The Bush administration is proposing a budget of nearly $75bn to fund the war in Iraq.
Based on a war lasting 30 days, the plan includes allowances for humanitarian aid and rebuilding.
Without UN support, the US and UK are bearing the cash costs of war alone. An extra £1.25 bn is being set aside for the Ministry of Defence in the UK.
How do you feel about the amount of money being spent on conflict? Are the figures justified?
The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:
I'm sure the allied forces troops would rather go back home than get paid for putting their lives in danger in an unjustified war
Yasmeen, Palestine
I don't want to die in a nuclear or smallpox version of 9/11. Yeah, the money is well worth it.
Jeff Hall, USA
If Iraq has only camels walk around the desert, but no oil under it... Bush...would you dare to invest huge budget for this "Operation Iraqi freedom"?
Jantra,
Thailand
Considering the fact Saddam has killed more people within his time frame than has happened during any liberation action, it is certainly apparent he won't be able to do it again. A savings.
Don, Canada
It is ironical that these governments are spending billions of dollars in a war to establish peace
|
The proposed $75bn is just the initial cost of this war. Imagine how much of money that would have been spent already (since the first gulf war) and imagine the amount of money that will be spent after this war is over. It is ironical that these governments are spending billions of dollars in a war to establish peace. None of the money will benefit any common citizen in any part of the world be it Iraq, US or Britain.
Seetharaman,
USA
It is amazing that we discuss the cost of war based on dollars and not on human lives!!! Shame on our human race !!!!
Scott Grendson, U.S.
I think that perhaps the critics of what the US, Britain and Australians are trying to achieve should spend a month in the life of an Iraqi citizen. I would then welcome you to come back to this very page and tell us whether US' $75b is too much to spend on liberating this oppressed nation. The coalition may or may not recoup the financial cost of the war with oil; who cares? Over 22 million men, women and children will recoup their freedom. No cost is too high!!
Ettore, Australia
Paying taxes to support freedom is worth it. I appreciate President Bush, and his cabinets' leadership.
Terry Pease, USA
What a waste. $75 billion sure could build a lot of schools, provide research and technology to decrease dependence on oil, and help suffering people around the world. How about reforming the American health care system? How about working to break the cycle of poverty in which many American families are trapped? Yeah, dropping bombs on busy Iraqi markets is a much better way to spend money. It makes me sick.
Shawn, Washington, DC, USA
The cost of the war in both dollars and lives lost should be judged against the cost of even a single terrorist attack with a weapon of mass destruction
|
The cost of the war in both dollars and lives lost should be judged against the cost of even a single terrorist attack with a weapon of mass destruction against a major city that has been thwarted. By that standard, it's a dirt cheap bargain. Compared to the 10 trillion dollar a year American economy it is insignificant. Iraq's vast oil wealth will pay for most of the rebuilding of that country for a change.
Mark, USA
At the end of the day it is not the Americans that will foot the war bill, but the world, because the US will continue to bully the third world for its resources. The Americans have not rid themselves of their slave master mentality. After enslaving Africans to boost their economy they are now enslaving the world with various surrogate regimes to plunder the world resources.
Daniel,
Namibia
It's a shame they are funding that much to destroy life and property rather than giving to create lives of poor people, if not that at least the own people of USA where unemployment is the highest ever in history. These politicians don't realise the effect of this war on normal people everywhere around the world.
Javed, India
What people need to realise is that war is a business in the eyes of the US. They would not invade a country if there was no economic gain. It's sad but it's true. It turns out that when Saddam was doing the most evil he was an ally and now that he is virtually powerless he is a threat. Somebody please tell us the real reason for this war.
Alva, Jamaica
There is always a cost to pay to achieve your goals and it is what it takes to stay ahead. If the United States could root out Saddam's regime with 75 billion dollars that would be good for the world. Imagine the peace and stability the Iraqi people would enjoy. No one can value peace in terms of cash.
Klaleyesus Bekele, Ethiopia
I am more concerned about the human-cost
|
There will always be a high cost in any war, financially. But I am more concerned about the human-cost. Who is going to account for the thousands who died and will die? And, pardon my ignorance, I am getting confused. Is this war about ridding Saddam's Weapons of mass destruction or is about "liberating Iraq"?
John Toh, Singapore
The Iraq war is costing poor countries like India and its people enormous amount of money. The fuel prices have risen dramatically and it is unbearable to the people of India. Bush and his cronies are putting the whole world's economy into a shambolic state.
Murli, india
America and Britain decided to go it alone by invading Iraq. I reckon they should pay for what they believe in; otherwise it would be hypocritical wouldn't it? Excluding the United Nations, condemning the UN process and then expecting UN members to pay Blair and Bush's dreams of empire bills is ridiculous. Blair and Bush. You wanted this war. You started this war. Now you pay for YOUR war.
Peter, a Brit in Canada
The US will bomb the hell out of the country, and then Bush will go back on his hands and knees to the UN asking for funding to rebuild Iraq, but at the same time making sure only US companies get their finger in the pie on oil contracts and reconstruction. But that is what this war was all about in the first place.
Mark, NYC, USA
Just think how much poverty and starvation could have been wiped out in Africa and the poor parts of the world with the $75 billion plus that Bush is spending fighting a country that poses less of a threat than other regimes that America conveniently turn a blind eye to.
Adrian, UK
Bush knows nothing about economics. Even most Bush supporters would admit it's not his "strong suit." Just look at what has happened to the US economy since he took over. And this is the man who knows how much it will cost to fix the shattered Iraq? Bush needs to start rebuilding some UN bridges fast.
Caleb, USA
1.25 billon up in smoke. We ( UK people) worked for this. Think next time you hear of a sick OAP that can't get a hospital bed, a kid in an over-crowded class or stuck in the mess we call a transport system.
Derek,
UK
Both the war and the reconstruction of Iraq will cost a great deal more than $75 billion
|
Do people really think the war will be over in 30 days? I have a nasty feeling that hostilities will last for quite a bit longer. Both the war and the reconstruction of Iraq will cost a great deal more than $75 billion. Don't people remember being told we would be in Afghanistan for a couple of months? How long ago that now seems and the US is still fighting there! The war on Saddam is going to take a long time; even if America dose remove him, it faces months, if not years, of guerrilla fighting which will surely push the costs the War way beyond what anybody has yet estimated.
James, UK
75 billion is a relatively small amount of money when you think of the amount of damage being caused to Iraq. Remember - money isn't going to bring back the lives of the civilian children who have lost parents, are permanently maimed or have lost their own lives in a war most of them don't understand.
J Cavill, Wales/Cymru
Spending money on schools, economic aid to other countries and social programs has given rise to the ignorant masses chanting anti US slogans in the streets of all the countries we have given aid to, except Israel. The only reason this war has a cost this high is because the US tries to limit civilian casualties and protect its troops. We could end it in ten minutes for a lot less if we did not care about the innocent.
Kevin James, Houston, USA
Millions of pounds of aid which we can ill afford will be given to yet one more nation!, yet we have a hard pressed health service, low pay, an underappreciated fire service, inadequate benefits, whatever happened to charity beginning at home!?. Well said Kevin James in Houston, USA, I am tired of my country and the US being the world's bottomless pit of welfare for ungrateful badly run countries whose people will take our money and give us 9/11's in return.
CR Henderson, England,
If it is going to cost 75 billion to disarm Saddam of nuclear weapons that he could use at any time, on any country, I am all for it. I'm willing to pay high taxes to be safe form nuclear weapons. I'm proud to be an American.
DerykCogdill,
Arkansas, United States
Why can't this amount be spent fighting poverty and disease around the world?
|
No, the amount being spent on the war is far from being justified. Why can't this amount be spent fighting poverty and disease around the world? I think both Bush and Blair have not looked in the eyes of a hungry child or a street kid, or seen the kind of hopeless situation you see in our hospitals. These are more of a threat to humanity than Saddam Hussein.
Rose Phiri, Zambia
I work in the reinsurance business. The 9/11 terrorist attacks on the USA resulted in losses estimated between $40 and $70 millions. I don't hear any people complaining about that huge cost inflicted on all of us by a few zealots. As for the NHS; it is just black hole and should not be given another penny until it learns how to spend it efficiently.
Chris Klein,
UK
Another ?1.25 billion for a war that nearly half the population of the UK don't want! Wait for the budget in a little over two weeks to see how we will be taxed to pay for it. Pay for it we will, one way or another, and the cost will be substantially greater than we will ever know. Think of the cost of all the munitions and equipment that the army will want replaced when it ends. This war must stop now, and the money used to prevent further decay in social and health care. Political victories in foreign policy will not cut much ice with those waiting for cancer treatment or a heart bypass, or those recently deprived of social care. It seems that the priorities at home are way down the list.
Peter, Buckingham, UK
I support the war fully but I think that Gordon Brown is stupid to give the war a "Blank cheque", so if he can do this for the war why can't he do this for the NHS, Schools, etc? I think it makes a mockery out of the British system.
Lee Beirne, United Kingdom
What is the cost for freedom and being treated humanely? Priceless.
|
Yes, I support the cost but also believe that the UN should help pay. The UN backed out of their agreement that something had to be done about the Iraqi's, not disclosing information of having or not having weapons of mass destruction, months before we went to war. I think that Bush waited too long to take action and stand behind his words. I and my family were in the last war and some of my family is there now. We are helping the people of Iraq get free of Saddam and live there lives. Lives without fear and with freedom! Freedom to live, peacefully and in harmony. What is the cost for freedom and being treated humanely? Priceless.
Athena Brubaker,
US
The Bush post-war plan consistently says "rebuild and repair." It does not say "improve and enhance." If a peaceful solution had been found, money could be directed for nobler ends than repairing and rebuilding what the "coalition" has destroyed.
Pam, USA
How can Tony Blair have no money to pay the firemen a sensible wage, but can find ?3 billion to pay for this war? By not supporting the last UN Resolution, France and others have avoided the cost of the war in Iraq, but has their strategy backfired - to many people their action denies them (the UN) the right to manage Iraq after the war.
Peter Gorton,
UK
I never supported the war. Saddam was not a threat. The UN resolution was working. The money could be better spent on reversing global warming. Isn't this important to future of mankind? The US have to get their priorities straight.
YK, Malaysia
None of this huge amount of money was necessary, only being used to bolster the Bush/Blair egos
|
Disgusting, my wife has just received notification of a 17p increase in her weekly old age pension. None of this huge amount of money was necessary, only being used to bolster the Bush/Blair egos. The UK find it difficult to finance the Social services and Health services, with Brown hanging on to his purse strings. Yet how easy it is to finance an illegal war and kill innocent civilians and our own young men, with Blair piously commiserating with the unfortunate next-of-kin. of young men whom he has sent to war illegally.
Ian Jackman,
Spain
This problem could have been solved much cheaper than this, if we were more patient, planned and better diplomatic.
Salim, USA
As one person said, freedom wasn't won over a game of cards. Countries like France, Germany, and Russia make my sick. They want freedom, but aren't willing to fight for it. I think maybe if they had a Sept 11 they'd feel differently about it. The US has to be the police of the world again, while they sit back and badmouth us. I am so thankful to our troops; US, British, Aussies, Polish, and all the rest who are willing to do what is right no matter the cost. You are all true heroes! God Bless You.
Misty McCall, USA
Misty from USA writes that France, Russia, and Germany would "feel differently" if they had a 9/11. Two points, one those countries have been through plenty of war and suffering in their histories, too. They just know the financial and human costs this conflict will cost. Second of all, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11! There were no Iraqis on those planes, and Osama hates Saddam just like we do. Islamic fundamentalist terrorists have nothing to do with this war. I for one am hoping that France, Russia, Germany and the rest of the UN will help us out with this burden after Bush completely ignored them.
