The three trillion dollar war | Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes - Times Online

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined. Full Story »

Posted by Jon Raymond

See All Reviews »

Review

Jon Raymond
5.0
by Jon Raymond - Jun. 21, 2009

This is a partial report on a long term scholarly investigation on the true costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by two highly respected writers: Joseph Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank and won the Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics in 2001. Linda Bilmes is a lecturer in public policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University .

This is an encapsulation of the larger book detailing the costs of these wars, and accurately points out some important facts to consider in these time sof economic hardship and calls for more war spending.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, 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 (that’s $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today’s dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

The information is revealing and shows how much the media and government dpwnplay the costs of these wars.

In fact, 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. Some will argue that a percentage of these non-combat injuries might have happened even if the soldiers were not in Iraq. Our new research shows that the majority of these injuries and illnesses can be tied directly to service in the war.

In depth coverage reveals the extend that our government has gone to, to hide the truth.

See All Reviews »

Jon's Rating

Overall
5.0

Very good
from 10 answers
Quality
5.0
Facts
5.0
Fairness
5.0
Depth
5.0
Popularity
5.0
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
5.0
More How our ratings work »