| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front |
| Pentagon: War Cost Is $20 Billion So Far |
| 2003-04-17 |
| The Iraq war has cost at least $20 billion and probably will consume that much or more in the next five months, the Pentagon's top budget officer said Wednesday. Cheap at twice the price. An additional $5 billion to $7 billion will be needed to pay for getting U.S. troops from the Persian Gulf region to their home bases, officials said. That process is just now beginning. Those totals do not include the yet to be calculated sums for postwar reconstruction of Iraq, the Defense Department's comptroller said at a news conference. The United States is counting on contributions from other countries to pay part of the rebuilding cost. Dov Zakheim said military operations in Iraq to date have cost about $10 billion to $12 billion. Personnel costs have been about $6 billion and the cost of munitions has been more than $3 billion. The figures include what it cost to move 250,000 troops to the Persian Gulf area. Between now and the end of the federal budget year on Sept. 30, the Pentagon expects to spend about $20 billion more on military operations inside Iraq, officials said. At his news conference, Zakheim explained how the Pentagon will use the $62.6 billion Congress has approved in supplemental spending over the Pentagon's $364 billion for the current budget year. Nearly all the new money is for the war in Iraq and the global fight against terror. The supplemental spending bill provides $1.4 billion to repay terrorism war allies such as Pakistan, which Zakheim said is spending $70 million a month searching its northern tribal areas for members of al-Qaida. Hmm, I think I know how we might save a few bucks ... Jordan also will be reimbursed, he said, without giving a figure. We got our money's worth there. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #37 As welcome as a substaintial drop in the price of oil would be,I fear that it will cause research in alternative fuels and technology to dry-up(Ex:fuel cell,and cold fusion). Same thing happened when the"74"Oil Embargo ended. At that time it was PC to hear"It is wrong to use food as a weapon or bargining chip"I said then and say now screw that.If you are going to use oil as a weapon then we have the right to use food as a weapon,Let them eat oil. Plllease don't go Murat,shooting holes in your opinions is perfect with my morning coffee. |
| Posted by: raptor 2003-04-18 08:34:01 |
| #36 Just couldn't resist an update of that old Mastercard commercial: Invasion of Iraq: $20 billion Monthly cost of looking for al-Qaeda in N Iraq: $70 million Seeing Iraqis dance in the streets as his statues fell: priceless |
| Posted by: Baba Yaga 2003-04-17 20:08:09 |
| #35 I'm gonna get ripped, but... Can you guys say "ugly american" in blogspeak? How can we be this insecure when we're right? Somebody go get that little SOB back here. I think we need him. |
| Posted by: Scott 2003-04-17 19:55:01 |
| #34 I agree I think Murat should stay. You drive me crazy too, but I really like hearing your diatribe. I really think you should reconsider. Just look at all the post you generate. |
| Posted by: George 2003-04-17 14:19:22 |
| #33 I had my own personal troll for a week, but after being shot down repeatedly by two of my regular commenters, he disappeared. I actually enjoyed him as he did cause lots of discussion, but, a troll's worst nightmare is logic. |
| Posted by: Denny 2003-04-17 14:10:16 |
| #32 Bah, Murat just raised bloodpressure, not intelligence. TGA's still around to keep us on our toes, and I count him as loyal opposition. And there will be others: do not underestimate the popularity of Rantburg. "Citius, Altus, Fortius!" ("Swifter, Higher, Stronger!") |
| Posted by: Ptah 2003-04-17 12:47:53 |
| #31 Regarding Murat: "Reason cannot prevail where reason cannot penetrate." |
| Posted by: ColoradoConservative 2003-04-17 12:43:32 |
| #30 Armenians Cypriots and Kurds - Kurdistan Don't feed the trolls - they breed |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-04-17 12:35:51 |
| #29 Michael, Excellent post! I personally wish Murat would stay and others with dissenting opinions would join the fray. Otherwise, we're all preaching to the choir and it becomes, well, like one of Saddam's cabinet meetings. Who wants to visit a site frequented by a bunch of people who go home and whack off to the O'Reilly Factor? After a short while, it's just not interesting. I might as well watch Al Jazeera. I'm glad Michael mentioned our less-than-exemplary involvement in Latin America. What separates democratic countries from others is just this sort of honest, self-critical perspective. It lends weight to any other observations you may make. If I say that corporate interests run amock in America is a shameful state of affairs that often brings well-deserved suspicion from other countries who observe our actions, then I can say that Islam has been hijacked by a bunch of homicidal primates who are not a great deal worse than their peaceful brethren who won't stand up and say it's wrong. At least then you know I'm more interested in the truth than having a conservative wet dream. It causes people like Murat to take a hard look at their views. Or to take a hike. I do wish Murat hadn't just visited to rattle the collective chain every now and then, which is what I think he was doing. If you're still reading, Murat, we're not the American fascists you think we are. We would like our government and our history to be virtuous, but as G. Gordon Liddy said, "The world is the South Bronx at three o'clock in the morning." It's a messy business for all countries. Many Americans are willing to admit this country's faults and wrongs. God knows, there are plenty to account for. But there is also plenty of good. Western democracy ain't perfect, but it's the best thing going at the moment. Democracy is to Islamic theocracy as a pimple is to a running, pus-filled abscess. |
