DERRICK Z. JACKSON
Searching for the truth on escalating war costsIN FEBRUARY, Josh Bolten, President Bush's budget director, was asked by reporters if the White House would seek any more money in 2004 for the occupation of Iraq. Bolten answered, "We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding during '04."
Bolten also said, "Right now in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are projecting outlays in '04 that are well below $50 billion for the ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. So I think you should regard that as kind of the upper limit for what might be needed in '05." Three months later, Bolten's boss made him a liar. On Wednesday, the same day Bush tried to reassure the Arab world in television interviews that America was a benevolent invader and not a serial abuser of Iraqi prisoners, he asked for a fresh $25 billion for the occupation. "While we do not know the precise costs for operations next year, recent developments on the ground and increased demands on our troops indicate the need to plan for contingencies," Bush said in a statement. With the $87 billion in supplemental funds already approved in November, that would make $112 billion in supplemental funds approved or requested in the last seven months. That is quite far from Bolten's "well below $50 billion." For Bush to come back to the well this soon in 2004 cannot bode well for 2005. Capitol Hill is buzzing over estimates of between $50 billion and $75 billion more in supplemental war funds. Republicans are saying it is our patriotic duty. House Speaker Dennis Hastert said, "We have no choice but to support our president and our troops at this critical time." Americans do have a choice whether to support a lie. The White House has low-balled or hidden the cost of this war and Iraq's reconstruction since its inception. If the $25 billion is approved, that will make for a total of $191 billion in total supplemental funds so far, with much more to come. Before the war began, the White House turned the dogs loose on anyone who predicted that the war could cost just that much. When Bush's chief economic adviser, Larry Lindsey, said the war might cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, the White House decried that as "very, very high." Lindsey was out of a job a few months later. When the Army chief of staff, General Eric Shinseki, worried out loud before the war that several hundred thousand troops might be needed to win and keep the peace, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz bayed that Shinseki was "wildly off the mark." Right after the war started, Wolfowitz proclaimed in a House hearing, "When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community. . . . The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 billion and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years." Continued... |