Caleb, USA
A good investment if it means people can live without fear for their lives
|
$75bn - it's only money. How often do we hear about $billions being wiped off the value of shares? A good investment if it means people can live without fear for their lives.
Andy, UK
The countries involved in the Coalition military forces should pay the entire reconstruction bill, which should be rigidly mediated and controlled by the UN. The warmongers should pay for their crimes against democracy, but not given the chance to reap their ill-gotten rewards from a country they've burned, starved and terrified for over a decade.
Hugh Platt, London, UK
The cost of the war reflects the cost of living. Alarming certainly but what would be the cost of not going to war now?
Michael Riley,
Devon UK
I believe this is the amount of money spent on this war is deplorable especially since every reason given to justify it was a farce. If the US really cared about the Iraqi people, war is the last option they should have taken.
Ester Sharpe, Bermuda
Considering the war is unnecessary and likely to increase international tensions, requiring further investment in national security in the future, I believe the money would have been better spent alleviating the problems in the NHS.
Jaez, United Kingdom
I support the war, but where is this money coming from?
|
Every state in the country is in a budget crisis, New York City has to sack some firefighters because they don't have any money yet Bush spends $75 billion on a war. Did he go and find some buried treasure somewhere? I support the war, but where is this money coming from?
Rob, USA
The US will not get rich from Iraqi oil, it is not ours, and it will not be ours. We could have used this money to build peace, instead we have bought hatred. I fear the world that our children will inherit.
James, USA
If this war is for reasons of national security; Then I would suggest to put the money into the police and fire services who badly need it; This will certainly make us feel more secure.
R EL -Hames, UK
Why should the UN foot the bill? Surely the US/UK will be making a fortune from this comparatively small (in financial terms anyway) investment in the war by not purchasing crude oil from Saudi.
Toby Cockburn, England
Yes I think that the cost is justified.
Patrick Woodgate, England
|
Yes I think that the cost is justified. What price do you put on human freedom and the basic human right to live without fear of your leaders and living in squalor? The people in charge of these regimes must be stopped. If they are not, then they will eventually prevail over all other free nations. Just look at Hitler. Initially everyone moaned about the war against him, but if he had not been stopped, where would we be now?
Patrick Woodgate, England
Spending money on schools, economic aid to other countries and social programs has given rise to the ignorant masses chanting anti US slogans in the streets of all the countries we have given aid to, except Israel. The only reason this war has a cost this high is because the US tries to limit civilian casualties and protect its troops. We could end it in ten minutes for a lot less if we did not care about the innocent.
Kevin James, Houston, USA
This war along with humanitarian efforts and rebuilding Iraq will cost far more than the figures that President Bush has ask for, its just a shame that more countries haven't stepped up to the plate and put their muscle and money in this plight.
Dave, North Carolina USA
My heart goes out to the children who will never live their dream because some people do not have the patience to make the live. Let the world count the cost of the war in terms of lost human lives not money.
Ken,
Minneapolis, USA
We should concentrate more on getting our accuracy right and stop firing on our own troops. More casualties have been made by us on our own, than by the Iraqi's
Iain Butcher,
England
The hypocrisy of this government beggars belief
|
The hypocrisy of this government beggars belief. Gordon Brown has now allocated a total of £3bn of OUR money for the invasion of a foreign country, but this government says there is no money to pay fire-fighters a decent wage. But then there's no political mileage in paying essential workers what they are worth, is there?
Paul,
England
On Tuesday George Bush requested $75 billion, could this money not have been used to fund research into developing a renewable energy source, saving the lives of many who are dying in this conflict.
James Nicholls, England
I think it's totally wrong that Mr Brown can find 1.25 billion for a war no one wanted. So why can't he find the same money for our national health service.
Emma Dale,
England
The only cost which counts for me is the loss of human lives. No-one can bring back these teenage soldiers and Iraqi women and children. Bush basks in the attention and glory while other more 'dispensable' human beings have to suffer, kill and be killed. The whole state of affairs sickens and saddens me.
Rachel, Switzerland
The real tragedy is that we had the opportunity to liberate Iraq 12 years ago but walked away, making every life lost and every pound spent twice as wasteful
|
Now that we live in a world where the chances of a war between super-powers are almost non-existent countries like Britain and America have a duty to protect the weak and preserve order, whatever the cost. The real tragedy is that we had the opportunity to liberate Iraq 12 years ago but walked away, making every life lost and every pound spent twice as wasteful.
Alex Kalinik, UK
Just like store policy: you break it, you pay for it. The US and UK area alone on this one. They were not backed by the UN. Therefore they have cover the cost themselves
Raul, Brussels
Just to get this amount into perspective: in Africa the lives of about 30 million people are threatened by famine. $75bn is enough to provide all these people with basic food for 25 years! If the West can afford a war on Iraq, why can it not prevent a humanitarian disaster in Africa?
John, United Kingdom
If you have followed the facts and action of the Saddam Regime since 1990, most 'sensible' people would be appalled at the torture and tyranny that the regime has conducted over the years. I am in agreement that ALL war should be avoided but this war is necessary as the Iraqi people have and will have NO chance of ridding Saddam from power. They never will, and they will be subjected to torture and tyranny for decades to come.
Dave Smith, Australia
Based on the behaviour and goals of the far right, the Bush administration will be largely blinded to the cost. Given the Iraqi civilian casualties and the millions of Americans without proper health care, crumbling schools, and children living in poverty, this is a crime of the greatest magnitude. It will not only rob these people of the present, but of their future hopes.
Jay, Canada
If I thought the war was justified, I'd have no problem with the cost
Merrill McKee, Orlando, Florida, USA
|
If I thought the war was justified, I'd have no problem with the cost. However, in its present form it isn't justified.
