Skip to comments.CBO: Eight Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act
Posted on 08/30/2010 12:21:09 PM PDT by Sub-DriverEdited on 08/30/2010 2:04:04 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It’s a quagmire! Pull out!
One has to be very careful when adding up the costs too.
Many of these troops would have been in arms anyway. If we’re going to be completely accurate about the cost of the war, we have to deduct the pay they would have gotten anyway.
Some costs of equipment play into this too. I question if we’ll ever see a truly accurate accounting. My take on it, is that it would be a far smaller number than most folks would think.
Was thinking the same thing. It’s not like WWII where there was a huge increase in the number of soldiers and all the previously non-existent materials/munitions to fight that war.
Obama: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Facts - Just Listen To What I Tell You!
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
This would actually cause Liberal heads to explode. Unfortunately, they’ll just continue to lie about it and make up their own figures so it really doesn’t matter.
I just saw this online and came here to see if anyone posted it yet ... shocking numbers now confirmed
That’s right. I think these numbers are gamed by folks who want to make the case our military spending is out of control and it must end because “IT” is what is bankrupting this nation.
Not hardly. Our military spending IS NOT out of control. As a percentage of the economy, it is very low. And if you consider what Washington’s actual mandate is, out spending is completely upside down.
You also have to consider all the veterans benefits that will be paid in future decades.
Like the stimulus , we couldn’t afford the war either.
Remember when John Kerry said “I voted for the $87 Billion before I voted against it ?”
well, to simplify things, if we spent $87B every year on the Iraq war, it will take 10 years to even reach what Obama spent on one stimulus package in ONE YEAR !
Okay, but then you would have to offset that with the cost of losses from terrorism that would have occurred without our military actions in the Middle-East and Asia.
As I understand it, we’re talking about a very large sum, if it reaches the level of the 09/11 attacks, and certainly if more than just one more.
Odd how the MSM only cares about money when it’s a stick to use against conservatives... no bias there.../s
Congress has been a quagmire since day one ...
Would you rather fight the terrorists here - where your children are?
Meanwhile Obama’s private MSM lap dog press reports he needs golf lessons...
Since this whole economic debacle was basically brought on by Wall Street’s screw ups, seems like there ought to be a way to make them pay for more of the costs of getting us out of the hole they got us in.
There’s also the “minor detail” that military operations fall under federal control in the Constitution, unlike any of the stimulus packages.
yeah but it’s for the childre... oh wait. Yeah, were screwing the children, and ther children, and their children.
Enabling the Democratic Socialist machine currently in control of the White House and Congress is expensive. And they want to spend more!
The amount of money spent on wars and homeland security since 9/11 is in the trillions. It dwarfs the monetary losses of 9/11 which were in the $100 billion range.
And with the stimulus, we didn’t get the great joy of seeing Saddam dangle at the end of a rope, or his two sons professionally taxidermied, or Zarq’s 72 virgins moment.