Pentagon Says Cost of Current Iraqi Operations is $7.5 Mil a Day

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 02:58:07 PM EST
Tags: Iraq (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Via Reuters, we have been spending $7.5 million a day in Iraq since mid-June. That's a total to date of about $532 million.

U.S. military operations against Islamic State in Iraq have cost an average of $7.5 million per day since they began in mid-June, the Pentagon said on Friday, a figure that means the department has spent more than $500 million on the conflict.

Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, told a briefing the expense of U.S. operations against Islamic State in Iraq had varied since U.S. forces became involved on June 16 but on average "it's costing us about $7.5 million per day."

Reuters says according to analysts, the U.S. has been spending $1.3 billion per week on Afghanistan.

< ISIS Explains Killing of Foley and al-Sheitaat Tribe Members | AQAP's New Magazine Urges Attacks in U.S. and Britain >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Pentagon Says Cost of Current Iraqi Operations is $7.5 Mil a Day | 20 comments (20 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Are there spread sheets anywhere (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by nycstray on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 04:43:01 PM EST

that we can see exactly how their money is spent?

I think a chunk of (none / 0) (#2)
by KeysDan on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 05:09:06 PM EST

it went toward a villa in the South of France, and reasonable expenses, for Maliki. If so, worth every penny. And, if we could get the place next door for Aba Bakr al-Baghdadi it would help the situation out also, too.


: Swell neighborhood... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by fishcamp on Fri Aug 29, 2014 at 05:16:00 PM EST

Buying off Taliban leaders isn't cheap (none / 0) (#4)
by ruffian on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:24:56 PM EST

Cheaper than MRAPs (none / 0) (#5)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:30:41 PM EST

Trying to destroy them :)


Expensive? (none / 0) (#7)
by squeaky on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:37:03 PM EST

They are giving them away


We aren't on that list, but we recently (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:48:31 PM EST

learned one of those landed in our city. Cost us 14K* for a half mil vehicle. Oh, and our PD says not to worry, they hope to never have to use it . . . cool! A 14k paperweight :P

*paint job and shipping . . .


If the plant shuts down (none / 0) (#9)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:40:51 PM EST

That becomes a future war problem.

So the Pentagon has to figure out how to keep their manufacturers going during more peaceful times. The assembly line must assemble or it will be disassembled. It's a no win situation for civilians and taxpayers :)


Someone is Winning... (none / 0) (#11)
by squeaky on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:44:10 PM EST

And I bet that they are big political donors..

Talk about keeping the manufacturing going.


: Oh yeah, you know it...and our current batch (none / 0) (#14)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:54:36 PM EST

Of promoted leaders are being impossible to calm down. All sorts of speeches from some about how we can't lose momentum. But the White House sets mission. So if the leaders don't get missions to meet that keep up our "momentum", then momentum will slow...which makes them all angry, goofy, frustrated, not right in the head :) They have phucking promotions to make okay?
It is very important that the next President be comparable in foreign policy to Obama or the Pentagon will go nuts. What am I talking about? They are nuts now. They won't have to recover from all this troop movement in and out of war zones being nuts though. A Republican President will feed them exactly what they want. They must be forced to face reality, but few want to.

And someone has to try out modifications (none / 0) (#10)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:42:18 PM EST

Work out the glitches and bugs


Uh, not if they are sitting around (none / 0) (#13)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:49:50 PM EST

gathering dust like ours is supposed to.


So if they don't get used it's a problem (none / 0) (#15)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:59:02 PM EST

For those who work on modifying military equipment. And those people exist.

If they can get law enforcement working out the kinks then the Pentagon doesn't have to pay for all that fielding and all those studies.


I'm certain in the Pentagon's mind this is (none / 0) (#16)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 02:03:02 PM EST

One of the most fabulous plans someone came up with. And police officers get to Phuck Up all the time and it doesn't make national news like it does when the military does.


Trust me, the PD will get sh!t load of grief (none / 0) (#17)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 02:08:11 PM EST

if they start rolling that sucker out. I think they know that, but they think it will be handy if we have a school shooting . . .


That is one of the "new jobs" for those (none / 0) (#18)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 02:11:55 PM EST

That care. Do you know where it is stored though? How will you monitor use? Who is monitoring use? Under what circumstances can they use it?


Monitoring use will be easy (none / 0) (#19)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 02:29:08 PM EST

as it pretty freakin' obvious :P

They have said 'they hope to never have to use it, maybe once a year, would be handy if there's a school shooting'. I think the only people who are happy about it are the idiots that made the decision and some of the PD. Can't remember where they are storing it, but I can go visit it @ the PD open house . . .

We recently got our bike patrol back, and it's made a big difference. Kinda funny how some dudes on bikes can really help out, but the big military vehicle is going to supposedly be collecting dust . . . I'll take more dudes on bikes, TYVM.


: If you're comfortable with that :) (none / 0) (#20)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 02:32:19 PM EST

In the military, eventually one freak shows up to be in charge...so everything has to be in writing, and sometimes even that doesn't stop them.

Military contractors (none / 0) (#6)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:32:01 PM EST

Not the Blackwater sort, but logistics


And it often bothers me how (none / 0) (#8)
by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 30, 2014 at 01:37:52 PM EST

Rightwing crazy voting military GS employees are. But wars are job security for them, their infrastructure grows and higher paying job slots become available to them and their blood will never be spilled on a battlefield. There are now more military GS employees than there are active duty soldiers in uniform.

Soooooo, the enlisted soldiers voted solidly for Obama but their "support structure" voted solidly for anyone but Obama....and they have more voting power now. How sad is that?
