Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So, how does Obama's war get paid for? Can we have an special tax on the wealthiest? Can [View all]grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)14. I don't know, maybe they percieve your statement as absurd, here's an estimate:
A limited military response could end with just one series of attacks. But what then, if more force is needed? One option would be to establish a "no-fly zone" over Syria, preventing the Bashar Assad government from using its air power against rebel forces.
But in a letter last month to the Senate Armed Services Committee, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chief of Staff, estimated it would cost $500 million to initially set up a no-fly zone, followed by expenses "averaging as much as a billion dollars per month over the course of a year."
Establishing a buffer zone to protect civilian populations in Syria could be even more expensive, according to the general, requiring a limited no-fly zone as well as U.S. ground forces. That would push the costs to over $1 billion per month. Other options, he said, are just as costly.
Clearly, none of this is cheap, even in a best-case scenario. In 2011, the Pentagon estimated the first few weeks of its operations in the multinational military intervention in Libya cost around $608 million. More than half of those costs went toward replacing weapons like the Raytheon (RTN -0.36%) Tomahawk missiles and Boeing's (BA -0.96%) Joint Direct Attack Munitions, the JDAM smart bombs, according to DefenseNews.com.
The 78-day air campaign in Kosovo, by contrast, cost the U.S. about $5 billion, although that amount also included peacekeeping and refugee assistance funds.
http://money.msn.com/now/post--what-would-a-strike-against-syria-cost
But in a letter last month to the Senate Armed Services Committee, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chief of Staff, estimated it would cost $500 million to initially set up a no-fly zone, followed by expenses "averaging as much as a billion dollars per month over the course of a year."
Establishing a buffer zone to protect civilian populations in Syria could be even more expensive, according to the general, requiring a limited no-fly zone as well as U.S. ground forces. That would push the costs to over $1 billion per month. Other options, he said, are just as costly.
Clearly, none of this is cheap, even in a best-case scenario. In 2011, the Pentagon estimated the first few weeks of its operations in the multinational military intervention in Libya cost around $608 million. More than half of those costs went toward replacing weapons like the Raytheon (RTN -0.36%) Tomahawk missiles and Boeing's (BA -0.96%) Joint Direct Attack Munitions, the JDAM smart bombs, according to DefenseNews.com.
The 78-day air campaign in Kosovo, by contrast, cost the U.S. about $5 billion, although that amount also included peacekeeping and refugee assistance funds.
http://money.msn.com/now/post--what-would-a-strike-against-syria-cost
Note the original estimate for Iraq was 80 billion.
Estimates are now from 1.7 to 6 trillion.
So if we call it 3 trillion for Iraq based on an initial estimate of 80b.
And the estimate for Syria is 1 billion a month, but really it's 37.5 times that, and it lasts just 5 years.... let's just say this could cost us 2.250 trillion in the long term, assuming it doesn't devolve into WWIII.....
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
77 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So, how does Obama's war get paid for? Can we have an special tax on the wealthiest? Can [View all]
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
OP
Money is never a problem unless its being spent on those who cant fund reelection campaigns
DJ13
Sep 2013
#3
Raytheon Will Replace the Missiles Fired For Big Bucks - A "New" Expense
HumansAndResources
Sep 2013
#64
I do not see why. A question was asked about 'the cost' and I gave my opinion.
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#10
I don't know, maybe they percieve your statement as absurd, here's an estimate:
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#14
Syria will be short-term and no boots on the ground and Obama is not going to do..
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#16
Syria might be like Granada, or Libya, or Iraq, or Vietnam.... which is why we should not start,
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#25
Von Clauswitz called it "The Fog of War" ie, no one knows what will happen...
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#59
I did not say 'hurry up and use them'. On the news during the Libya intervention...
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#15
The missiles that are fired will have to be replaced. The war profiteers are already salivating I'm
totodeinhere
Sep 2013
#21
Three missiles at 50 targets equals 150. That time $1 million apiece equals one hell of a lot of
rhett o rick
Sep 2013
#28
Why are you comparing Bush's Iraq to Syria - instead of comparing Syria to how Obama handled Libya?
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#45
I think some of us learned a lot about Pres Obama by what he did regarding LIBYA.
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#48
My sig line is NOT ridiculous. Going to help prevent more people from being gassed is NOT a dumb war
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#49
Going in and bombing military stockpiles and aircraft is NOT bombing 1400 people.
Tx4obama
Sep 2013
#52
Yeah, and those soldiers were gonna die anyway, after all, everybody does!
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#62
No. It will be paid for out of your earned pension, earned benefits, etc. The rich
silvershadow
Sep 2013
#30
Well he did stae his intention toward Syria, and he said he wants war.
DisgustipatedinCA
Sep 2013
#37
So I read a few posts above me explaining that this military adventure was practically paid for.
mick063
Sep 2013
#54
So, why doesn't he represent the will of the majority? Thinks he knows better?
grahamhgreen
Sep 2013
#75