Iraq, Afghan Wars Price Tag Jumps To $195B
Spending to cover the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan next year will total nearly $200 billion, according to a budget request the White House will take to Congress next week, making 2008 the most expensive year of those conflicts to date.
The news was first reported by the Los Angeles Times, which cited unnamed Pentagon officials.
The Bush administration has earlier this year said it would need $147.5 billion for fiscal 2008, but the estimates have been raised by another $47 billion. This request is in addition to the Pentagon's nearly half-trillion annual budget, which omits war spending but covers routine costs, including training, payrolls and weapons procurement.
To blame: the massive troop buildup and production of new equipment, including mine-resistant trucks.
The $195 billion price tag would mark an increase of about 12 percent from $173 billion in Fiscal 2007.
Winslow Wheeler, a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information and a former Republican congressional budget aide, told the Los Angeles Times that the Iraq war (including associated costs such as embassy expenses in Baghdad and CIA operations) and currently costs taxpayers $12 billion a month, and the costs will rise, even as incremental drawdowns in troop levels take place over the coming year.
"Everybody predicts declines, but they haven't occurred," Wheeler told the Times. "It all depends on what happens in Iraq, but thus far it has continued to get bloodier and more expensive."
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and other officials are expected to present their request to the Senate on Wednesday.
In 2004, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan together cost $94 billion. Those costs rose to $108 billion in 2005, and $122 billion in 2006.
The Congressional Budget Office this week released estimates on the long-term costs of deploying troops in Iraq, and said that, if the U.S. were to maintain a long-term presence (as President Bush suggested in his address to the nation last week), even a minimal force of 55,000 troops in a peacekeeping role would cost $25 billion a year.
The report says keeping the troops protected at established military bases and out of combat would lower the cost to about $10 billion dollars a year, with additional costs of $8 billion for the construction of bases or additional equipment.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., asked for the study after President Bush likened America's future in Iraq to the peacekeeping role U.S. troops play in South Korea, where they have been stationed for some five decades. Mr. Bush announced his intention to keep a force of between 100,000 to 130,000 troops on the ground in Iraq through the end of his term, and was quoted in a new book, "Dead Certain," as saying he hoped his eventual successor would be "comfortable about sustaining a presence" in the war-torn country.
A four-decade-long presence in Iraq, mimicking our presence in South Korea, would top $1 trillion dollars, based on the CBO's estimates.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. The news was first reported by the Los Angeles Times, which cited unnamed Pentagon officials.
The Bush administration has earlier this year said it would need $147.5 billion for fiscal 2008, but the estimates have been raised by another $47 billion. This request is in addition to the Pentagon's nearly half-trillion annual budget, which omits war spending but covers routine costs, including training, payrolls and weapons procurement.
To blame: the massive troop buildup and production of new equipment, including mine-resistant trucks.
The $195 billion price tag would mark an increase of about 12 percent from $173 billion in Fiscal 2007.
Winslow Wheeler, a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information and a former Republican congressional budget aide, told the Los Angeles Times that the Iraq war (including associated costs such as embassy expenses in Baghdad and CIA operations) and currently costs taxpayers $12 billion a month, and the costs will rise, even as incremental drawdowns in troop levels take place over the coming year.
"Everybody predicts declines, but they haven't occurred," Wheeler told the Times. "It all depends on what happens in Iraq, but thus far it has continued to get bloodier and more expensive."
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and other officials are expected to present their request to the Senate on Wednesday.
In 2004, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan together cost $94 billion. Those costs rose to $108 billion in 2005, and $122 billion in 2006.
The Congressional Budget Office this week released estimates on the long-term costs of deploying troops in Iraq, and said that, if the U.S. were to maintain a long-term presence (as President Bush suggested in his address to the nation last week), even a minimal force of 55,000 troops in a peacekeeping role would cost $25 billion a year.
The report says keeping the troops protected at established military bases and out of combat would lower the cost to about $10 billion dollars a year, with additional costs of $8 billion for the construction of bases or additional equipment.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., asked for the study after President Bush likened America's future in Iraq to the peacekeeping role U.S. troops play in South Korea, where they have been stationed for some five decades. Mr. Bush announced his intention to keep a force of between 100,000 to 130,000 troops on the ground in Iraq through the end of his term, and was quoted in a new book, "Dead Certain," as saying he hoped his eventual successor would be "comfortable about sustaining a presence" in the war-torn country.
A four-decade-long presence in Iraq, mimicking our presence in South Korea, would top $1 trillion dollars, based on the CBO's estimates.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Mexico's drug war 20 Photos
- U.K. official: London attack suspects probed before
- London soldier slaying homegrown Islamic extremism?
- Graphic video: Man dead in "truly shocking" London attack Play Video
- Man dead in "truly shocking" London attack 245 Comments
- Tokyo's rockabilly scene 16 Photos
- Mexican volcano on verge of eruption 15 Photos
- Who were the 4 U.S. citizens killed in drone strikes? 95 Comments
f-you..................................... americans dont have it..
you have already stole anough..go ask your brother the king in saudie and ask for a loan not for america but fro you........................
