![]() |
|
| |
|
No ‘Straight Talk’ on Iraq CostPosted on Feb 21, 2008By Joe Conason As a presidential candidate, John McCain stands out not only for his vocal endorsement of the unpopular war in Iraq, but also because one of his own sons is a Marine Corps officer on active duty there. He supports the war, even at the price of his own career or the life of a child he loves. Yet although the senator from Arizona is obviously no chicken hawk, he carefully avoids “straight talk” about the real costs of this war in dollars and debt. Like every other politician who agrees with the Bush policy of prolonged war and occupation, he still pretends that we can spend hundreds of billions on this endless misadventure without collecting enough tax revenue to pay the actual costs. Hundreds of billions? Sorry, but that vague estimate is probably far too modest, according to a new book by Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz and author Linda J. Bilmes. In “The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict,” they warn that the war’s “true budgetary cost,” excluding interest, “is likely to reach $2.7 trillion.” Aside from the price of munitions, contractors, transport, fuel and other fixed costs, their calculations are based on the government’s continuing obligation to provide medical care and disability payments for the thousands of wounded veterans of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan over the coming decades. Those costs represent a moral debt on which we cannot default—and they will grow larger every day that we maintain the occupation. Even if the war could be ended immediately, the fiscal obligations incurred by the invasion and occupation will continue. Beyond the mandatory disability payments, medical and psychiatric care and additional benefits to which our vets are entitled, the nation will face years of increasing military budgets to restore the equipment and readiness of our battered armed forces, especially the Army and the National Guard. Even in the “best-case” scenario envisioned by Stiglitz and Bilmes, with our troop presence declining rapidly, the U.S. commitment in Iraq is still likely to cost no less than $400 billion over the next several years, on top of the $800 billion or so that we have spent to date. Those figures, which don’t include veterans’ benefits, add up to $1.2 trillion. What the authors call their “realistic-moderate scenario” for a prolonged presence in Iraq will cost twice as much or more. Having served at the highest levels of the federal government, both authors understand that the Bush administration’s war budgeting has been a travesty—aided and abetted by lawmakers such as McCain, who have gone along all the way. Instead of accounting honestly for the war’s costs and requesting the necessary funds to pay for them, the White House has routinely used “emergency” supplemental requests as a device to hide the truth. The emergency process prevents the Office of Management and Budget as well as congressional staff from thoroughly reviewing the data. Inevitably, they explain, this lack of transparency and competence has resulted in waste, fraud and corruption in payments to contractors, most of them politically wired, while essential equipment and veteran care remain underfunded. Compounding the disgrace is the fact that the Bush administration and Congress financed these “emergency” budgets by borrowing, rather than raising taxes, as the United States has traditionally done in times of war. The Bush administration has insisted on reducing taxes, with most benefits accruing to the wealthiest individuals, while piling on debt for succeeding administrations and generations (and leaving the nation’s infrastructure to rot away, too). Politicians like McCain who have cooperated in this outrage should tell us why they still call themselves “conservative.” Back in 2001, when he was still in his maverick phase, the Arizona senator voted against the Bush tax cuts. Today, he says that he objected to the budgetary flimflam that cut taxes without reducing program costs, but at the time he claimed to worry about the excessive premiums for the very rich. Now, he runs around promising “no new taxes” just like every standard right-wing Republican. In an unguarded moment, McCain once confessed that he doesn’t know much about economics. Even he should be able to comprehend the disastrous fiscal effects of the Iraq war, which its proponents originally promised would cost us almost nothing. Perhaps he should ask an economist to calculate the real cost of occupying Iraq for a hundred years, as he imagines—and how many generations will pay dearly for this mistake. Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer. © 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc. Previous item: The Poppy Problem Next item: A Trade Transformation Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By Marshall, February 25, 2008 at 11:33 am #
Ahhh… the liberal term used to handily invalidate the opinions of those who don’t have an immediate blood relative serving in Iraq - as though that’s the prerequisite for having an opinion on the war. If it is, then the irony is that this invalidates the opinions of most who oppose the war as well.
Report thisBy omop, February 24, 2008 at 2:48 pm #
In an ideal world $ 3 Trillion dollars could have been put to uses that would have improved an un-named conditions in a society of 300 million.
Instead in a nation of 300 million Americans a cabal of neocons/likudniks and chickenhawks decided to undertake an illegal war, in international legal relations tha have resulted in over one million Iraqi deaths, Close to 4000 US military fatalities and some 96,000 American young mean women crippled for life. A cost of billions every month contributing to the total estimate by J. Stiglitz and a senior Harvard University researcher of some 3 trillion US dollars to be paid for by still unborn generations of Americas.
In an ideal society all those who pomoted such almost treasonous acts would be facing a criminal tribunal. All those promoting future military actions such as Mr. Podhoretz, Sen. Lieberman as well as any of the presidential candidates should be considered potential security risks to the welfare and publuc security of USA.
Report thisBy paul harrington, February 24, 2008 at 1:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
“Some folks simply outlive their usefulness to the greater society”
Your word Miss?
First they abort and muder the babies. Next come the old folks.
pjh
Report thisBy waxman, February 22, 2008 at 1:55 am #
YOU COULD BE A VERY MEAN PERSON IF YOU TRIED….I’M NOT SURE HOW YOU KNEW WAS CONFINED TO A WHEELCHAIR, I MAY GET OUT ONE DAY, HOWEVER YOU WILL ALWAYS BE A MEAN FEMALE DOG…...
Report thisBy BlueEagle, February 22, 2008 at 1:02 am #
There is only one candidate that will get us out of Iraq and he has been shut out by the MSM. He also told us what will happen if we stay on this course. The writing is on the wall - economic collapse. The only way we are going to get the troops home is if the US goes broke, which means hyperinflation. Make no mistake about it Obama, Clinton and McCain are all hawks that have no intension of bringing all the troops home. The printing press is on overdrive and Ben is warming up the helicopter.
Report thisBy republicanSScareme, February 21, 2008 at 11:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m sure glad John McCain will get the Republican nomination. I’ve been trying to think of someone easier to beat and only Jimmy Hoffa came to mind. That’s a dead Jimmy Hoffa.
I live in Arizona and it’s very difficult for us to get through a month without having to suffer our illustrious Senator putting his foot in his mouth. Basically, that means that John will make a complete fool of himself about 10 times between now and the election.
Over and out.
Report thisBy cyrena, February 21, 2008 at 11:16 pm #
Nope, not the same pervert waxman. Not the same at all.
Those Americans who have died in foreign wars, as well as those ‘wars’ here at home, to gain and assure my human rights and civil rights are not the ones I’m speaking of when I reference ignorant people like you, of ANY age.
I have no living children, and my parents and grandparents/great grandparents, (who DID fight and die) WERE intelligent and educated, and all have been Americans.
So, take your loose marbles and go play on a freeway somewhere, or take your wheelchair out for a joy ride. Some folks simply outlive their usefulness to the greater society.
Report thisBy QuyTran, February 21, 2008 at 6:05 pm #
Don’t worry about invasion war cost in Iraq. In the Vietnam war we spent ONLY 600 billion dollars and almost 60,000 US soldiers killed in action.
Report thisBy tomack, February 21, 2008 at 4:29 pm #
Hey, as RP says, he’s only ten in dog years. That aside, he IS the second best choice…after the Dem nominee of course. Fields better than Da Bush.
Report thisBy ocjim, February 21, 2008 at 3:09 pm #
We are supposed to suffer the consequences of McCain knowing nothing about economics. We are already suffering because of the ignorance of our current president who says that God guides him.
For McCain to support this needless, idiotic war without talking about the consequences is as dishonest and compassionless as Bush himself.
Report thisBy PatrickHenry, February 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm #
Since WWII there haven’t been any wars which come to mind which were fought “over there” to preserve our freedoms over here. Korea, Vietnam, Dominican Republic, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Iraq #1 and #2, none of these foreign adventures had anything to do with preserving U.S. freedoms here at home.
McCain is up to his shriveled neck in this fleecing of America which has occured since WWII. Time to put those war monies into something more constructive than destructive.
Report thisBy waxman, February 21, 2008 at 11:03 am #
On a previous site you inferred people over 65 ain’t got no book learnen…are they the same ones that died to protect your right to blather on the internet ???Since you think you are so smart, why don’t you move to Kenya ( where your love childs ancesters live )and straighten their government out..
Report thisBy kath cantarella, February 21, 2008 at 2:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
keep him out of the White House.
Stopping further war is the priority. McCain is so gung ho he makes my eyes water.
President HRC or President OB 2009.
Report thisBy cyrena, February 21, 2008 at 1:20 am #
On this:
.their calculations are based on the governments continuing obligation to provide medical care and disability payments for the thousands of wounded Iraqi and Afghanistani veterans over the coming decades...
One can only wonder how much it will cost if the government actually begins to FULFILL this obligation. So far, it hasnt come close.
Instead of accounting honestly for the wars costs and requesting the necessary funds to pay for them, the White House has routinely used emergency supplemental requests as a device to hide the truth. The emergency process prevents the Office of Management and Budget as well as congressional staff from thoroughly reviewing the data. Inevitably, they explain, this lack of transparency and competence has resulted in waste, fraud and corruption in payments to contractors, most of them politically wired, while essential equipment and veteran care remain underfunded.
And, there it is. These emergency funds are NEVER requested as part of the budget. And yep, its ROUTINE. $70 billion here, $102 billion there, then another few $70 billion dollar requests, (they dont even bother to change that much any more).
Meantime, theres Walter Reed, and a thousand other VA facilities just like it. (decaying and leaving our vets - our loved ones, to rot) Vets are homeless and walking around with permanent cases of untreated PTSD. Recently, we discovered that the lucky ones are being treated with the recreational drug Ecstasy .
Medical professionals/technicians have left the Veterans Administration in DROVES since 2000, having been outsourced to contractors, or otherwise scared off.
How does one Cabal do this much damage to an entire nation, and do it for this long? Hitler and Stalin didnt even get away with this, and surely not for as long.
Politicians like McCain who have cooperated in this outrage should tell us why they still call themselves conservative.
They should tell us why they still call themselves HUMAN!
Nevermind, we dont care. We know they arent. And this guy actually thinks we are crazy enough to elect him to continue the damage? Well never last that long. There isnt that much money in the world.
Report this