Before getting into the details of our current financial status in funding the war in Iraq, let’s take a moment to highlight what the Bush administration told us before we launched the invasion.
* Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz, Paul said, “The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.” (3/27/2003)
* White House Budget Director Joshua Bolten said, “We don’t anticipate requesting anything additional for [Iraq for] the balance of this year.” (7/29/2003) Six weeks later, Bush asked for another $87 billion.
* When several newspapers estimated the cost of war and reconstruction at $60 billion to $95 billion, Wolfowitz dismissed them as way off the mark, saying war costs could “range from $10 billion to $100 billion.” (2/28/2003)
* When White House adviser Larry Lindsey said the war might cost as much as $200 billion, he was promptly fired.
The administration was tragically mistaken; Bush officials dramatically underestimated the resources needed. Making matters considerably worse, after the war has already cost so much in terms of lives and dollars, we are now learning that the Pentagon is once again running out of money for the war.
The U.S. military has spent most of the $65 billion that Congress approved for fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and is scrambling to find $12.3 billion more from within the Defense Department to finance the wars through the end of the fiscal year, federal investigators said yesterday.
The problem is not just a lack of funds. Because the administration doesn’t want to have to ask for more money, especially in an election season, the Pentagon has to take money away from some areas in order to finance the ever-growing costs of the war.
The report from the Government Accountability Office, Congress’s independent investigative arm, warned that the budget crunch is having an adverse impact on the military as it shifts resources to Iraq and away from training and maintenance in other parts of the world. The study — the most detailed examination to date of the military’s funding problems — appears to contradict White House assurances that the services have enough money to get through the calendar year.
Already, the GAO said, the services have deferred the repair of equipment used in Iraq, grounded some Air Force and Navy pilots, canceled training exercises, and delayed facility-restoration projects. The Air Force is straining to cover the cost of body armor for airmen in combat areas, night-vision gear and surveillance equipment, according to the report.
Keep in mind, in a campaign context, Bush is accusing Kerry of not doing enough to support the troops. And yet, this report makes clear that it’s Bush who is shortchanging the military.
“George W. Bush likes to call himself a wartime president, yet in his role as commander in chief, he has grossly mismanaged the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq,” contended Mark Kitchens, national security spokesman for Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry. “He went to war without allies, without properly equipping our troops and without a plan to win the peace. Now we find he can’t even manage a wartime budget.”
Oh, and just to add insult to injury, we’re running out of ammunition and having to buy bullets from our allies.
The U.S. military has assembled the most sophisticated fighting arsenal in the world with satellite-guided weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles that shoot Hellfire missiles. But as billions of dollars have poured into the technology for futuristic warfare, the government has fallen behind on more mundane needs — such as bullets.
The protracted conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and heightened combat training with live ammunition have left the military short of small-caliber bullets. To offset the squeeze, the Army is taking unusual stopgap measures such as buying ammunition from Britain and Israel.