Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

What Is Iraq Costing You?

By Larry Beinhart, AlterNet. Posted September 24, 2007.


The War in Iraq has cost about $453 billion to date. That's pretty hard to grasp. Especially on my income and probably on yours. Let's bring that home and make it a little more understandable.
Advertisement

The War in Iraq has cost about $453,000,000,000 (four hundred and fifty-three billion dollars) to date.

That's pretty hard to grasp. Especially on my income and probably on yours. Let's bring that home and make it a little more understandable.

I live in Ulster County, New York. Our share of that is $372,000,000 (three hundred and seventy-two million dollars).

If you live in Los Angeles, your bill is $4,823,000,000 (four billion, eight hundred twenty-three million). Savannah, Georgia, $144,000,000. Little Rock, Arkansas, $339,000,000. That's how much you're putting in so far. It keeps ticking away at two billion dollars a week. If you live somewhere else and want to know how much it's costing your city or county, go to costofwar.com.

You might also want to do what they suggest. Imagine what could have been done with that much money. The schools, bridges, medical care, playgrounds.

What did we get for our money?

The original deal -- as presented to us -- was to disarm Saddam Hussein for $50 billion. If we didn't do it right away, the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud.

Bizarre, but true, that was actually accomplished. And for far less. It wasn't difficult, since Saddam was already disarmed. But by massing our troops and demanding UN resolutions, Saddam was forced to let the inspectors in so that we got to see it for ourselves.

But the administration was set on war! We're not actually sure why. Perhaps they aren't either. So they told us that the inspectors were associated with the UN. They were Swiss or French or some other foreigners, and therefore, unlike Americans, they were easily conned. Their failure to find WMDs didn't mean there weren't any. It really meant that Saddam was super tricky as well as super evil.

So the goal slipped from disarming Saddam to removing Saddam.

Removing Saddam was going to be a magic moment. It was going to be like a Disney animated feature. When the ogre was slain, the entire kingdom would break out with flowers and the flowers would dance and sing. And welcome the Americans as liberators!

That's not all we were going to get for our investment. We were going to get much, much more!

We would strike a blow in the war on terror! Keep (non-existent) weapons of mass destructions out of the hands of a dictator who might give them to terrorists. Establish a democracy in the Middle East. Bring stability to the region and hope to other people under evil dictators. Make Israel safer.

Most of all it would be a demonstration!

We would smite our foe like the Lord God Almighty, throwing thunderbolts and parting the very seas, so that all who saw would quake in fear and tremble before us. That's the colorful, theological version, but it is, in fact, what the administration expected.

We were a beneficent power, too. We were going to rebuild Iraq. George Bush said it was going to be "The greatest financial commitment of it's kind since the Marshall Plan!"

Was that going to cost us more?

No. "We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon," said the ever astute Paul Wolfowitz, deeply knowledgeable about third world countries, war and finance. 'What a deal,' as they used to say, throwing in a second pair of pants and a genuine silk tie, when you bought your Bar Mitzvah suit down on Orchard Street.

But it wasn't a Disney movie. The commander-in-chief and his crew were wrong in their assumptions and incompetent in execution.

If they stop, they will have to admit that we got nothing for our money. If they go forward, it's not their money. Or their bodies. While it's not be in our interests, its in their interests to turn the war into the Energizer Bunny, endlessly, mindlessly, going and going and going.

One question that should be asked, but hasn't been, is where did the money actually go?

The answer is that nobody really knows.

To give you some idea of how bad the book keeping is, the Congressional Budget Office reported that from 2001 to 2006 we had spent 290 billion dollars on the war in Iraq. But the Congressional Records Office had the number at $318.5 billion dollars. A gap of 28.5 billion.

The Government Accounting Office said that because of the way the Department of Defense handles its money, "neither DOD nor the Congress reliably know how much the war is costing and how appropriated funds are being used."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: cost of war, iraq

Larry Beinhart is the author of Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin and other works of fiction.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
IT'S ACTUALLY MUCH MORE
Posted by: NoPCZone on Sep 24, 2007 12:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you factor in future expenses for veterans and survivor benefits, the replacement and refit of equipment, etc, you can probably double that number. The repair, remanufacture and replacement of high dollar equipment (tanks, helicopters, planes, etc) that have accumulated as many hours in a couple of years in SW Asia as they would have in decades of peacetime training has already been estimated to be in the hundreds of billions. Welcome to the trillion dollar war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: IT'S ACTUALLY MUCH MORE Posted by: Knowmad
This should make all US citizens furious
Posted by: vox persona on Sep 24, 2007 1:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
453 billion. Wow. And you know that doesn't even include ancillary and related costs, like lifelong rehab and health care for vets, plus the cost of the humanity; the ruined lives, widowed families, limbs blown off, etc. That is a lot of suffering, carnage and misery on the decisions of one man. I hope his soul-less masters are happy. And I think it has only just begun, George II will make sure we are entrenched for a long, long time. Can anyone say 'Korean model'? Let's get real, our treasury is being plundered daily. No-bid contracts, mercenary armies, there are war profiteers swimming in blood money.
On the bright side, 453 billion. That is 453,000 separate million dollar stacks. I once worked it out to about 3,000$ per second, every second of the year....based on the conservative estimate of 100 billion/year. Now, don't you feel safer?That money would go a long way toward infrastructure,health care, education, and other worthy needs. Oh yeah, it's money borrowed from China (et al), and 'off budget'. This is going to destroy our crumbling dollar as it (shrub) destroyed our credibility and leadership in the world. All because of oil. When Reagan took office and decimated every one of Carter's alternative energy projects, he locked us into a dependency on a fuel source that is harmful to the Earth and could well mean WWIII. Can you imagine if we (back in 1980) drew together the best minds in the country, like a modern day Apollo project, to solve the pending energy crisis? By now we could have passive solar written into the building code and cars that ran on non-polluting renewable energy. Not only that, but we'd have a whole new industry to make money on, since that seems to be the bottom line. Our government dropped the ball in the name of unrestrained capitalism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Update Posted by: vox persona
a coke-head texas gambler
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Sep 24, 2007 5:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
has your credit card and you just sit there, reading the bill, not even bothering to stop him from using it.


stupid americans. breaking the economy isn't a good thing. are you better off now? didn't think so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another $2 Trillion Perspective!
Posted by: TarryFaster on Sep 24, 2007 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ultimately, we are looking at a two trillion dollar war. To put that in perspective, two trillion dollars ($2,000,000,000,000) would make a stack of $100 bills placed one on top of the other, flat side on top of flat side, reach 1,358 miles high.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An arm and a leg?
Posted by: messedup on Sep 24, 2007 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about traumatic permanent brain injury, or cancer from depleted uranium. How about suicides, PTSD, and just more messed up individuals with no job outside of knowing how to kill people walking my streets?

Obviously, some people could care less about the money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Real cost already over $1.2 Trillion..to care for the already wounded..
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Sep 24, 2007 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Larry real cost already to date of the Iraq war is over
$1.2 Trillion dollars..!

You as many left out the already over $680 billion it will cost us according to The GAO to care for the 12,100+ seriously wounded troops over the next 40 years..!

