ABC poll finds that 51 percent of Americans believe that the costs of fighting in Afghanistan outweigh the benefits. It’s a staggering number. Once you account for statical error, it’s safe to say that about half of this country has forgotten the reverberating costs of September 11, 2001.

First, it is vital that we remember why we’re in Afghanistan. While President Bush had a grand vision of bringing democracy and prosperity to the Afghan people, President Obama realized that Bush’s vision was impossible to achieve. President Obama has redefined America’s goals in the region, saying during the 2008 campaign that, “Our critical goal should be to make sure that the Taliban and al Qaida are routed and that they cannot project threats against us from that region.” Once he became Commander-in-Chief, Obama reiterated that approach:

I can articulate some very clear, minimal goals in Afghanistan, and that is that we make sure that it’s not a safe haven for al-Qaida, they are not able to launch attacks of the sort that happened on 9/11 against the American homeland or American interest.

In other words, our mission in Afghanistan is clearly linked to preventing the re-occurrence of a similar, massive terrorist attack.

With that in mind, it’s worth reviewing the costs of the 2001 attacks to remind the American people why we’re trying to prevent another one.

First, a few numbers:

2,973 individuals were killed in New York, at the Pentagon, and in Shanksville, PA.
In the year following the attacks, the New York City Comptroller’s office estimated that 146,000 jobs were lost.
In the year following the attacks, the New York City Comptroller’s office estimated that the total economic impact on the city was $94.8 billion, including personal wealth, lost wages, rebuilding costs, and others.
In the three days after the attack, the Federal Reserve injected $300 billion into the economy in various forms. They were actions that were “essential to cushioning the terrorist effects on the economy.”
The Congressional Research Service found long-term negative economic effects as per capital real income growth would slow.

It’s well-and-good to break down the attacks’ effect in cold, stark numbers, but it’s also worth remembering the price we paid in other ways:

Recall the emotional trauma you – as someone possibly hundreds if not thousands of miles away with no direct connection to the tragedy – experienced to understand what happened and why?
Remember how our key aspects of infrastructure were blocked? And that life didn’t return to normal for months?
Remember how the Bush administration undertook highly questionable security measures like torture in the name of national security?
Remember how the Bush administration quickly turned a moment that should have sponsored national unity into one that leaned heavily on the politics of fear?
Or remember how the Bush administration pivoted off military action in Afghanistan to gin up ultimately dubious charges against Saddam Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction?

This is not an exhaustive list. Furthermore, I’m hardly saying that all of these outcomes will come to pass should another massive terrorist attack occur on American soil. For one, I believe President Obama owes his election to presenting a decidedly different version of national security from President Bush.

When Americans say that they don’t believe the costs of fighting in Afghanistan outweigh the benefits, I’d say this: Remember that we’re in Afghanistan to prevent another massive terrorist attack, and that the costs of those attacks were enormous to Americans’ lives, our economy, and our national identity.

Crossposted to AllOurMight.com