Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The $1.3 Trillion War
Linda Bilmes, a Commerce Department assistant secretary from 1999-2001 who teaches budgeting and public finance at Harvard, estimates that
if the American military presence in [Iraq] lasts another five years, the total outlay for the war could stretch to more than $1.3 trillion, or $11,300 for every household in the United States.
See a graphical representation of Bilmes' math here; her column here. Key section:
But the biggest long-term costs are disability and health payments for returning troops, which will be incurred even if hostilities were to stop tomorrow. The United States currently pays more than $2 billion in disability claims per year for 159,000 veterans of the 1991 gulf war, even though that conflict lasted only five weeks, with 148 dead and 467 wounded. Even assuming that the 525,000 American troops who have so far served in Iraq and Afghanistan will require treatment only on the same scale as their predecessors from the gulf war, these payments are likely to run at $7 billion a year for the next 45 years.
$1.3 trillion is more than the annual GDP of Canada, Mexico, Spain and 217 other countries. (Bilmes link via Anti-War.com.)
norbizness|8.22.05 @ 4:06PM|#
Look, they're not just HANDING OUT loosely confederated nations who base their laws on the Koran, are firmly allied with Iran, and are built for imminent civil war at SuperTarget, you know. Sometimes you have to pay retail.
|8.22.05 @ 4:07PM|#
I'm sure the burgeoning Islamic republic we're underwriting is worth every penny.
|8.22.05 @ 4:15PM|#
Ouch. Blowing it on beer, strippers, and go-karts would have been a better investment too.
ed|8.22.05 @ 4:15PM|#
Have they finished that Koran-based constitution yet? Yeah, that's the ticket.
|8.22.05 @ 4:16PM|#
I'm sure the women of Iraq will be thrilled to know we spent to much to bring them the benefits of life under Sharia law.
|8.22.05 @ 4:16PM|#
Finally, I get to bear some of the cost of this war! This is better than a draft!
|8.22.05 @ 4:19PM|#
Here's what joys your tax dollars are bringing to the women of
Iraq:
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article305879.ece
|8.22.05 @ 4:21PM|#
Where are the right-wingers to explain why this is worth it, and
we're all safer because of it, and the Iraqis (especially the
women, and the guys who sell the acid that gets thrown in their
faces when they dare to venture outside) are much happier because
of our invasion?
Don Mynack?
|8.22.05 @ 4:39PM|#
Jennifer, I think they're all writing new words to put into Casey Sheehan's mouth.
|8.22.05 @ 4:42PM|#
Although the triumphalist taunting that accompanied Flight Suit Day, Purple Finger Day, and Spider Hole Day certainly make the hawks fair game for this mockery, it would behoove the Reality Based Community to avoid repaying them in kind, if only to deprive the "you're objectively pro-Saddam" side of the opportunity to bemoan their opponents' shrillness.
|8.22.05 @ 4:42PM|#
Ouch! Health care costs are skyrocketing - Now's the chance to nationalize the system!
gaius marius|8.22.05 @ 4:43PM|#
traditionally, the only thing more expensive than an empire is a poorly-run empire. seeing as we seem to be incapable of having the former, i'd suggest abandoning the latter.
|8.22.05 @ 4:45PM|#
Joe--
You actually think the hawks are capable of feeling shame in
regards to this?
|8.22.05 @ 5:00PM|#
Jennifer,
The people who wore band aids with purple hearts on them to make
fun of a guy with shrapnel in his ass?
No, I don't think they're capable of feeling shame.
I expect we'll start seeing the "stabbed in the back by those
secular, cosmopolitan types who own the media and don't share our
Christian values" conspiracy theories any time now.
|8.22.05 @ 5:49PM|#
"I expect we'll start seeing the "stabbed in the back by those
secular, cosmopolitan types who own the media and don't share our
Christian values" conspiracy theories any time now."
Right. Like we've never seen comments like those on H&R. I
don't remember them attached to pro-war sentiments, though.
|8.22.05 @ 5:56PM|#
Matt Welch obviously opposes high government expenditures,
especially ones that don't yield clear economic benefits.
The returning soldiers are likely to impose a high health-care cost
on the US for decades to come, with no (or little) economic
benefit.
Non-returning soldiers do not impose such a cost.
Plainly, Matt wants the soldiers to die in Iraq. Matt, why do you
hate America?