Merrill McKee, Orlando, Florida, USA
If you asked the parents of some of the servicemen that have been killed, the price is already too high. But what would it cost us to protect America twenty years from now when Saddam has nuclear weapons with the range to reach the United States? Enough is enough maybe this will be a eye opener to countries around the world that the United States and its real allies will not sit idly by any longer and let those countries run amok throughout the world without some sort of reprisals. Pray for peace but be prepared for war.
Jim, U.S.A
A lot of the cost will be offset by revenue from Iraq's oil. A pro U.S/U.K Iraqi government will ensure that the parties involved will get back any expenditure now, probably with plenty of interest on top. However, the non-monetary cost will be huge. Our freedoms will evaporate as we (in the U.S/U.K.) will have to live in a police state for our own protection against all the desperate and oppressed people the US has been exploiting since the Vietnam war. This is the real cost of this war.
Brad Gillis, London U.K.
$75 billion to establish a post-American democratic government in Iraq? I think not! Bush and his own cronies should be taking care of his priorities in his backyard first before attacking a country that was no threat to the US. He should be putting the taxpayers' money back to our schools, help Medicare and decrease the deficit. Just look at the state of the other countries such as Afghanistan, Vietnam, Turkey and East Timor the U.S. has attacked and how "much better off" those countries are doing today after gracing them with our presence.
Irene, USA, Los Angeles
NHS waiting lists get longer, the youth must pay to finish their education, and our dear government of the people decide to go to war! And then they "spin it" and blame the French. And they call Saddam Mad?
Lee, UK
I am assuming the Americans who support Mr. Bush's request for 75 billion are not among the 2.7 million average Americans without jobs and health insurance since Bush became president. No one is going to win from this war. All of us are losers.
Renee, USA
After the war, the Iraqis will potentially see massive increases in wealth. If they adopt a democratic government and live peacefully there is enough oil wealth to give them the best medical, educational and social environments in the world. Thus they can afford to compensate the nations that paved the way for the population to benefit from that wealth.
Peter Riley, Epsom, UK
The amount of money spent on this war is diabolical. Each of the missiles being launched into Iraq costs around £1 million. If this money was instead spent on humanitarian aid for not just the people in Iraq but all across the third world then the world would be in a much better position. Also before Gordon Brown writes out blank cheques for the destruction of another country, he should consider sorting out the mess this country is in. The NHS and the education system would benefit greatly from any extra money.
N, England
As an urban dweller in the mid west of the USA, I find those warmongers hijacking not only the urgently needed welfare, education and social programs, but also the sense of moral decency. The current administration are cowardly bombarding a helpless, defenceless nation to total submission in their own country. They're not only violating international laws, but also teaching the "inspiring" world a great lesson in bribery and blackmailing. This current administration makes me feel ashamed to be an American.
John Holden, USA
The Tory party supported Blair going into this war.
Will they also support a Labour rise in taxes to help pay for it and an maintain education, the health service etc
William Melville, Scotland
What a senseless waste of our money. Still, at least we can recoup some of it by selling the rebuilt Iraq new weapons and equipment (provided Bush's cabinet don't continue to give all the contracts to their friends)
Guy Chapman, UK
Democracies don't find it easy to deal with dictators, but we have to do what we have started
|
We can not afford NOT to fund the war. There is an important point of principle at stake. Opting out is NOT an option. Democracies don't find it easy to deal with dictators, but we have to do what we have started.
Jim Colraine,
UK
Imagine how much cancer research could be funded with that $75 billion? Still, I suppose Mr. Bush will be able to re-coup some of these losses with added oil revenue. Oh sorry, I keep forgetting, it's not about oil is it? Silly me!
As for this supposed 'removal' of a 'genocidal tyrant', I don't remember any money or effort being spent on the removal of Pol Pot or Ceausescu or Pinochet...
Richard West, UK
It's easy.
US and UK and allies pay for the war they're waging.
US and UK and allies pay for the reconstruction for the damage they've committed plus compensation to innocent victims of the war. Iraq is allowed to sell its oil on the open market with no strings attached. The oil belongs to Iraq, not anyone else. Sounds fair to me.
Rob Smith, UK
The figures are justified for the future of American interests.
The aim will be to build a larger military presence in Iraq, even though the Iraqi's have been 'liberated', until an American infrastructure has been built.
What better way to occupy a country than to destroy it.
Richard P, England
This war wouldn't be happening now if Colin Powell and Thatcher had removed Saddam properly in the last conflict. Let's hope they finish the job this time.
Adrian, UK
Imagine the result if the 75 billion was allocated to researching a cure for cancer and aids
Nick, UK
$75bn to help make Iraq a safer and better place is a drop in the ocean to what would become of these people if Saddam stayed in power
|
$75bn to help make Iraq a safer and better place is a drop in the ocean to what would become of these people if Saddam stayed in power. With all the weapons being used on this war it will generate jobs here and in the U.S .The amount of contracts to rebuild Iraq. It will give countries like England and the U.S the much needed boost they need in there industries.
Mark, England
Bush's request for $75 billion for the war with an assignment of $1.5 billion to reconstruct provides a telling insight into how Iraqi lives are weighed. Of course the real cost of the war may take twenty years or more to emerge, as US companies alone line up for 'reconstruction' contracts.
John Harpur, Ireland
USA is a net importer of 11 million barrels a day of oil products. After this conflict the US will increase the oil supply from Iraq, thus reducing oil prices in the range of $17 per barrel to $20 per barrel - based on $10 per barrel reduction in oil price, USA will save $40 billion per annum and in 2 years they will recover the cost - let alone the economic benefits of lower oil prices for US economy.
Farhan, Pakistan
We either fight the war or risk being killed by chemical and biological weapons. I know which one I prefer!
