Garden of Eden Escorts

Iraq War Costs Censored

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Pentagon removes $3 trillion price tag for war from web site after exposure

By Ralph Forbes

The cost of direct U.S. military operations in Iraq—not including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans—already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

These costs are projected to be almost 10 times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of World War I. The only war in U.S. history that cost more was the World War II, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion.

With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per GI (in today’s dollars) was less than $100,000. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per soldier.

America is spending $16 billion a month on running costs alone. Running expenses for 2008 are projected to exceed $12.5 billion a month for Iraq alone, up from $4.4 billion in 2003. A contractor working as a security guard gets about $400,000 a year, more than 10 times what the government spends on a soldier. To save money, if a soldier is injured, he is forced to repay his sign-up bonus.

One soldier was sued for $12,000 for loss of his helmet and equipment even though he had suffered massive brain damage in an attack.

The Pentagon keeps two sets of books. The first is the official casualty list posted on the DoD website. The second, hard-to-find set of data is available only on a different website and can be obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. This data shows that the total number of soldiers who have been wounded, injured, or suffered from disease is double the number wounded in combat. New research by the Stiglitz/Bilmes team shows that the majority of these injuries and illnesses can be tied directly to service in the war.

After Linda Bilmes published a paper on the cost to veterans, the then-assistant secretary for Health at the Pentagon phoned her and her dean and demanded, “Where did you get these numbers?”

Bilmes said, “I got them from your website, which we now have access to.”
He said, “Oh, that can’t be.”

Bilmes said, “Well, look at your website.”

He said, “Well, fax me my own website.” So she faxed him his website.

Then they took down those websites. Then they directed the Department of Veterans Affairs to change the Veterans’ websites.


This trickery is seen in the president’s proposal for the FY09 budget for veterans. Ostensibly the budget is being increased by $5 billion, But if you look at the fine print, they’re hoping to recoup over $3 billion by increasing the co-pays and all the fees on the veterans who need to use the services.

While shafting the soldiers, the administration insists on “sole-source bidding,” awarding vast, multi-year contracts to Halliburton, et al., instead of putting them out for bids.

“An academic might say, ‘How can you be a free market, yet demand single source contracting?’” asks Joseph E. Stiglitz, co-author of The Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict.*
 

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,139
1
0
Detroit, USA
Maybe this is why the USA is in such a mess now. The news is saying its the sub-prime leading but maybe not.

If the USA did not blow 3 trillion $ and maybe more, would things be as bad as they are now here?
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
S.C. Joe said:
Maybe this is why the USA is in such a mess now. The news is saying its the sub-prime leading but maybe not.

If the USA did not blow 3 trillion $ and maybe more, would things be as bad as they are now here?
Don't forget the late USSR went bankrupt after wasting 10 years in Afghanistan. Could Dubya be heading the USA down that same road. History is not one of Dubya's strong points.....if he has any strong points at all!....:rolleyes:
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
DonQuixote said:
When governments are no longer
transparent they lose their credibility.

This administration is conducting itself
in ways very similar to the Nixon era.
This corrupt administration is WORSE than Nixon. These corrupt neofascists think they are above the Law and the US Constitution as their 'stonewalling' continues.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
....along with 'cover your sorry arse' above all.......
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
DonQuixote said:
And the usual suspects think Clinton was a sleeze.
LOL!!!!
That's because they were afraid Bill was getting more than them. Nothing gets the GOPers more worked up than some sex hanky panky. That's probably why so manner GOPers go gay......:D
 

frasier

Insert comments here!!
Jul 19, 2006
3,377
0
0
In your head
WoodPeckr said:
Don't forget the late USSR went bankrupt after wasting 10 years in Afghanistan. Could Dubya be heading the USA down that same road. History is not one of Dubya's strong points.....if he has any strong points at all!....:rolleyes:
The USSR went bankrupt because of Afghanistan??? Priceless !!!..another product of the great American educational system....
 

frasier

Insert comments here!!
Jul 19, 2006
3,377
0
0
In your head
DonQuixote said:
The war in Afghanistan had a significant impact on
the demise of the Soviet Union. They invaded in
1980. Shortly thereafter, the price of crude oil,
gold and other commodities collapsed. Since those
commodities are still the foundation of the Russian
economy its easy to understand why they're now
playing the nationalist power game.

I think the invasion and the collapse of the commodity
markets were significant in causing the demise of the USSR.

You're not going to post that it was all Reagan's doing, are you?
USSR collapsed because of a failed experiment of a central market economy. Instead of letting the open market decide supply and demand they controlled it from the central politbureau.
While the war in Afghanistan didn't help, it certainly wasn't the cause. Reagan wasn't the cause of the collapse either but his politics of strength certainly helped the cause...
 

Meister

Well-known member
Apr 17, 2003
4,240
336
83
I think what's more amazing is that at 3 trillion the US still keeps going and may survive this cash crunch relatively unscathed. Mind you pretty soon we'll have to stash the US dollars in big packets to go grocery shopping like they used to in Italy.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,940
5,741
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
....and yet Dubya fancies himself a fiscal conservative like Reagan.....now there's a delusion!....:eek:
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts