Has anyone seen a cost estimate on the new permanent US bases

[HereSince1628]

being built in Iraq?

I've seen comments that they are "billions of dollar" facilities but really nothing more.

[ixion]

1. Here's a good op/ed piece on this topic

although because the bases are largely 'ghosted' by the MSM, there isn't a great deal of info on them.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=191258


on edit: change 'is' to "isn't"

[HereSince1628]

3. Thanks, got that one in my list as "several to multi" blns.

Maybe that's as specific as we can get right now.

[leftchick]

6. That is a great article

thank you for this. I had never seen the bases described before....

<snip>

There are at least four such "super-bases" in Iraq, none of which have anything to do with "withdrawal" from that country. Quite the contrary, these bases are being constructed as little American islands of eternal order in an anarchic sea. Whatever top administration officials and military commanders say - and they always deny that the US seeks "permanent" bases in Iraq - facts on the ground speak with another voice entirely. These bases practically scream "permanency".

Unfortunately, there's a problem here. American reporters adhere to a simple rule: the words "permanent", "bases" and "Iraq" should never be placed in the same sentence, not even in the same paragraph; in fact, not even in the same news report.

While a LexisNexis search of the past 90 days of press coverage of Iraq produced a number of examples of the use of those three words in the British press, the only US examples that could be found occurred when 80% of Iraqis (obviously somewhat unhinged by their difficult lives) insisted in a poll that the US might indeed desire to establish bases and remain permanently in their country; or when "no" or "not" was added to the mix via any US official denial. (It's strange, isn't it, that such bases, imposing as they are, generally only exist in US papers in the negative?)

[ixion]

8. sure thing. yeah, I found it both disturbing and informing...

trying to imagine the people who live in those little titanium bubbles. How do they reconcile with the world around them? My guess is that they don't. They make jokes about it, akin to "You don't have to be crazy to work here, but it helps." and move on.


I would also be willing to bet that many of those 'billions of dollars' that have simply vanished since the illegal invasion have gone to build these abominations.

[leftchick]

7. omg! Read about the 1 Billion Dollar US Embassy in Baghdad...

:wow:

<snip>

The Bush administration is sinking between $600 million and $1 billion in construction funds into a new US embassy. It is to arise in Baghdad's Green Zone on a plot of land along the Tigris River that is reportedly two-thirds the area of the National Mall in Washington, DC. The plans for this "embassy" are almost mythic in nature.

A high-tech complex, it is to have "15 foot blast walls and ground-to-air missiles" for protection as well as bunkers to guard against air attacks. It will, according to Chris Hughes, security correspondent for the British Daily Mirror, include "as many as 300 houses for consular and military officials" and a "large-scale barracks" for marines.

The "compound" will be a cluster of at least 21 buildings, assumedly nearly self-sufficient, including "a gym, swimming pool, barber and beauty shops, a food court and a commissary. Water, electricity and sewage treatment plants will all be independent from Baghdad's city utilities." It is being billed as "more secure than the Pentagon" (not, perhaps, the most reassuring tagline in the post-September 11 world). If not quite a city-state, on completion it will resemble an embassy-state. In essence, inside Baghdad's Green Zone, we will be building another more heavily fortified little Green Zone.

[MSgt213]

2. The cost of running US bases is going to be out of this world. Imagine

attempting to run several mid size american cities with no source of income and no taxes. You pay all the citizens salaries, provide all their food, gas, utilities, medical and every other item you can think of that an average american citizen expects from living in a city. The costs will be in the billions for one of these bases. In the trillions for more then one.

[HereSince1628]

4. Yes, I have pondered the notion that NG and Reserve units aren't

going to get refurbished or expanded because of the comittment to operations out of these facilities.

[leftchick]

5. I found this little bit of propaganda

I am still looking for some numbers but in the meantime I found this...

<snip>

By October 2004, it was reported that the US Army, in a move to take a friendlier face, had renamed all 17 of its facilities in and around the Iraqi capital of Baghdad and given them nore noble sounding name with, as well, Arabic names to go along. The majority of the original base names were taken from Army unit nicknames, such as Bulldog and Headhunter. Three were named for American soldiers killed in action during Operation Iraqi Freedom I. The new base names are intended to reinforce the idea that these are not US bases. The land belongs to the Iraqis, and the legacy left by this operation should be one of Iraqi services and not the US spirit. The new names are posted in English and Arabic at the entrance of each base.

OLD NAME NEW NAME (ARABIC) ENGLISH
Banzai Al-Adala Justice
Cooke Taji Taji
Cuervo Rustamiyah Rustamiyah
Eagle Al-Amal Hope
Ferrin-Huggins Al-Saqr Falcon
Greywolf Al-Tawheed Al-Awal Union I
Gunslinger Al-Tadamun Solidarity
Headhunter Al-Istiqulal Independence
Highlander Al-Isdehar Prosperity
Iron Horse Al-Watani Patriot
North Victory Al-Tahreer Liberty
Outlaw Al-Hurya Al-Thani Freedom II
Steel Dragon Al-Sharaf Honor
Trojan Horse Al-Tawheed Al-Thalith Union III
Victory Al-Nasr Victory
Warhorse Al-Hurya Al-Awal Freedom I
Warrior Al-Tawheed Al-Thani Union II

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq-intro.htm