So add your figure which is low over $480 billion to the $680 billion and you do the math..!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They also serve who only sit and bitch - but not much.
Posted by: Spock on Sep 24, 2007 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thirty years ago, when I first started my own efforts to do something about the silent military industrial complex coup that took over the U.S., I was all alone. Even when I had infiltrated government offices everywhere and forwarded to senators and congressmen, attorneys general, the media and more stacks (literally) of proof of federal crime from embezzlement and fraud to rape and extortion to commit rape, no one did anything. In 1987, a U.S. District Court ruled that to give me my own records (that in order to prove certain crimes by federal officials) "would irreparably damage the tax collection system of the U.S." (that was the only way to "justify" denial of the records on the basis of the national security exclusion in the Freedom of Information Act). Frankly, all of this whining and moaning crap just makes my ass tired. Where was all the bitching and complaining when the government was breaking up my businesses and taking steps to assure that I would never again be employable, destroying my marriages, and driving my son to attempt suicide? All of you bitchers have the power to bring down this government within months; but you have to DO something besides bitch - there, as Shakespeare said, "is the rub."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reasons for War
Posted by: larrykueneman on Sep 24, 2007 10:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author states that he doesn't know why Bush went into Iraq. Since it wasn't told to us in a manner that makes sense, I strongly suspect that Bush, before he ever ran for President knew full well that if a first term President was engaged in a war, if running for a second term, historically he would be assured of winning. For this reason, I believe that almost 30,000 of our young men and women have either been killed or maimed specifically so Bush could have a second term. This may sound cold, but I've had 75 years to work on such matters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Reasons for War Posted by: jcando
turning our kids into killers
Posted by: openeye on Sep 24, 2007 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wonderful/terrible article Larry. And brings to mind the thing that really bugs me about this situation: there is so much information out there about exactly what is happening - and isn't happening - and yet there is no wide-spread protest. I figure it's all part of our basically government-controlled (marketing) media that keeps us scrambling for a living while believing we are somehow promoting "democracy" and improving the state of the world. I would suggest that anyone who is interested in why we are stuck in so obviously an "old school" methodology take a look at who Dick Chaney really is, and what his goals and objectives truly are. I can only think that perhaps the reason all of this is being so glaringly brought into our faces (regardless of our willingness to examine it) is that it could be the last of our very own "old school" belief in war as a solution to ANYTHING.

The real cost of war is our youth. Turning our sons and daughters into killers is condemning them to a nightmare lifetime of painful psychosis. Believing that it will ever be possible to live a full emotional life after committing - or even observing - such inhuman atrocities is a fantasy. The scars will remain and will erupt and impact our society for generations.

William James wrote in 1902 that "What we need now to discover in the social realm is the moral equivalent of war; something heroic that will speak to man as universally as war does, and yet will be as compatible with their spiritual selves as war has proved to be incompatible." ("The Varieties of Religious Experience") We have had over 100 years of developing consciousness to realize the truth of that statement. To my way of thinking we have a choice as to how we employ the great wealth of our country: We can kill or we can help our fellow human beings. There is no "democracy" at the end of a gun. There are simply two sad losers - the one doing the shooting and the victim. A truly moral and great country does not turn its youth into killers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Noting the obvious: Iraq War is about controlling middle east oil and regional security
Posted by: jcando on Sep 24, 2007 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(Re-posted from an "RE:" above).

Everyone, starting with the mainstream and alternative media on down to Larry Beinhart seems to be unable to grasp the obvious about why we are in Iraq, and will likely soon be in Iran, Syria and anywhere else they can manage to put US troops. This has been ABOUT PUTTING TROOPS in the Middle East to control oil resources and to protect Israel from its neighbors.

Remember that Iraq has about 1/3 of all the oil reserves in the region. The US needs that oil to fuel its military globally. Remember too that Saddam used to give money to Palestinian suicide bombers and he sent Scuds to Israel in the First Gulf War. He was an existential threat to Israel.

Neocons such as Richard Perle openly called for the removal of Saddam to benefit Israeli security, not in 2002-2003 when they were trying to convince America to support war in Iraq, but back in 1998 when he was calling for Saddam's removal in his "Clean Break" paper for Netanyahu.

Connect the dots people! Recognize the obvious. From this perspective of controlling the region for its resources and security, toward controlling all of globalization, Iraq is the prize. Even if we can't get at the oil right now, no one else can either and if we just wait it out in "enduring bases" for as long as it takes, we'll eventually have all the oil we'll need to keep dominating globalization.

From this view it's no wonder US leaders were and still remain hell-bent on keeping Iraq no matter what. Even Alan Greenspan recently wrote about this taboo, about this war being about oil. In Israel they openly talk and write about how this war has made them dominant in the region. These things are just a secret here in the US.

There is a man behind the curtain, he's called US "full-spectrum global domination." This is the most simple and sensible explanation for what has happened and what is still to come. We progressives must stop chasing our tails understanding events and start thinking clearly and talking about what we should do INSTEAD OF an endless "war on terror."

We must stop responding from the elite policy makers' perspective of constant inter-cultural war and re-frame the issues into a more constructive vision where we turn from acceptance of war as normal to where war is unacceptable and we have other priorities, such as dealing with global warming and building a sustainable global middle class.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Higher costs do not equal better equipment, food or supplies for our troops
Posted by: fanny666 on Sep 24, 2007 2:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Winslow Wheeler of the Strauss Military Reform Project is a good source for understanding how this happens. The procurement process is out of control. The F-22 is a very good case study (MP3, very worth listening to).

I think that this is an issue upon which progressives and "conservatives" can find common ground... wasteful spending in the Department of Defense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Silent Auction: America being sold
Posted by: Ripcord on Sep 24, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Forget about how many dollars are being spent.

Notice that Dubai wanted to buy our ports.
Halliburton moves to Dubai.
GM auto workers strike, but does GM care?
Hell no! GM loses money in the US but overseas profits are up.
Who owns Exxon?
The Saudis want to buy 20% of the NASDAQ.
China has the cash to buy any US industry.

Folks, America is being auctioned off to the highest bidders.

From the start I opposed the Iraq war for 3 reasons:
1. Preemptive wars are immoral,
2. War in the Middle East will bankrupt America, and
3. The American people do not have the perserverence
to see a war to its conclusion.

So now many are crying over spilt milk.

Yet, most will still support wounded hawks like Clinton, Obama,
Republicans.

Few have the guts to immediately stop the hemorhaging
(except Kucinich--maybe a few Greens),
stop funding immediately, withdraw all troops immediately.

Good luck America!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What??
Posted by: tgabriel on Sep 24, 2007 5:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You wrote: "Iraq has become the textbook on how an insurgency can defeat a major power."

While I think your article is very good, the quoted statement has a small problem. Let me restate it: Iraq has become the textbook on how a people who are ignorant of their own history will suffer to relive it.

Have you forgotten the "insurgency" of the War of American Independence? Have you forgotten the Viet Nam War?

Americans have whatever bad things might happen coming because of their stupid choices for "leaders." I suspect they will get further lessons taught to them when they go to war with Iran.

Keep this in mind: Iran is no Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about lost Iraqi Lives?
Posted by: nancylove on Sep 24, 2007 7:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I love Alternet and rely on it for a lot of my news as an American who no longer resides in the United States. I'm not saying you have never covered this, but it saddens me that there is so much attention focused on American lives and costs and not enough on the devastation to the Iraqi's-at least American soldiers volunteered to go to Iraq. I'm also not saying that we shouldn't be aware of the monetary costs. I just want to say I left the country because I can't support this war in any way. I realize this is not an option for many.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Totally over looked COSTS to YOU
Posted by: common intelligence on Sep 26, 2007 6:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SInce the "Empiracal invasion" commenced Building materials have at least doubled in cost to the consumer.
Simply noted, before the BS war Driwall was around $$5- $6 bucks a sheet. Now it's $11 to 12.

Plywood double almost immediately. (It was being shipped to Iraq for floors for tents)

Many products are and have been on a back-order filled bases. That means product distribution has been slowed, which means "jobs" and "projects" have been curtailed on the consummer level.

But also when consummers pay more, They pay more sales and Tax.
This kind of "rerouting the money flow" takes away from infrastructure, not to speak of human resources that are directed to the war machine instead of infra structure needs.

The amount of energy and natural resources too are wasted, thrown in the toilet, wasted, nonretreivably lost.

The intelligence (not military) Brain-drain, that is rerouted to stupidity....well the whole world looses.

The list is huge, why go on? If People whom are suppose to govern the nation would put this kind of things on the scale of justice .....Oh, I just can't go on breathing into a void of stupid wasted effort hoping my words will make a difference.

Mean while people are being wasted to death for GEORGE W. BUSH and CO.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Totally over looked COSTS to YOU Posted by: peacefullaim