NOTE: The views expressed in this post are not necessarily those of
the author, or any sentient being.
|8.22.05 @ 6:25PM|#
Just remember, Joe, the Iraqis would have thrown flowers at our troops, and would have turned into a happy US-loving democracy, if only traitors like you had had the decency to keep your damned mouths shut.
|8.22.05 @ 6:37PM|#
Guys, I simply have to laugh at the complete cynicism that runs rampant on this board. Not that I don't share, but Shelby and Jennifer's last posts are hi-fucking-larious examples.
|8.22.05 @ 7:37PM|#
Jennifer, joe, if neither of you are readers of Obsidian Wings,
you should be; it's a group blog with a mix of liberal,
conservative and moderate posters, and I think you'd both enjoy it.
It was started by former regular commenters at Tacitus.org, but
ended up being a much better blog.
In any case, I bring it up only to note that, over there, one
regular front-page poster and several right-wing loon commenters
have already started the new war apologist PR campaign: We Can Only
Encourage The Iraqis, And If They Don't Adopt A Democracy With
Equal Rights, It Isn't Our Damned Fault.
|8.22.05 @ 8:07PM|#
" one regular front-page poster and several right-wing loon
commenters have already started the new war apologist PR campaign:
We Can Only Encourage The Iraqis, And If They Don't Adopt A
Democracy With Equal Rights, It Isn't Our Damned Fault."
As opposed to the left-wing loons PR campaign: "Suddam Hussain is
better then a Muslim Democracy."
Hey anyone know how much WW2 cost using the same criteria? The cold
war? Civil war?
But i guess if you think that all war is immoral and US history
proves it then i guess there is no point in argueing...
By the way are libertarians isolationists? I really don't see this
argument put forth very much that we shouldn't be anywere...south
korea, Nato UN, etc. I can see this intellectual argument. But the
stuff put out recently on this board does not follow that
logic...in fact it mirrors the democrats argument...which is any
arguemnt we can make so long as its anti-bush.
|8.22.05 @ 8:15PM|#
Tu quoque! Strawman! Another strawman! False comparison!
Excluded middle!
Did you have any actual arguments to make, or . . . ?
M1EK|8.22.05 @ 8:29PM|#
"As opposed to the left-wing loons PR campaign: "Suddam Hussain
is better then a Muslim Democracy.""
Thanks, Rush.
More accurately, Saddam Hussein was better than either another
theocracy or a civil war.
|8.22.05 @ 9:27PM|#
gaius: It really is a poorly run empire if the imperial forces
waste time on security and infrastructure for the subjugated. A
good emperor would just steal the wealth and enslave the
people.
Jennifer, et al: One one hand you complain when USA meddles in
another nation's self-determination, then on the other, you
complain when they self-determine in a way you disprove of. You're
really setting yourself up for some trite "there's no pleasing
women" wisecrack.
Julian: Do you actually believe we'll keep funding them so
extravagantly if we're not happy with their form of
self-determination? There really not much oil flowing from Iraq, so
you can't fall back on that tired conspiracy theory (not so tired
when applied to Saudi, however).
|8.22.05 @ 9:30PM|#
By the time your children repay the trillion bucks, it will only feel like a few dozen billion. Inflation is the friend of those who sell debt. And if you are a tax protestor, you get the whole war for free!
|8.22.05 @ 9:50PM|#
"Right. Like we've never seen comments like those on H&R. I
don't remember them attached to pro-war sentiments, though."
You wait, Steve. You just wait. The nut doesn't fall far from the
tree.
M1EK, "More accurately, Saddam Hussein was better than either
another theocracy or a civil war." Better? I dunno. Worth it? Not
even close.
But then, I would probably say that if we could have had these
casualties for free.
|8.23.05 @ 12:00AM|#
$1.3 trillion? I have this credit card that gives me a $25 gift
certificate for Amazon every time I spend $2500. I do all of my
regular purchases by credit card, plus utility bills, insurance,
major purchases, etc., and pay the balance every month, so I don't
have to carry much cash or write many checks. So I get a lot of
gift certificates.