| Posted by: Joe 2003-04-17 11:58:36 |
| #28 Murat the troll was a merry old soul Who wrote to us from Turkey He dissed George Bush and he dissed Colin Powell And he drove Rantburgers crazy! You may be a troll, but you're the best troll we've ever had. Gonna miss you, little buddy. |
| Posted by: Mike 2003-04-17 11:36:54 |
| #27 Murat--Even though I disagree with you on many subjects, it seems beneath you to bail out. There are trolls that visit the board to rant and make vicious swipes on occasion, but not many of them will actually try to engage in a debate. I give you credit for at least trying to argue your point. I hope you'll reconsider. Debate and discourse are needed in any public forum. |
| Posted by: Dar 2003-04-17 11:03:54 |
| #26 Phil B: You make excellent points. These are the same ones that I've been making to the anti-war crowd myself when the subject of oil comes up. It can appear unseemly to discuss economics while discussing war, but it's necessary. The point here is that when the parties involved (meaning ME govts, other govts, and international markets) understand what the future will hold for the region, anxiety lessens, and prices of crude will come down or go up based on market conditions. Some producers/consumers will do well and others not. So what? Your examples of the UK and Australia losing money in this whole deal is instructive to the No Blood for Oil crowd. Those govts. that take a long-term view of the situation are the ones on the right track. So kudos to Howard and Blair. OTOH, from what I've been reading in the French press, Chiraq and da vile pin still believe that somehow the US/Coalition is going to come to them in a few months begging for their help. Yes, this is still the belief they hold despite their recent phone calls and public statements. I love Le Canard Enchaine. Also Mark Steyn has recently revealed that the company of the son-in-law of Jean Chretien is Total/Elf/Fina's largest shareholder. Who'd a thunk it possible? Back to Phil B., recall that before the bombing started in GWI, oil was, correct me if I'm wrong, around $35. After the first night, it went down to $25 the next day. Another thing, Rantburgers, I'd like to bring up is who is going to pay for the war. I've heard comments in the media and from a few politicians that Iraq should compensate us with its future oil revenues. No, no, no. Why? While working in Riyadh during the Clinton days, I heard from Saudis that the US got a great deal out of GWI. The Saudis, Japanese, Germans, etc. picked up the tab, and we supplied the force. Very mercenary and even prosituty in the eyes of the Saudi cynics. Let's be strong and admit that we went into Iraq for our national security. A price cannot be put on defending your country. Paying our part and not asking Iraqis to foot the bill is the only honorable thing to do. In the end, we WILL benfit, although when and in what forms the benfits accrue may not be obvious. But rest assured, our eschewing the compensation/money angle will make it more difficult for the other side to question our motives. And the only thing the anti-war crowd harps on is motives, since it can't detract from the Coalition's actions of the last month. Murat: You have a great country and are a great people. Turkey has been a very good NATO ally and you helped out in GWI, plus provided facilities for Operation Northern Watch. Thank you. However, your country has not been up to the task of doing the right thing in Iraq this time. Well, at least you're not the only ones. Parliament votes down, although just by a few votes, the 4th ID using Turkey? OK, no problem. I never held it against you guys. Your govt. did help in other less important ways. The Phillipines kicked us out and the SKors now express themselves freely. That's the price of democracy and the rule of law. We can handle that since we've been practicing it since 1789. I'm not proud of our Latin American behavior, but the last 20 years in that region has shown that the Cuban/Communist is/was not the answer. And you, personally, have never understood what a debate forum is. True German Ally does. TGA doesn't always agree with many Rantburgers, and is not afraid to defend his country, but he understands what reasoned discourse is. I get the idea that you make your comments and postings, print a copy and then go down to your local cafe and show everybody how you stuck it to the imperialists. What a stud you are! (Real example of sarcasm) |
| Posted by: Michael 2003-04-17 10:49:44 |
| #25 mike at least theres some benefit to being an "old guy" - not that i was aware of NPT in 1968 :) but NPT was still a very visible issue when i took poli sci courses - before fall of USSR changed everything. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-04-17 10:47:30 |
