The US war with Iran is already costing 50% more than what the Pentagon admits
The US war in Iran is evolving into a financial quagmire, with official Pentagon reports now resembling a poorly constructed science fiction script. While Washington attempts to reassure Congress with "convenient" figures, an eye-opening study from Harvard has arrived to blow the American government's narrative apart. Top academic Linda Bilmes exposes a megaton accounting fraud, proving that the actual cost of the conflict is not just higher, but threatens to open a $1 trillion "black hole" in the American debt. With the Pentagon appearing out of touch—calculating losses using prices from past decades while the superpower "bleeds" financially from cheap Iranian drones—the next generation of Americans faces a staggering bill.
The numbers cause vertigo
In more detail, according to the Harvard analysis, the war with Iran could ultimately cost American taxpayers significantly more than official data suggests. The first 6 days of the US-Israel war against Iran, which began on February 28, accumulated costs of $11.3 billion, according to the Pentagon's briefing to Congress. While a fragile ceasefire remains in place, efforts to reach a permanent settlement have so far proven fruitless, with American forces initiating a blockade of Iranian ports following the failure of peace talks over the weekend. "I am certain we will reach $1 trillion for the war in Iran," stated Professor Linda Bilmes, a public policy expert at the Harvard Kennedy School, in an internal interview. Her research, published two days before the announcement of the temporary truce on April 8, identified several reasons why this military operation could have catastrophic consequences for the US national debt in the future. She estimates that the short-term, direct costs total approximately $2 billion per day during the 40 days of active conflict. This includes the price of ammunition, troops, and damage to military assets—such as the downing of three F-15 fighter jets due to friendly fire from Kuwait. Bilmes believes the short-term cost is higher than it appears on paper, as the Pentagon reports figures based on the historical value of inventory rather than the actual replacement price of these assets today—which is typically much higher. "These gaps are one reason why the reported $11.3 billion is actually closer to $16 billion, reflecting a persistent discrepancy between what the Pentagon reports in real-time and what the war actually costs," she said. Bilmes added that large, multi-year contracts with Lockheed Martin and Boeing for interceptors and missiles mean that replenishment costs for the US will be much higher—at $4 million per interceptor—compared to the cost of drones launched by Iran, which can be produced for just $30,000 each.
Long-term consequences
In the long run, the cost of the war increases due to the reconstruction of destroyed facilities and equipment—not only American military assets in the region but also the infrastructure of their Gulf allies. Added to this is the cost of potential lifelong disability benefits for the approximately 55,000 soldiers deployed to the region and exposed to toxins and environmental hazards, further increasing the burden on the taxpayer. Meanwhile, the White House has asked Congress to increase the US defense budget to $1.5 trillion, which would mark the largest expansion of military spending since World War II. This amount does not include the $200 billion requested by the Pentagon to be set aside specifically for the war in Iran. "Even if Congress does not agree to approve the entire increase, it is very likely that at least $100 billion annually will be added to the base defense budget, which would not have been approved in the absence of this war," Bilmes added. Such spending will significantly burden the swelling US fiscal deficit. Compared to the Iraq war, which cost a total of $2 trillion, the public debt during that period was under $4 trillion. Today, it exceeds $31 trillion, and much of this stems from previous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Bilmes. "We are borrowing to fund this war at higher interest rates, on top of a much larger debt base," she added. "The result is that interest costs alone will add billions of dollars to the total cost of this war. And unlike the initial costs, these are costs that we are explicitly passing on to the next generation."
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments