cost of Bush's Quagmire
like $3 trillion and counting
Writing in these pages in early
2008, we put the total cost to the United States of the Iraq war at $3
This price tag dwarfed previous estimates, including the Bush
administration's 2003 projections of a $50 billion to $60 billion war.
But today, as the United States ends combat in Iraq, it appears that
our $3 trillion estimate (which accounted for
both government expenses and the war's broader impact on the U.S.
economy) was, if anything, too low.
For example, the cost of diagnosing, treating and compensating disabled
veterans has proved higher than we expected.
Moreover, two years on, it has become clear to us that our estimate did
not capture what may have been the conflict's
most sobering expenses: those in the category of "might have beens," or
what economists call opportunity costs. For instance,
many have wondered aloud whether, absent the Iraq invasion, we would
still be stuck in Afghanistan. And this is not the only
"what if" worth contemplating. We might also ask: If not for the war in
Iraq, would oil prices have risen so rapidly? Would the
federal debt be so high? Would the economic crisis have been so severe?
The answer to all four of these questions is probably no. The central
lesson of economics is that resources -- including
both money and attention -- are scarce. What was devoted to one
theater, Iraq, was not available elsewhere.
What the Washington Whore Post wants you to forget is they led the cheering for Bush's bloody quagmire,
along with the scumbags at the NY Whore Times and the soulless huns at
The Bush bastards would offer the Times or the Post "an exclusive" and
then feed them pure lies.
Then Cheney would go on whore Russert's show and lie, saying, "Even the NY Times
says it's true."
And then this bastard, under
oath, admitted "trading
favorable coverage for better access."
That made you a lying whore with lots of blood on your
Back to Bartcop.com