James, Manchester
That figure gives the game away. No way would the US spend that amount of money, and more, simply to liberate an oppressed people. Where is the evidence of the US ever doing anything like that? Just look: they're not interested in tackling famine or third world poverty, they're unconcerned about global warming, they've no intention of relieving the Palestinian people from their oppression by Israel. One can only conclude that they see this incredible sum of money as a worthwhile investment in US global domination.
Rachel,
UK
Lets get this thing over with then we can worry about the cost. It's cost us all more than we wanted to pay already in lives, good will, and brotherhood. God help us all.
Anon, Canada
Am I alone in being sceptical of any move that allows the USA to 'administer' the Iraqi oil output?
|
Am I alone in being sceptical of any move that allows the USA to 'administer' the Iraqi oil output? Even if it's on behalf of the Iraqi people. There are many such administered funds and lands in the USA on behalf of Indians and Hawaiians who see nothing from them.
James Scobbie, Scotland
The cost merely underlies the folly of this war. Iraq posed no current threat to the rest of the world, and - disagreeable and oppressive though its regime certainly was - it was not distinctly worse than many other totalitarian states (including the US allies of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait). However it has not suited the 'war' agenda to discuss the complex reality of modern Iraq.
George Hawes, Cambridge, UK
United States is the most self-righteous nation in the world. And they believe that their system and way of living is the only right thing for the rest of the world.
But whatever the reason is to this war (oil), the Iraqi people get the chance to develop to a democracy, hopefully by their own choice. And don't forget that the world is a better place without evil bloodthirsty dictators.
Rollx,
Sweden
The US budget deficit this year will be around $360 billion dollars. What's $75 billion compared to that? It's just a shame only $1.7 billion is going on rebuilding Iraq, while $10 billion goes as aid to Israel, who probably aren't going to spend to much of that on rebuilding Palestine
Henry Milner, UK
Once we are in the battle, the line has to be that it costs what it costs.
|
I am not generically happy about the price we have to pay for any war.
However once we are in the battle, the line has to be that it costs what it costs.
I would not be happy if the troops did not get the finances they need to allow them to do the job they have been tasked with. Nor would I be happy if the Iraqi people were not supported with supplies they need in those areas made safe and with rebuild post war. From my perspective the intent to dislodged a tyrannical regime encompasses far more than the deposing of the leader and the infrastructure supporting them.
Mick B,
England
The cost of this war is justified. It will bring down another tyrannical regime and will send a clear message that no terrorism is acceptable where ever or whatever it is.
Dr. Kanagaratnam, United Kingdom
It's interesting to note that the UK can stump up cash for a war yet our transport, education, and health service appear to be in a state of turmoil.
If they have enough money to spend on a worthless war, why couldn't they spend this money on improving our social services, our communication links, promoting our businesses overseas, regeneration of our inner cities¿ the list is endless.
Jeff Sorando,
Germany (UK resident)
The cost of the war is the divide in the UN. Why are we viewing it as material wealth? How many will die under the new Iraqi, from the date of invasion. That is the real cost. The war will only encourage the greater divide. If the account of people loss is greater than under Saddam Hussein reign, then the justification is a double standard.
Ian Lightryder,
UK
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the war, talking about "shock and awe" and covering the war as if it was a Hollywood blockbuster has ignored the scale of the casualties, both civilian and military, in the conflict. This is real life (and death), not the movies!
Neil Drysdale,
Scotland
The battle experience gained in the Gulf would be of huge value to the USA and alone probably justifies the cost
|
The battle experience gained in the Gulf would be of huge value to the USA and alone probably justifies the cost.
This generation of battle hardened American forces would now be capable of dealing with any further country with terrorist sympathies with even greater efficiency (and less cost) and may prove to be a more effective deterrent than before.
Philip WT,
UK
I was against the war before it started. Now I agree because this is a war for removing Saddam and giving freedom to the people of Iraq. I come from East Europe and I understand what a dictator is. Let's hope that Saddam will be removed very soon and all the world will be proud of US and British soldiers.
Gezim Alia, London
A lot more than $75bn went into training and developing the US armed forces and their weaponry. It is therefore illogical not to spend the necessary funds to deploy them when they are required. After all, you wouldn't buy a Cadillac and then not pay for the gas to run the thing, would you?
Todd MacDaniels, US Living in UK
It's amazing how UK and US can mobilize financial resources that huge to fight one man, and fail to make such resources available to avert HIV/AIDS scourge in Third World countries and elsewhere.
Phoebe Dzinkambani,
Malawi
Yes the cost is justified - the cost of doing nothing would be much higher ultimately
Paul C, England
"Freedom" at the cost of innocent lives will never be acceptable to the Iraqi people. It's insane for the US to think that future generations would accept a US lead government, knowing the misery which is inflicted upon the them today.
Manpreet Singh, India
You can't put a figure on a human life let alone the 100 of thousands already killed at the hands of Saddam.
If this is the price for freedom and peace, then let freedom and peace prevail over the constant threats from evil madmen like Saddam, Osama Bin Laden and so on...
What would have happened if Hitler was left to do as he pleased....where we would be now? Let's take the long term view here people!
Simon Grumbt, UK
The cost of war can NEVER be justified. As in WWII, one man was responsible for the deaths of thousands; if Saddam had been removed 10 years ago many, many civilians would be spared.
Claire Driver, England
What is the cost of inaction?
|
War will always cause debt. The question that should be asked is - What is the cost of inaction? New York City asked for $20 billion of federal aid after losing the World Trade Center. What would New York, London, or Paris need after a dirty-bomb blast delivered by Saddam and al-Qaeda?
Bill,
RSA
Sounds like money well spent to me. Not only do we get rid of Saddam, we also assist other ailing regimes in the area, like Saudi Arabia. We also send a message to the likes of Syria, Iran and Yemen, not to encourage terrorism or they too will be facing the wrath of a decent people whose patience has now snapped.
