Economic implications of being in Iraq/Iran/ Afghanistan beyond 2008

[jamis359]

In economic terms, the Iraq War is a good investment:

$250 bil war cost / 110 bil bbls oil = $2.27 per barrel, or about 4% of the current world price.

We don't have to "steal" the oil to "win" -- a stable, secular government is all we need to secure the supply. That mission is far from accomplished, however.

In moral terms, the war is a disaster. It is a tragedy, a farce and a sham, and marks a new low in American conduct and civility.

 

[mahram]

Its actually well over 350-500 billion so far. But records for the cost of the war are flakey at best. B/c some people discount the rebuilding of iraq costs, and only include the military costs. Also its not the US's oil. there are 110 billion barrels, but americans will have to pay for that oil a second time, at 65 dollers a barrel.

Quote from jamis359:

In economic terms, the Iraq War is a good investment:

$250 bil war cost / 110 bil bbls oil = $2.27 per barrel, or about 4% of the current world price.

We don't have to "steal" the oil to "win" -- a stable, secular government is all we need to secure the supply. That mission is far from accomplished, however.

In moral terms, the war is a disaster. It is a tragedy, a farce and a sham, and marks a new low in American conduct and civility.

 

[dis]

There may be political implications, but no economic ones. The U.S. can afford an extra 100 billion a year on military training.

Besides, we as a nation need to figure out whether we can democratize koranimals by force, or must pacify them by other, less conventional means.

 

[mahram]

well afford, as in it can get the money, yeah but not without fiscal and economic drawbacks. You cant just spend 500 billion without cutting back on some of the icing on the cake. Like cap gain, dividend, and general tax cuts. If your going todo both, your going to increase the deficit and debt to places we havent seen before. either the government reigns in on the spending side, or interest rates will go up.

Quote from dis:

There may be political implications, but no economic ones. The U.S. can afford an extra 100 billion a year on military training.

Besides, we as a nation need to figure out whether we can democratize koranimals by force, or must pacify them by other, less conventional means.

 

[hofficita]

Quote from mahram:

well afford, as in it can get the money, yeah but not without fiscal and economic drawbacks. You cant just spend 500 billion without cutting back on some of the icing on the cake. Like cap gain, dividend, and general tax cuts. If your going todo both, your going to increase the deficit and debt to places we havent seen before. either the government reigns in on the spending side, or interest rates will go up.

Foreign wars have historically been and economic boon, as long as you win. Not only is domestic production of military supplies stimulative, the technological innovations that have historically been developed as a direct result of battlefield needs are proof enough of the economic beneficence.

 

[hofficita]

Quote from Johnny Walker:

Had we left as soon as the insurgency started (cut our intial losses) to create problems because we realized that our presence was attracting extremists from around the world and within the country; the insurgency possibly would have stayed small and petered.

The whole point is to kill the extremists on foreign soil. Even better to have a newly anointed Iraqi military killing extremists on foreign soil. Not sure it will turn out this way, but conceptually it is brilliant.

 

[Johnny Walker]

It looks more like we are creating more extremists on foreign soil then we are killing. The Iraqi army is built along secratian lines you basiclly have Shiites and Kurds in the national army killing the Sunnis. This looks like brilliant idea on the surface, but it will make it very difficult to form a unified country.

 

[sharkbites]

Quote from hofficita:

Foreign wars have historically been and economic boon, as long as you win. Not only is domestic production of military supplies stimulative, the technological innovations that have historically been developed as a direct result of battlefield needs are proof enough of the economic beneficence.

Do you now submit this statemnt, as a justification for war?

 

[hofficita]

Quote from sharkbites:

Do you now submit this statement, as a justification for war?

I do not think the US operations in the Middle East need any more justification than the fact that declared, militant enemies of the US are located there.

I think the economics of war are an ancillary benefit, and I made this statement to answer someone who doubts that war can be stimulative.

 

[hofficita]

Quote from Johnny Walker:

It looks more like we are creating more extremists on foreign soil then we are killing. The Iraqi army is built along secratian lines you basiclly have Shiites and Kurds in the national army killing the Sunnis. This looks like brilliant idea on the surface, but it will make it very difficult to form a unified country.

An extremist is created by the cultural influences and religious indoctrination of his upbringing. I don't believe an extremist is created by US action, perhaps revealed.

Additionally, the US cannot be dissuaded from killing its enemies for the fear of revealing others who share their same ideology.

I agree that the sectarian violence is a negative consequence of Saddam's removal, but is it really any worse than before? I will willingly concede that attempting to unify Iraq is a dangerous and futile undertaking.