| #24 liberalhawk, you are correct. The U.S. was among the original signatures on NPT in 1968. I got busted gimme a break, that was 10 years before I was born. Just a breif bit of 'net surfing, and I was corected. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-04-17 10:44:07 |
| #23 "...give me a clue." Posted by: Murat 4/17/2003 5:44:42 AM Hey Murat, I got your clue right HERE, bitch. Good riddance. |
| Posted by: Flaming Sword 2003-04-17 10:43:30 |
| #22 "Remember, he is a Turk - and they have no honor or courage. Check the history of the Islamists, Kemalists, and Ottomans. " what little i have read of Ottoman history (mainly Bernrad Lewis) indicates it to be long and complex. Filled with brutalities, but Im not sure that its lacking in courage. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-04-17 10:14:09 |
| #21 Don't judge Murat too harshly - he MUST leave - every time he posts his polemic screeds, he gets torn down on facts, reasoning and bias. Its pretty brutal to be shown your core beleifs cannot stand scrutiny. So rather than admit that he is very biased and his core beliefs are wrong, and exchange in truly free thinking, he is choosing instead to run and hide. Remember, he is a Turk - and they have no honor or courage. Check the history of the Islamists, Kemalists, and Ottomans. The Turks constantly use brutalization on weaker minorities, but run in the face of a strong opposition. Their culture is morally and intellectually bankrupt. And Murat is a prime example of it. So its quite obvious that running and hiding from the truth is what he or any Turk would do when confronted with the truth in a forceful way. Especially when confronted with the immense guilt of ongoing genocidal actions of his people, every bit as racist for the Turkomen as Hitler was for the so-called Aryans. Ask the Armenians and Kurds -- Whom Murat refuses to address - he is simply in defensive denail to prevent an ego collapse, every bit as much as the Arab Nationalist movement is over the collapse of Saddam and the joy of the people at that collapse. Goodbye Murat - One of these days you will come to your sense, and hopefully you will find the courage to step out of the cowardly and dishonest mode your culture has imposed on you, and rebel against it. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2003-04-17 10:01:26 |
| #20 I always hoped that when a scrawny press-corps reporter asked Rummy, (in a whining voice of course) "How much will the war cost?" That he would reply just like Dr. Evil, (pinky firmly placed in corner of mouth) "One milllllliiioon dollarssss" mwah ha. mwah ha ha ah. Mwah HAHA AHAHAHH |
| Posted by: matinum 2003-04-17 10:01:08 |
| #19 I could try and take up the slack... I have experience being unreasonable and obtuse at times. I can be uninformedly, subjectively, didactic. I can be obstinately biased in my opinions, and cloud them to obviate my own peccability. I can even refuse to eschew obfuscation! Am I qualified? |
| Posted by: Tadderly 2003-04-17 09:51:24 |
| #18 Is Murat really going to retire from posting? Who will advocate now for the baby ducks, puppies, kittens, and |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-04-17 09:40:09 |
| #17 First no |
| Posted by: Samma-lamma 2003-04-17 09:32:54 |
| #16 Little M- You have the freedom to speak. I have the freedom not to listen. So it shall be. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-04-17 09:25:02 |
| #15 Murat, perhaps your still here and might be able to grasp this little bit of logic. Possession of WMD for offensive use is bad. Possession of WMD for defensive use is good. The US and Israel have WMD for defensive reasons. If some of the Arab countries had WMD, they have already stated they would be used as offensive weapons against Israel and the US. Thus, steps must be taken to prevent them from ever obtaining WMD. How come no one ever complains about China having WMD? |
| Posted by: Anonymous_in_TN 2003-04-17 09:22:54 |
| #14 Murat's red herring: "but now you start censoring and taking away the news stories you don't like," Murat, I challenge you to cite ONE news item that was 'censored' or 'taking away news stories' that wasn't a duplicate of something posted earlier. Someone from Turkey lecturing us about an open society. That's rich. Your absence is addition by subtraction, and I thank you for not blowing smoke up our asses any longer. |
| Posted by: Raj 2003-04-17 09:08:51 |
| #13 Guys, it was nice talking to you but I am going to leave this board. For a while I appreciated Fred for being openminded, and still I thank you Fred for your site, but now you start censoring and taking away the news stories you don't like, that's a pitty and not representative for an open society. To all, take care. |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-04-17 08:54:09 |
| #12 you must be talking about a different treaty (Kyoto? Land Mines? ICC?) - US signed and ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty over 30 years ago. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-04-17 08:38:14 |
| #11 Murat, Your assertion that China etc. didn't sign onto NPT because the U.S. didn't first is not only baseless, it's absurd. We didn't sign NPT beacuse we had/have allies that could potentially need our help to protect them from Communism, and Islamofascism. It makes no sense for the U.S., or any other country, to sell their allies down the river just to appease people with broken logic. The same people that would just move to another Anti-American subject, and whine about that one. Cypriots, Armenians, Kurds. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-04-17 08:14:13 |