John,
UK
I read a lot of cynical comments about the reason for this war, but I believe the intentions of the coalition to be honourable. We will know soon enough if they are true to their word and I wonder how many people will think the cost was justified then?
Sean, England
Save the Children says that $10,000 is required to cover the cost of each child in this world.
This amount covers hospitalization, regardless the length of stay for the youngster, medical needs, teaching programs and administration. Entire surgical, intensive care and nursing staff.
Try to calculate this:
The cost of war with our children of the world the future of this world.
Simon A. ,
The Netherlands
$75bn is just the start of it. Sometimes war is necessary, but since this war is going to completely destabilise the area and make the world a much less safe place for all of us, $0 would be too much.
Chris G, UK
Can ALL people who insist on saying that this war is for oil please read the interactive essay on this website entitled Jerry Taylor: the war is not about "blood for oil"
Mr Taylor uses good logical arguments that I feel the hardiest of anti-war protesters will have difficulty arguing with.
Rich W,
England
I think the budget of $75bn is justified. Weapons cost money, especially top of the range precision ones, this is what will combat this war with. I think that once the war is over and money is invested in Iraq, it will be a better place, free from Saddam Hussein's evil regime.
Liz,
Southampton, UK
It is disgusting to read about the companies winning the contracts for reconstruction of post-war Iraq. The war is not over yet and despite the certainty for victory of coalition forces it is not yet reached. With all those talks about tenders and contracts the real idea behind the war is becoming clearer - money (as always)...For many pro-war people this realization might be very painful.
Leva, Latvia
Bush would like to have $75billion to fund the war, but $2 billion to pay for humanitarian relief after the war. Please tell me how the world got this crazy!?
Leewen,
Japan
War can never, and must never be justified under any circumstances, let alone its cost. A clear answer to this question is how beneficial $75bn would be to Asia, Africa and the world as a whole?
In a world as 'civilised' as we have, must we go to war to resolve any trivial issue?
Tony McCoy Adams, Ghana
It's a bargain when I consider my children's future.
Tazio,
This figure is completely necessary and justifiable to ensure Americans continue to pollute the world with their addiction to oil.
Tony, Malaysia
Hopefully, Bush will not get the oil he wants, as that's the one thing to pay back the money he's now spending.
Kobayashi, Japan
Freedom has always been purchased with blood, sweat, and tears
|
The question isn't 'can we afford the cost of the war' but rather can civilisation and especially the people of Iraq withstand life under the rule of a homicidal dictator while others enjoy the 'free trade' of weapons of mass destruction. Freedom has responsibility and has always been purchased with blood, sweat, and tears.
George Pomerantz, USA
The money would be better spent in human development and education, to allow us to be wiser when choosing representatives to deal with world affairs. God help us all.
J Ramos, New Zealand
I believe the cost of this war is irrelevant if and only that madman called Saddam Hussein is removed from power. My heart goes out to coalition forces who have lost their lives and also to their families. May God give them fortitude to bear this terrible loss. We are proud of you all. More grease to your elbow.
Laura, Ghana
Too bad this amount of money is not being spent on the research and economic development of alternative energy sources. Just think of what we could accomplish as a world society in finding environmentally friendly energy sources which are plentiful. Maybe we would not have a misguided cowboy trying to take the oilfields of an area half way around the other side of the world. A concerned American.
Deborah,
USA
John Li - the Australian government support this war as well you know! What with terrorists blowing up Bali in a direct attempt to kill Australians. What motivates them, greed or peace? Are Australian SAS in Iraq on holiday?
Alex, UK
Every American and British taxpayer should be billed for the damage they have wreaked on Iraq
|
Every American and British taxpayer should be billed $10,000 right now for the damage they have wreaked on Iraq. That would drive it home where it hurts and what motivates them in this war - greed.
John Li, Australia
What cost on life? It doesn't matter how much in monetary terms this war will cost - if we don't stop this nutter Hussein and his regime, money won't be worth the paper it's written on because there will be nothing left to spend it on, and no-one left living to spend it. Save the lives of our children.
Lorraine Hardman, England living in Chicago
It is amazing how willingly the US can spend $75bn on destruction, while they aren't able to afford the $1bn their PSS administration has asked for. If that money was spent on feeding the world there wouldn't be any war against terrorism be needed. Who's winning this war? It is not "our troops at the front" - it is the weapon industry. Who's loosing the war: The tax payer!
Claus, German in Saipan, USA
if people complain at the cost, then maybe they should start thinking about the price you put on the civilians
|
Would all the people who begrudge the cost prefer that we did it on the cheap? Precision weapons are expensive. And if people complain at the cost, then maybe they should start thinking about the price you put on the civilians who would be killed by cheaper, unguided weapons.
Chris W, England
Do the figures include any funds that would be spent in any case, if there was no war, ie the cost of maintaining military in peacetime? When figures like $75bn are mentioned, it isn't clear whether this is additional cost, or total cost. It's a small point, but people forget the much higher figures spent annually by some on defence spending in general.
Linden, New Zealand
Unlike some countries, the US and UK military forces are there to protect our civilian populations - not unpopular dictatorships. The USA lost over 3,000 civilians on 9/11. If the military could have spent 75 billion and lost 3,000 soldiers to stop the attack, I have no doubt that they would have. That is one additional reason to be proud of our military.
Kevin, USA
My heart bleeds with how gullible Americans are to believe Iraq is being liberated. $75 billion clearly tells me the war is about oil; America and the UK know they will reap the returns from taking over Iraqi oil. In spite of all the propaganda and double standards, time will tell who the real tyrant is. American's show PoWs on TV when their families have not been informed and they have not broken the Geneva Convention; Iraqi's do and they have. The real cost of this war is not $75 billion but the hatred and insecurity it is going to generate.
