How much money have we spent to fight the so-called “war” in Iraq?
March 4th, 2008 by Erich ViethA new Salon.com book review gives us the depressing and infuriating answers to how much the Iraq adventure is costing the citizens of the United States. The book, written by Joseph Stiglitz and Linda J. Bilmes, is titled “The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict.” In typical dyfunctional White House style, White House spokesman Tony Fratto has argued that the book is misguided because “One can’t even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11.” As though the occupation of Iraq has anything to do with 9/11 . . .
The numbers presented by Stiglitz and Bilmes are truly staggering:
“The Three Trillion Dollar War” talks about two types of war-related expenses: budgetary and social. Budgetary costs include operational spending on Iraq and Afghanistan, which they estimate will total from $1.7 trillion to $2.7 trillion. (Throughout the book, the authors put forward two sets of figures: one based on a “best-case scenario” and one on a far more likely “realistic-moderate” scenario.) This figure includes the expense of keeping armies in the field, paying veteran-related costs, replacing equipment ($400 billion for this alone), and paying interest on the vast debt we have incurred to fight the war. So far, Congress has actually appropriated $645 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001, plus the $200 billion Bush asked for in 2008. As the authors point out, this is more than the U.S. spends annually on Medicare and Medicaid combined. And the monthly “burn rate” to pay for the wars has gone steadily up, from $4.4 billion in 2003 to $16 billion today. This means that every American household is spending $138 a month on the current operating expenses of the wars.
The additional “social” costs that are not borne by the government are harder to calculate — and more controversial.
As an aside, I find the neocon sleight of hand interesting. The usual neocon line when it comes to taxes is that money paid as taxes really belongs to the people. Fair enough. Why then, don’t neocons emphasize that these wild, irresponsible, inefficient and often corrupt expenditures on the Iraq occupation (I don’t call it a “war”) are being paid with my money and your money, not “government” money? If any of you American families out there have a better use for $138 each month than blowing up buildings and people in Iraq, raise your hand!
In an interview published by McClatchy Newspapers Feb 27, 2008, Stiglitz warns that the worst is yet to come regarding our military expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan:
In an interview, Stiglitz said that too much of the public debate had been over the wars’ operational costs while the real budget strains would show up only years from now.
“The peak expenditures are way out,” he said, noting that the peak expenditures for World War II vets came in 1993.
The McClatchy article reminds us of the rosy 2003 predictions of the Bush Administration:
When U.S. troops invaded Iraq in March 2003, the Bush administration predicted that the war would be self-financing and that rebuilding the nation would cost less than $2 billion.
Being off by a few decimal points in grade school gets a student a well-deserved “F.”
March 4th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
The cost really is both insane and underestimated. I saw an article recently that said Bush’s cost estimates exclude the replacement cost of military equipment that is wearing out much faster because of the occupation. Equipment like F-16 fighter jets. Obviously, the desert is a very hostile environment for such high-tech military machinery, which, combined with the large number of missions, means costly equipment will need to be replaced much sooner than otherwise would have been necessary. Yet another legacy of the Bush/Cheney transfer of public wealth to the military-industrial complex for purposes of protecting the oil industry. Come to think of it, with Bush from the oil industry and Cheney from the defense industry, what better way would there be for them to pump vast amounts of public money into both industries than by creating a gigantic foreign occupation that has no endpoint?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Where to begin?
The pricetag for 911 can be readily calculated. It might take a while to collect up all the 911 claims paid out by the insurance companies and the assessed value of the property damaged in the attacks. Just a guess, but I’ll bet it’s a heckuva lot less then $3,000,000,000. After all, this is America, where everything including the government, has a pricetag. As for the owners of the WTC…. it was a bonus. It is my understanding that the WTC was losing money as a rental property. BUt what does the 911 attacks, a set of totally forseen set of terrorist attacks, planned by a member of Saudi Arabian royalty who happened to be a former business associate of Dubya’s have to do with the war in Iraq? Absolutely nothing.
In a few years, when we are watching the evening entertainment on our overpriced Iraqi branded TV’s and driving trendy Iraqi made cars some one may have a dim memory of a “war” in Iraq, but won’t recall why.
As for the 2003 rosy prediction of the war, it shou be remembered that the last words spoken by General George Custer to anyone outside of his party before riding off the the little bighorn river was: ” This shouldn’t take but a half a day!”
March 6th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Perhaps the saddest thing about the boxcar-loads of money spent for the unnecessary invasion of Iraq is that it it tends to distract us from the far greater cost: the needless death of 4,000 American troops and untold hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis (both civilian and military).
March 6th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
So, what shall we do for the 5th anniversary of “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq?
On May 1st, 2003, Dubya flew to an aircraft carrier that was almost as far as possible from Iraq to declare that the war was over. That’s when the expenses really got going.
September 29th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
MAN..this country is run by a a bunch of morons. As long as they can put money in their own pockets they are good for anything. Please someone tell me in WHAT WAY CAN A MIDDLE CLASS family have a voice in anything (free speech, my ass free speech, you can talk but you won’t be heard).
Our current president is a prick, and sent all the money need to fix this mess in Iraq, as mention above, we’ll be driving cars, getting other things that are made in Iraq in the US, but what are we getting out of it, OH WAIT.. NUTTING.. we’ll have to pay Iraq.
Why can’t US use their own stuff, make their own, plan their own, buy their own, and tax heavily on IMPORTS. IMPORTS are making a TON of money and taking it out of the US, the government is getting a large sum of that under the table and letting it happen.
But sooner or later when they money can’t buy what’s not available, then we’ll see what happens.