| #10 "I still wonder why I am scratching my head" Hahaha |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-04-17 07:45:17 |
| #9 Don't worry Ben, you are not the only one, if one cannot answer these facts rationally, then resorting to such evasive answers like yours do always do fine for most people (Bush included). |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-04-17 07:41:41 |
| #8 As for the particulars, of the treaty I don't know nor care. Very few governments in the middle east have show they can be trusted and not stab us in the back, on almost any issue. Including yours Murat. If we can't trust you, we can't trust you. We can't trust you with the big toys, because you simply will not act responsibly. Is that clear enough for you Murat? |
| Posted by: Ben 2003-04-17 07:30:13 |
| #7 Raptor, the US started the START (strategic arms reductions treaty), however it is the same US (senate) who did not ratify the NPT Treaty, effectively nullifying this global norm, thus giving the perfect example to Russia, China, Pakistan, India, etc. etc. (about 20 countries) rejecting the treaty too. |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-04-17 07:18:16 |
| #6 Murat: let's get one thing straight. You are NOT a skeptic. A skeptic looks at evidence and changes their position when it is inconsistent with a logical interpretation of factual, verifiable evidence. A skeptic is aware and vigilant against 'confirmation bias' ie: only ever seeking facts and news that supports their own position, and ignoring or placing too little emphasis on facts that refute their position. You are not skeptical at all, you are a dogmatic ideologue. You only quote storiest that support your point of view, and you never honestly argue your position nor admit your blindspots/weaknesses. You NEVER provided an adequate response as to why you feel a special privelidge in criticising America, when your own country committed genocide against the Armenians and the Kurds, and brutally invaded Cyprus. 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones' Bye the way, everyone else: DId you know that non-turkish cyprus just got admitted to the EU? It was a big poke in the eye for turkey. SO now, I say forever to you, Murat: Cypriots, Armenians, Kurds... Kurdistan... Cyprus in the EU! |
| Posted by: anon1 2003-04-17 07:04:07 |
| #5 Hey Murat,The U.S. got rid of it's Bio/chem weapons decades ago?Ever heard of Johnson Island, first plant ever expressly built to dispose of chemical weapons. Who do you think initiated the START treaties? |
| Posted by: raptor 2003-04-17 06:43:37 |
| #4 Finally a note to the Its about oil! crowd that everyone seems to ignore. Two of the three countries that provided combat troops - the UK and Australia - are net exporters of oil and stand to loose financially (a lot of money) from liberating Iraq. Well Phil, appreciated member of the its all about WMD crowd, credit to your nice writings, though as sceptical as I am I still wonder why I am scratching my head by the thought that two of the nations (US, Israel) that refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty of WMD's are the most staunchly opponent of WMD weapons in the middle east, give me a clue. |
| Posted by: Murat 2003-04-17 05:44:42 |
| #3 The supplemental spending bill provides $1.4 billion to repay terrorism war allies such as Pakistan A worthy investment, no doubt. |
| Posted by: Paul Moloney 2003-04-17 03:51:57 |
| #2 There was a lot of talk before the war about who was going to pay for the war and subsequent reconstruction of Iraq. The simple answer is OPEC (or more precisely oil exporters)! In 2001 the USA imported 10.6 mb/d. The end of the war has already brought oil prices down by about $10. When Iraqi oil starts to flow in large amounts. Expect the price to go a lot lower. Anyway a $10 fall in oil prices results in a 38.7 billion dollar saving to the USA. Note that this saving is completely separate to Iraqi Oil revenues. Iraqi oil is cheap to produce ($2/barrel)and is mostly close to ports for shipping. Iraqi reserves are at least the second largest in the world. I say at least because limited exploration has occured over the last 12 to 20 years. Some pundits have speculated that when modern exploration techniques are used, Iraq will be found to have the world's largest reserves. We face the prospect within a few years of Iraq rivalling Saudi Arabia as a producer. SA can pump close to 10mb/d. Iraq pumping even half that amount will send prices (a lot?) lower and generate major revenues - oil @ $20/b will generate $36.6 billion per annum. Finally a note to the Its about oil! crowd that everyone seems to ignore. Two of the three countries that provided combat troops - the UK and Australia - are net exporters of oil and stand to loose financially (a lot of money) from liberating Iraq. Both countries should get more recognition of their principled stand contrary to their economic self-interest. |
| Posted by: Phil B 2003-04-17 01:04:21 |
| #1 Heym Dubya? Now that we have an extra $60 billion, can we pleeez splurge and take out Syria next? |
| Posted by: badanov 2003-04-17 00:38:14 |