Page 1 of 1

War Costs: How Much? Well, How High Can You Count?

Posted: 20 May 2003, 15:39
by Andy TG
May 26 issue — Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has ordered the U.S. military to collaborate on a “lessons learned� study of the Iraq war. That will take months, but the air commander, Lt. Gen. Michael Moseley, has had a team from his “analysis and assessments� staff compile some raw numbers. Some highlights of the 16-page report:

423,998 U.S. MILITARY personnel were deployed; other Coalition forces sent an additional 42,987 troops. The total is roughly equivalent to the population of Albuquerque, N.M.

The war lasted 720 hours.

The allies flew more than 41,400 sorties. That consumed 18,622 tons of fuel, enough to keep a Boeing 737-300 airliner aloft for about 12 years. The Coalition flew 1,801 aircraft—all but 138 were American.

The Iraqis were showered with 31,800,000 leaflets bearing 81 different messages. End to end, the leaflets would have made 120,454 rolls of toilet paper.

Coalition forces lost 20 aircraft, but only 7 as a result of enemy fire.

Search-and-rescue teams flew 55 missions and saved 73 people.

80 aircraft were flown to gather intelligence; they took 42,000 pictures of the battlefield, transmitted 3,200 hours of video and eavesdropped on 2,400 hours of Iraqi communications.

Known costs: $917,744,361.55 —an amount equivalent to 46 minutes, 10.5 seconds’ worth of total U.S. economic output in 2001.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/915060.asp?0s ... =-51a77393

Knew You'd Be Pleased.....

Posted: 21 May 2003, 14:33
by cyn
Did they count the cost of the Metallica albums the used to blast the Iraqi's until they surrendered?

Posted: 21 May 2003, 15:06
by Quiff Boy
cyn wrote:Did they count the cost of the Metallica albums the used to blast the Iraqi's until they surrendered?
nah, they got all them off napster ;)

Posted: 21 May 2003, 17:13
by Andy TG
Quiff Boy wrote:
cyn wrote:Did they count the cost of the Metallica albums the used to blast the Iraqi's until they surrendered?
nah, they got all them off napster ;)
ARF! QB :notworthy:

Posted: 21 May 2003, 17:57
by karin
yeah it's total bollocks. The government can find millions of pounds to fight a war but they can't find money to pay the firemen or to sort out the N.H.S etc.

Posted: 21 May 2003, 19:23
by Andy TG
karin wrote:yeah it's total bollocks. The government can find millions of pounds to fight a war but they can't find money to pay the firemen or to sort out the N.H.S etc.
Good Point ! ;D - I guess thats becuse the NHS and The Fire Service are not sponsored by Coca Cola, McDonalds and Texaco - More corporate sposorship is whats needed! :wink:

I can see it now - the new Diet Coke Clinic for Chroinc Aspartame Addiction!

Yellow and Red Fire Tenders - with fries (sic) and a weeks free fuel with your hip operation!

Posted: 21 May 2003, 20:06
by Black Shuck
Yeah, wars are obviously extremely expensive, but you have to put it in perspective; I read a recent report in the Guardian which said that the money Britain is spending on the war/aftermath in Iraq is roughly the amount spent on the NHS every single week(!)

Besides, as the arms industry is the biggest industry in the world, regular wars actually help to strenghen the western world's economy, so the money the US/UK are spending in Iraq will eventually filter back.

If the war were as costly as it appears on the surface, there is no way it would ever have taken place.