NEVER FORGET THE RAPES OF BESLAN GIRLS!
Terror at Beslan
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1316935651894423094
RAPES IN BESLAN: IN MUHAMMAD%u2019S FOOTSTEPS
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic04/NewsST091304.html
Forget Not the Children of Beslan
http://kenlydell.typepad.com/islamic_evil/forget_not_the_children_of_beslan/index.html
Religion of Peace??? More like a cult of death.
http://www.terrorists-suck.org/why_suck/beslan.html
Radical Islamists must be stopped:
comments on the Beslan child slaughter.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/list.htm
Qaeda warns of attacks ''worse than 9/11''
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070530102648.wuwa6k96&show_article=1
Hizbullah Deputy Sec-Gen Sheikh Naim Qassem: We Have Jurisprudent Permission to Carry Out ''Martyrdom'' Operations, Fire Missiles on Israeli Civilians From Ayatollah Khomeini
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD154907
Switching Sides: Inside The Enemy Camp
But then in 2000, well before his arrest, something happened which would make Abas question everything he believed in: a fatwa, a religious edict, was issued by Osama bin Laden.
"It should be understood that killing Americans and Jews anywhere found are the highest act of worship and the highest form of good deeds in the eyes of Allah," Simon quotes bin Laden.
Abas and his fellow commanders were ordered to read the fatwa to their men and make sure they carried it out. The others obeyed, but Abas refused. It was his moment of truth. He firmly believed that jihad was to be fought only on the battlefield in defense of Islam; he had always been taught that the killing of civilians had nothing to do with holy war and that it was forbidden.
The fatwa justified killing non-Muslim civilians everywhere.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/04/60minutes/main2761108.shtml?source=RSSattr=60Minutes_2761108
American Al Qaeda Member Threatens Attack
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/29/terror/main2865282.shtml
non muslims of the world unite,,, fight against the tyranny of the fascist nazi terrorslam imperialist empire of the darkside,,,
I was a fanatic...I know their thinking, says former radical Islamist
By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair''s bombs" line did our propaganda work for us.
More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=465570&in_page_id=1770
Bless the Beasts and Children
Fascist nazi terrorslam kills every man woman and child in the village again%u2026 typical mo for terrorslam%u2026
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm
Our Prophet commanded us to fight the kaafirs when we are able and to attack them in their homelands and to give them three choices before we enter their lands: either they become Muslim and be like us, sharing our rights and duties; or they pay the jizyah (poll tax) and feel themselves subdued; or they fight, in which case their wealth, women, children and homes become permissible as booty for the Muslims.
http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=13759&ln=eng&txt=before%20islam%20arabia%20pagan
dnc are like john adams and want to give the jihadist their lunch money hoping they will leave us alone,,,
gop are like thomas jefferson and want to spend their lunch money on weapons and go kick the jihadists in their arses,,,
What Thomas Jefferson learned from the Muslim book of jihad,,,
Thomas Jefferson knew about fascist nazi islam,,, he killed plenty of them,,,
In 1786 Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli''''s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman or (Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). They asked him by what right he extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:
The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War
http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm
muslim justifies slavery and piracy,,,
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?6bdec278-6a71-4436-bc4d-29d1c54b0ad7
MUSLIM PIRATES STRIKE AGAIN,,,
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2005/06/muslim-pirates-strike-again.html
the resumption of hostilities was only a matter of time since iraq broke the ceasefire agreement,,,
blame saddam for iraq,,, Even clintoon and the dems wanted the resumption of hostilities back in 1998,,,
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq"s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Moreover, no international law can prevent the United States from taking actions to protect its vital interests, when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and survival. I believe, however, that such a choice is not presented in the case of Iraq. Indeed, should we decide to proceed, that action can be justified within the framework of international law rather than outside it. In fact, though a new UN resolution may be helpful in building international consensus, the existing resolutions from 1991 are sufficient from a legal standpoint. - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/gore/gore092302sp.html
G*d D*mn this Regime! G*d D*mn these monsters who wage war and take lives they did not create. G*d D*mn these b*stards who poison our world for their own profit! G*d D*mn this human offal who outlaw the easing of human suffering while financing the programs of war, the destruction of life! G*d D*mn the war-mongering trollops who support this vile regime of murder, plunder and oppression for the sake of Capital. G*d D*mn the Demo-publican Regime! Revolution Now! Revolution Now! Revolution Now!
know what the south did?...
they started murdering all their yankee prisoners of war.
yep, that''s right, folks.
dixie confederate scum started murdering their yankee prisoners of war...
thousands and thousands of fine, young, defenseless, captured yankee prisoners murdered
before grant could rescue them.
read about it! confederate death camp at andersonville, georgia.
oh well, that''s the bush loving south for you, folks!