President's Plan for 'Korea-like' Presence in Iraq will Cost Trillions

[sabra]

Source: Congressional Budget Office Report - Senator Kent Conrad

Washington -- The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) today released a report, requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND), showing that the cost of maintaining a 'Korea-like' presence in Iraq over the next 50 years could exceed $2 trillion. The report found that even after a significant drawdown of U.S. forces, it could cost up to $25 billion each year -- more than two-thirds of our nation's homeland security budget -- to keep a military presence in Iraq similar to that now on the Korean peninsula.

"President Bush has repeatedly drawn an analogy between the Iraq and Korean wars and his administration has suggested that our ongoing presence in Korea could provide a model for Iraq," said Senator Conrad. "The American people deserve to know that they are going to be handed a multi-trillion dollar bill from this President to cover the cost of his misguided policy in Iraq."

CBO has previously projected that war costs could reach $1 trillion over the 2009-2017 period, assuming a gradual drawdown to 75,000 deployed U.S. troops. Based on CBO's new report, which projects the annual cost of permanently maintaining 55,000 U.S. troops in Iraq (roughly the equivalent of the U.S. commitment in South Korea), it could cost another $1 trillion (in constant FY '08 dollars) for operations in Iraq over the 2018 to 2057 period. In other words, taken together, CBO's reports show that the long-term presence in Iraq envisioned by the Bush administration could cost $2 trillion over the next 50 years. And this cost comes on top of the approximately $567 billion already appropriated and requested for Iraq through 2008.

"The Bush administration has been trying to hide the cost of this war every step of the way," said Senator Conrad. "Now the President is considering a significant ongoing presence in Iraq, long after he leaves office. Yet, he gives no indication of the cost or how it should be paid for, except to throw it all on the charge card and continue to run up the nation's debt."

Read more: http://conrad.senate.gov/~conrad/releases/07/09/2007920625.html

[leQ]

1. why isn't the MSM picking up on this? (eom)

[daninthemoon]

2. It won't cost anything like that much, because at some point China

will stop lending us money to keep it going. Only question is how much of the US will be left by then.

[hedgehog]

3. Great idea, but exactly where is the DMZ? nt

[Baby Snooks]

6. There are several DMZs

Just look at a map. Wherever there's a border with another country, there's the DMZ between Iraq and that country. All of Iraq's neighbors, you see, are our enemies. Not Irag's enemies. Our enemies.

[spindrifter]

4. This is not a Korea-like engagement!

Korea was a very different venue. Nothing B*sh has said about Iraq has been reliable, and this comment is not a very apt analogy.

[DeepModem Mom]

5. K&R

[Nutmegger]

7. R&K

:thumbsup::kick: