Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Halliburton and Bechtel Are Nothing
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 300047" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>In fairness, Gates has warned that the $170 bil may be wrong.</p><p></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: 12px">Gates estimates war costs but calls it inaccurate</span></strong></p><p></p><p>REUTERS</p><p>Reuters North American News Service</p><p>Feb 06, 2008 11:34 EST</p><p>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, pressed to estimate total war costs, said Wednesday that <strong><span style="color: red">Iraq and Afghanistan operations could cost $170 billion in 2009</span></strong> but<span style="color: red"> <strong>warned the figure was likely wrong.</strong></span></p><p></p><p></p><p>"I have no confidence in that figure," Gates told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee.</p><p>He said the Pentagon could not accurately estimate total war costs for next year before receiving full war funding for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.</p><p>Gates said he based the $170 billion figure on current expenditures in the wars.</p><p>Gates also said the 2009 estimate will depend on what decisions are made about U.S. troop levels in Iraq after the top commander there, Gen. David Petraeus, makes his next recommendation to the president in March.</p><p>The Bush administration this week asked Congress for $515.4 billion for the Pentagon in fiscal 2009 plus an additional $70 billion to pay for war operations for part of the year.</p><p>Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, told Gates they were disappointed the administration did not seek war funding for the full year -- something they demanded last year. But Gates said Congress still had not provided full war funding for the current year.</p><p>Congress in December approved $70 billion to cover war funds for part of fiscal 2008. The Pentagon says it needs $102.5 billion more.</p><p>"This delay is degrading our ability to operate and sustain the force at home and in theater and is making it difficult to manage this department in a way that is fiscally sound," he said.</p><p><span style="color: red"><strong>Since the Sept. 11, 2001</strong></span>, attacks, <span style="color: red"><strong>Congress has approved $691 billion</strong></span> to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan <span style="color: red"><strong>and related activities such as Iraq reconstruction</strong></span>, according to the Congressional Budget Office. (Reporting by Kristin Roberts; Editing by Bill Trott)</p><p></p><p><strong>Source:</strong> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color: #0099cc">Reuters North American News Service</span></strong></a></p><p></p><p>Note: The Red/Bold highlight is my doing and not from the original story. I did so to beg the question, of what amount were to some of the areas of cost abuse that have been pointed out? Would be interesting to see an actual cost breakdown and for what these monies were spent on. And also these figures were from the CBO and not OMB just for full disclosure and that's $691 bil on top of normal annual defense budget as I understand it. You can use the budget amount asked for this week by George Bush as a rough gauge so taking $500 bil plus multiplied by 7 years and you have a ballpark (highside I would think) of $3.5 trillion making for a total of $4 trillion total defense spending in the last 7 years.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 300047, member: 2189"] In fairness, Gates has warned that the $170 bil may be wrong. [B][SIZE=3]Gates estimates war costs but calls it inaccurate[/SIZE][/B] REUTERS Reuters North American News Service Feb 06, 2008 11:34 EST WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, pressed to estimate total war costs, said Wednesday that [B][COLOR=red]Iraq and Afghanistan operations could cost $170 billion in 2009[/COLOR][/B] but[COLOR=red] [B]warned the figure was likely wrong.[/B][/COLOR] "I have no confidence in that figure," Gates told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. He said the Pentagon could not accurately estimate total war costs for next year before receiving full war funding for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. Gates said he based the $170 billion figure on current expenditures in the wars. Gates also said the 2009 estimate will depend on what decisions are made about U.S. troop levels in Iraq after the top commander there, Gen. David Petraeus, makes his next recommendation to the president in March. The Bush administration this week asked Congress for $515.4 billion for the Pentagon in fiscal 2009 plus an additional $70 billion to pay for war operations for part of the year. Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, told Gates they were disappointed the administration did not seek war funding for the full year -- something they demanded last year. But Gates said Congress still had not provided full war funding for the current year. Congress in December approved $70 billion to cover war funds for part of fiscal 2008. The Pentagon says it needs $102.5 billion more. "This delay is degrading our ability to operate and sustain the force at home and in theater and is making it difficult to manage this department in a way that is fiscally sound," he said. [COLOR=red][B]Since the Sept. 11, 2001[/B][/COLOR], attacks, [COLOR=red][B]Congress has approved $691 billion[/B][/COLOR] to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan [COLOR=red][B]and related activities such as Iraq reconstruction[/B][/COLOR], according to the Congressional Budget Office. (Reporting by Kristin Roberts; Editing by Bill Trott) [B]Source:[/B] [URL='http://www.reuters.com/'][B][COLOR=#0099cc]Reuters North American News Service[/COLOR][/B][/URL] Note: The Red/Bold highlight is my doing and not from the original story. I did so to beg the question, of what amount were to some of the areas of cost abuse that have been pointed out? Would be interesting to see an actual cost breakdown and for what these monies were spent on. And also these figures were from the CBO and not OMB just for full disclosure and that's $691 bil on top of normal annual defense budget as I understand it. You can use the budget amount asked for this week by George Bush as a rough gauge so taking $500 bil plus multiplied by 7 years and you have a ballpark (highside I would think) of $3.5 trillion making for a total of $4 trillion total defense spending in the last 7 years. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Halliburton and Bechtel Are Nothing
Top