Kofi, Ghana
Cost is irrelevant. The change process taking place by necessity will be bloody and hard won, what do dollars have to do with it? It may at times seem that Iraq is winning "its" war, however should the USA ever choose to relax its rules of engagement to the extent that Iraq has, the war would be over in a matter of minutes. Right now, Iraq exists at the whim and patience of Bush.
R, Canada
If I truly believed the Iraqi people wanted the USA and the UK to bomb Saddam Hussein out of their country I would not begrudge a penny of the money
|
If I truly believed the Iraqi people wanted the USA and the UK to bomb Saddam Hussein out of their country I would not begrudge a penny of the money. However this war is not wanted by the Iraqi's, will breed hatred for the West in the Arab world and will destabilise the region.
Philip Urwin,
England
I'm in full support of our government and British government, no matter the cost. It will save us from greater expense in the future. I'd go to Iraq and lend a hand in the battle or the reconstruction if asked to do so, and do so without hesitation, even at personal loss.
Jeffrey Frank Herrick,
USA
The money "invested" by Bush and his right wing counsellors will serve better in food, health and education for USA and the whole world. The problem is that it will not encourage the profit margins for the arms dealers and the oil companies that pay them huge bribes to alter our country's policies and to make America the most hated country in Earth.
J Mora, USA
It is amazing and highly hypocritical that countries such as the USA and UK can find unprecedented amounts of money for the sake of war when they continually claim they are unable to find enough money to fund poverty, homelessness, public healthcare, and pay rises for essential services such as the UK Fire Service.
Shabir Aziz, UK
Making war costs money. Making war costs lives. How can the costs of making war be justified, financially and emotionally unless the warring nations expect to see Dollars and Pounds or in the case of the Iraqi war, barrels of oil.
Lil Visser, The Netherlands
What is the cost of freedom and life? No one can put a price on these, it should cost exactly what it should cost and no more.
Yvonne hunt, Great Britain
Imagine what it would cost once Saddam Hussein would gain even more biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons
|
Yes! Imagine what it would cost once Saddam Hussein would gain even more biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons, and would most certainly use those weapons on any country or group of people that would not submit to his ambitions. I am so thankful that we have strong leaders like Blair and Bush that will not wait for someone like Hussein to gain that kind of power.
Lowell, USA
This money could be used for so many things that make a difference, it's criminal to waste it on war. They say the cost is currently over $75B, seems like we could have bought the entire country for that much. It's time for better solutions to our challenges.
John Roethlein,
USA
As one person said, freedom wasn't won over a game of cards. Countries like France, Germany, and Russia make my sick. They want freedom, but aren't willing to fight for it. I think maybe if they had a Sept 11 they'd feel differently about it. The US has to be the police of the world again, while they sit back and badmouth us. I am so thankful to our troops; US, British, Aussies, Polish, and all the rest who are willing to do what is right no matter the cost. You are all true heroes! God Bless You.
Misty McCall, USA
Most definitely, you can bet your freedom on it. It's too bad we had to wait so long to resolve this issue but better late than never. Money is not the most important thing, our freedom and quality of life among our friends and families is what we are defending. Hopefully the protestors will finally get a clue that they are demonstrating support for everything that goes against what we enjoy in life.
Randy Littlefield,
USA
All it is is another colonial invasion by Western nations to control the region for its economic benefits
Rogeh Ghandour, Palestine/Canada
|
All it is is another colonial invasion by Western nations to control the region for its economic benefits as well as for the sake of its only ally, Israel. The Iraqi people are paying the price for the benefits of our future! Don't think I can sleep on that for the rest of my life.
Rogeh Ghandour, Palestine/Canada
The human and long-term costs of this war are so much greater than the direct dollar costs. Now that we are in, we have to spend what it takes to do it right, and not lose sight of how much more we will need to spend after the war to confer some legitimacy and decency on this massacre. If we truly want to support democracy around the world, there are far better ways to spend our money than on war. Bush's proposal to simultaneously push through a huge tax cut for the wealthiest Americans is beyond outrageous.
Tony,
USA
Regardless of whether the war is justified or not, and regardless
of whether American aid to Israel is justified or not, I cannot see why $10 billion should go to Israel as part of the war on Iraq: Israel is certainly not directly or even indirectly affected by the war by this amount. How does the Bush administration think this will be seen in the Arab world?
Kish Shen,
UK
War cost money. This is a reality the Americans understood when they began the war to liberate Iraq. Saddam should be removed solely on the basis of his crimes against humanity, excluding his possession and continued attempts to obtain weapons of mass destruction. Anti-war demonstrators are demonstrating war however, in this world there are people who do care for rules. This is exactly the same reason why we prosecute criminals who murder and rape. Saddam has done much worse things than these.
G Huddleston, UK
Seventy-plus plus billion dollars, thousands of innocent lives, the chaotic new world order, and the political career of Tony Blair will all be the cost of this unjust Iraq war that one mad cowboy single-handedly launched.
Daniel Tam, United States of America
I believe it is obvious that this war isn't good for the world-economy
Annemie Libbrecht, Belgium
|
The US and the UK went to war against Iraq without the consent of the UN, on their own. So they must realise they have to pay for it themselves. The economy isn't doing too good, and if George W Bush Jr thinks he can boost it by bombing Iraq so he can have some more oil, he's quite wrong. I believe it is obvious that this war isn't good for the world-economy. Many men and women are fighting and dying out there and an entire country is being ruined and with it several other countries suffer too, what's the use Mr Bush? Weapon industrials are the only ones who benefit from it!
Annemie Libbrecht, Belgium
It is becoming clear that Bush intended all along that the US would take control of Iraq after Saddam is removed. The hundreds of billions of tax dollars might then be better seen not as a waste but as capital - stolen and invested on behalf of Chevron, Shell, and the rest. Of course, the poorest 98% of US taxpayers will never see that money again. This war is a disgrace.
Matthew John Rahaim, USA
Yes, whatever it costs to stabilize that vitally important region. We cannot afford to allow a Hitler or Stalin to remain in power in that part of the world where unlimited resources can simply be pumped out of the ground.
