Can reporters perform basic math calculations

**Shek** · 04-24-2006, 08:53 AM

I love the math skillz of these reporters, who round up to the nearest ten in order to get their headline. While the nearly $8bn a month for Iraq based on the CSBA estimate isn't chump change (I'll have to check out their estimate and see where the $$ is actually going), adding greater than 25% to the actual estimation to get your title figure is either deliberately misleading or just plain dumb (and I find it highly ironic that they include a quote about "failing basic accounting" ha!).

Quote:

New York Daily News
April 24, 2006
Pg. 8

Cost Of Iraq War Nears $10 Billion Per Month

By Michael McAuliff, Daily News Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — As Congress takes up emergency funding for the military this week, an unpleasant reality will complicate the debate: The increasingly unpopular war in Iraq is getting more and more expensive.

According to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, the combined costs of war in Iraq and Afghanistan this year will hit $117.9 billion — about $9.8 billion a month — if Congress passes the White House’s emergency money request, as is virtually certain.

About 80% of the cash goes to Iraq, where costs have risen from $48 billion in 2003 to a projected $94 billion this year — for a total of $282 billion, according to the Center for Strategic and Budgetary a think tank.

The White House is planning to ask for another $50 billion next year and the center predicts if the situation does not improve, the Iraq war could end up costing $660 billion by 2016— more than the Vietnam War, adjusting for inflation.

In spite of those grim projections, leaders in both parties predicted Congress would pass President Bush’s request.

“You have to pay whatever it takes,” said Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.), the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. “Once the troops are committed . . . you have to spend whatever it takes.”

A large part of the skyrocketing expenses for a war the administration had predicted would be relatively quick is blamed on booming maintenance and equipment costs as machinery breaks down under tough desert use.

Democrats, unwilling to look soft on defense, agree the military will get its money. But, forced to approve billions more for a war rapidly losing public support, they were set to highlight what they see as failures of the GOP and White House when the Senate debates its version of the bill, which the House passed last month.

“The administration has failed basic accounting,” said Jim Manly, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), adding the White House should be paying for the Iraq war through the normal budget process. “There is very little in this that is so-called emergency spending.”

The Democrats also plan to push other issues in the debate that they see as real emergencies, including spending on flu preparedness, port and border security, and veterans’ health care.

King admitted the combination of falling public support and soaring costs makes for a painful political outlook for the GOP, building incentive to call for a withdrawal. “Sure, there’s going to be pressure,” he said. “But whether it’s popular or not, you have to follow through.”

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why are there so few reporters with American troops in combat? Don't blame the media.	Ray	The War in Iraq	4	10-28-2006 01:05 AM
The Basic Laws of Human Stupidty	sparten	World Affairs Board Pub	0	03-08-2006 08:44 AM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)