Skip to main content

Iraq: The dollars and cents.....

1. How much money has the United States spent fighting the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the broader war on terrorism, and how much more can we expect will be allocated over the foreseeable future?

"Including all the funds Congress has voted this year, we will have spent $437 billion on Iraq, Afghanistan, and other parts of the war on terror since 2001—about $1,500 for every American. All this despite Paul Wolfowitz's promise that the war would be over quickly, the troops home soon, and that the reconstruction would be self-funding, thanks to the sale of Iraqi oil supplies. Back in 2003 the President's economic advisor, Larry Lindsay, predicted that the Iraq adventure would cost more than $100 billion. He was fired, in part, for saying it, yet he greatly underestimated the cost."

The question was put to to Gordon Adams one time senior White House budget official for national security for national security and international affairs from 1993 to 1997. He is a Fellow of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and is writing a book on national security budget planning. He responded to a series of questions about the enormous sums of money being spent on the war on terror, and the Enron-style budgetary trickery being used by the Bush Administration to obscure the war's true cost.

The full Q & A appears in Harper's Magazine here. The sums are staggering - to say the least.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...