So, if Bush had just used this credit card to pay for the war, he
could get $13 billion worth of Amazon gift certificates. That would
be more than enough to buy him a copy of an Econ 101 textbook and
teach him that farm subsidies, tariffs, and drug prohibition make
no sense.
|8.23.05 @ 12:12AM|#
thoreau-The man supposedly has an MBA from an accredited university. The fact that he didn't take the time back then doesn't bode well for anything like that. He'd probably buy himself a new pair of running shoes. Of course, Kerry would have bought books in French, so we should be grateful, I guess.
|8.23.05 @ 1:37AM|#
Although the triumphalist taunting that accompanied Flight
Suit Day, Purple Finger Day, and Spider Hole Day certainly make the
hawks fair game for this mockery, it would behoove the Reality
Based Community to avoid repaying them in kind, if only to deprive
the "you're objectively pro-Saddam" side of the opportunity to
bemoan their opponents' shrillness.
I expect we'll start seeing the "stabbed in the back by those
secular, cosmopolitan types who own the media and don't share our
Christian values" conspiracy theories any time now.
Nah, just hint that hawks are Nazis.
|8.23.05 @ 3:18AM|#
We were lied into the war and now our government and the neocons
want to keep spending more money and even more lives until the
"mission is complete". Just WTF mission is that?!
The neocon's REAL mission now is for our government's troops to
stay in Iraq so that they can be used toward regime change, or at
least pressure on Iran and Syria.
|8.23.05 @ 5:38AM|#
It really is a poorly run empire if the imperial forces
waste time on security and infrastructure for the
subjugated.
So the Roman Empire fell because of all the roads and aqueducts it
built in conquered territories?
One one hand you complain when USA meddles in another nation's
self-determination, then on the other, you complain when they
self-determine in a way you disprove of.
No, I complain when the USA turns a secular nation into an Islamic
theocracy, and has the gall to say this will make Americans safer,
and make the people living under the theocracy more free.
|8.23.05 @ 9:15AM|#
Jennifer,
We didn't MEAN to turn Iraq into a theocracy/failed state/terrorist
haven. Our hearts are pure! Our hearts are pure!
|8.23.05 @ 9:16AM|#
Eric,
"Nah, just hint that hawks are Nazis."
Actually, I was thinking of the Nixonite conservatives after
Vietnam. But I guess your version works, too.
|8.23.05 @ 9:17AM|#
You'll never hear me suggest that it would be BETTER if Saddam
were still in power.
But when I look at the prospects of an Iran-leaning theocracy or a
failed state/terrorist haven, I'm not sure that Saddam would be
much worse either.
Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
|8.23.05 @ 9:18AM|#
FWIW, The Onion offers this little gem on the future of
Iraq:
Iraq Declares Partial Law
BAGHDAD�Citing the chaotic state of his occupied nation, president
Jalal Talabani declared a state of partial law in Iraq Monday. "We
must preserve a few laws and some order," said Talabani in a
televised address. "If not for our own sake, then for the sake of
the peace-loving citizens who make up nearly half our population."
Talabani said the state of partial law is temporary, promising that
within the decade, his interim government will be replaced by a
more stable fascist theocracy.
|8.23.05 @ 9:20AM|#
Joe--
Protest all you want, Planner Boy. Your lack of faith in
our leader is what got us into this mess. Everything would have
been fine if you'd just shut the hell up and put more
yellow ribbons on your car.
That's right, I said it. Somebody had to. It's about time we put
the blame for this debacle where it belongs--on the backs of those
who opposed the war in the first place. Every American soldier who
died is blood on your hands, Joe.
|8.23.05 @ 9:45AM|#
Tinkerbell would be ashamed of what Peter Pan is doing. Peter
pan is a whore, a pimp, and a traitor.
Peter Pan doesn't speak for me.
|8.23.05 @ 9:48AM|#
It's too late to turn back now, Joe. All great Neptune's ocean won't wash the blood of the patriots from your handds.
|8.23.05 @ 10:06AM|#
And lest any of you think I'm being unduly harsh on Joe, just consider this: the mess we're in, in Iraq, is clearly somebody's fault, and if we don't pin the blame on the Joes of the world, then who's left to blame? The guys who actually got us into this war? The guys who forgot to plan for what would happen after we reached the Mission Accomplished point? Pshaw. Not them.
|8.23.05 @ 10:07AM|#
Joe--
Lady Macbeth. "Will all great Neptune's ocean wipe this blood from
my hand?"
No.
|8.23.05 @ 11:02AM|#
Pardon the threadjack.
Matt, is this the day the music died? I got dead air all the way
from Mission Viejo to Orange.
|8.23.05 @ 11:16AM|#
Bad news Matt.
http://www.smmirror.com/volume2/issue7/off_the_air.html
No more shall we hear the sweet cry "Wake up. How many times do I
have to tell you to get the #!$% out of bed?"
|8.23.05 @ 12:17PM|#
the mess we're in, in Iraq, is clearly somebody's fault, and
if we don't pin the blame on the Joes of the world, then who's left
to blame? The guys who actually got us into this war?
You mean the Congress, who gave GWB a blank check? Twice?
No...you can't engage any more sophisticated analysis than simply
blaming somebody who goes to church regulary. After all, that's
proof of how completely stupid a person is. There's certainly no
responsibilty to be shared by the previous pagan president for the
world situation today. Bubba gets a pass, but somehow previous
righty administrations do manage to get some demerits for their
meddling in the middle east.
Do you actually have a mind, or are you composed entirely of anger
and cigarets?
(That's rhetorical. I know you have a mind. You're just not using
in this thread)
|8.23.05 @ 12:28PM|#
you can't engage any more sophisticated analysis than simply
blaming somebody who goes to church regulary.
So. . . you're saying that I'm saying that this mess in
Iraq happened because Bush goes to church? WHAT?!?
|8.23.05 @ 1:05PM|#
I'm snarking that you choose not to look at the whole situation.
Although you incessantly complain about what GWB has done and is
doing, you've got no other alternative to offer, and you rarely if
ever call out any of the other wackjobs who share responsibility.
So I figure there must be some emotion-driven component to focusing
on the current President, and you seem to hate the righteous even
more than the merely rich and well-connected.
It not about who is the cause, it is an observation about who you
choose to blame.
|8.23.05 @ 1:24PM|#
Dynamist, I blame EVERYBODY who got us into this bullshit
false-pretense war. And if the Republicans were as big on "personal
responsibility" as they claim to be, we'd hear a few more mea
culpas and a few less "everything is fine. We must stay the course.
You go to war with the army you have, not the army you'd like to
have" justifications.
And yes, yes, let me beat you to the punch: CLINTON believed some
of the bad stuff about Saddam too. But Clinton didn't start a war
over it. I am more concerned with actions than thoughts.
And when you're sticking up for your party, you REALLY need to do
better than "Bush goes to church whereas his predecessor was a
pagan." You're sounding as ridiculous as I did when I blamed Joe
for the war--except I was kidding.
|8.23.05 @ 4:34PM|#
But Clinton didn't start a war
But he wanted to. That's why he sent Mad and Al on tour in 98. For
some reason the country wasn't insane then so the crowds shouted
them down and told them to go home.
I wonder what Shrub is putting in the H2O supply that Bubba didn't
have.
|8.23.05 @ 10:36PM|#
Jennifer: My party? I have a party of one. My tickets are always
split between the majors, the minors, and animated characters.
Daffy Duck has been a write-in on every ballot I've cast.
Generally, I'm not defending Bush as much as I'm attacking shabby
arguments like the ones you often make. E.g., don't intervene, but
also don't allow self-determination. How does that make any
sense?
You so rarely blame anyone other than GWB I must be forgiven for
not remembering any instance where you volunteered such a view.
Since you're past the point of rational argument on anything Bush
has touched, I find it more fascinating to speculate on your
psychology. In my experience, the lefties are angrier and
hate-filled than the righties. If my experience isn't too clouded
by my own filter, I wonder why the lefties are always so pissed
off? Jesus envy?
(joe, certainly a lefty, is an exception to my above
stereotype.)
|8.24.05 @ 7:51AM|#
E.g., don't intervene, but also don't allow
self-determination.
No, actually my complaint is: don't turn a secular society into a
society run by Islamic radicals, and then lie and claim that this
will somehow reduce the threat from Islamic radicals. Do you
honestly believe that only a rabid Bush-hater could decry the fact
that we've created another Islamic theocracy? And when Bush was
selling us this war, when did he ever say "Having Iraq turn into a
theocracy with close ties to Iran is exactly the goal we're
striving for?"
|8.24.05 @ 1:04PM|#
Jennifer, what possible good can it do, when discussing American
foreign and military policy, to focus on the President of the
United States?
How come, when you talk about Iraq, you're always talking about
what George Bush did, instead of what, say, Dunnis Kucinich or Pat
Robertson did?
There must be some kind of emotional reason why, when discussing
the policies and assumptions behind the Iraq War, you always talk
about George Bush and his administration.
I think it's because you hate the righteous and/or Jews.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245