Ron Anderson, USA
Blair goes on and on about the state of the NHS and tells the country that there is no more money to put in, but he can waste it on a war that no one wanted
|
No the cost of this war cannot be justified, Blair goes on and on about the state of the NHS and tells the country that there is no more money to put in, but he can waste it on a war that no one wanted. It seems to me that he just wants to be like Mrs Thatcher, but she went 8000 miles without the aid of the Americans.
Les Yarrow, England
Tony Blair must be on another planet, to believe that the mass of Iraqi people will welcome the coalition forces with open arms the moment the present regime falls, it's a racist insult to the people of a proud nation.
Brian Christley,
UK
If an alien was to land on this planet tomorrow and think to itself who's the terrorist nation on this piece of rock - it would say America - and as the 53rd state, are we are terrorists or crusaders and defenders?
Mr Craig W Hill, England
The costs associated with freedom, and the defence of humanity should have no limit. Those who disagree are obviously either extreme pacifists, or have an underhanded interest in weakening a state in order to take it over. The last point is that the US and UK should not have to pay dues to the UN. Because the coalition is picking up the UN's slack, any such debts owed the UN should be considered paid. This would amount to a savings, and money well spent.
Rob Barquero, USA
$75bn to stop Saddam - a reckless gambler with a total disregard for human life - from getting nuclear weapons: Cheap at twice the price!
Robert, Switzerland
If George Bush wishes to make up for his father's mistakes then we cannot stop him
|
I cannot begin to agree with all that money being spent on destruction. If George Bush wishes to make up for his father's mistakes then we cannot stop him, but I would like to think that my Prime Minister should have my best interests at heart which does not mean to me that he should spend my taxes on war.
Janette, Belfast
Anybody who believed military action would be quick and painless was living in cloud-cuckoo-land. Saddam had 12 years to prepare for the inevitable.
Richard Webb, England
It's a lazy argument saying millions spent on a war could have been spent on the NHS, schools etc.
Sorry, but the world doesn't work like that.
Much more is wasted on pointless bureaucracy and politically correct initiatives in this country.
The cost of the war can be judged worthwhile if we see a positive outcome for the people of Iraq.
Victor Houghton, UK
What on earth makes the leaders of our nations think the Iraqis will collapse in 30 days
|
$75 billion: What does that look like? I can't begin to imagine what we could have paid for with this kind of funding, and what on earth makes the leaders of our nations think the Iraqis will collapse in 30 days. They sustained horrific casualties in the war with Iran so their courage is not in doubt and one senses a backs-to-the-wall mentality, an almost Dunkirk spirit developing amongst the Iraqi forces. I fear it will take a little longer than that.
Chris Whitehead
UK
I think George Bush carries on like ike this then America will be heading for another depression, just like in the past when their leaders have spent all their money on a cause they believe to be just, so by spending all that money, they will have to cut back on spending on things like urban regeneration and rehabilitation schemes to name but a few.
Aaron Thomas,
Wales
The cost of the war is very difficult to justify, but for people to say that it could be better spent being given to the firefighters is ridiculous.
Compare their pay and conditions to the members of the Armed Forces currently fighting in the Iraq. Add to that that fact that most of them will not see their families again for 6 months at least, and the fact that a firefighter gets to go home after every shift.
Chris Wilkinson, UK
I think the war is justifiable if we continue to do things to limit the damage done to Iraq whilst removing Saddam! We need to think carefully about what we do and with what force! We should make sure we reduce damage caused to innocent people.
Gary Bennington, United Kingdom
The cost of the war is huge, as is the cost of the no fly zone and sanctions
Brian Stewart-Coxon, Scotland
|
The cost of the war is huge, as is the cost of keeping the status quo ie the no fly zone and sanctions so either way there is a cost that has to be met. The anti-war protesters need to add the wasted cost of their actions to the cost of war: The police required, the closure of roads and the effect on business when centres of cities are forced to close. If this money helps make Iraq a better place for the majority it is well spent.
Brian Stewart-Coxon, Scotland
The US has a higher infant mortality rate than any EU country. A significant fraction of its population cannot afford medical care. But it can spend $75bn on a war which it has not been able to convince the rest of the world is necessary. The highly state-subsidised industrial military complex gains, Americans and Iraqis lose.
Catherine, UK
I'm not sure why Bush and Blair would expect financial aid from the UN, given that it's only a 'debating society'.
Andy, UK
If you're the cause of the damage, it is only right that you're responsible for rectifying the destruction. To wreck Iraq and expect other countries to foot the bill is cheeky to say the least.
Michael Watson, UK
In the end, the war will be measured in human cost. The real question is, would more people have died under Saddam's rule than the casualties of this war? If the politicians say there will be less casualties this way, then I will support them. This is what they were elected to do. I would be proud to contribute the $75bn from my taxes if it helps prevent suffering. If this is the cost of ending suffering, then so be it.
Mike, UK
$500m humanitarian aid, compared to $6.5bn on munitions shows Bush is certainly committed to the people of Iraq!
|
How come only $2.3bn will go to humanitarian aid and the rebuilding Iraq, when $10bn will go to Israel, who remain unaffected by the campaign?! It doesn't seem quite right somehow. $500m in humanitarian aid, compared to the $6.5bn on munitions, shows that Bush is certainly committed to the people of Iraq!
Andrew Jackson,
Leeds, UK
When the Clinton administration was in power, America enjoyed the greatest economies in the world. Analysis shows that America's economy has gone down because of Bush. This money would have been spent on developmental programmes around the world...The figures shown here are a sign of LOVE FOR WAR and NOT LOVE FOR PEACE!
Kabvuto, Zambia
It strikes me as bizarre how the British government can write
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~23~RS~)
One-Minute World News
News services
Email this to a friend
Printable version
