Seraphim
09-02-2003, 08:47 PM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030902/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us_costs
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030902/capt.1062531707.iraq_us_msr101.jpg
U.S. Army soldiers Spc. Teaance Peters of Sulphur Spring, Tx., foreground, and Spc. Chad Anderson of South Dakota both from the 14th Engineering Battalion of the 4th Infantry Division patrol the Tigris river in Tikrit, about 110 miles (180 kilometers) northwest of Baghdad, Iraq (news - web sites), Tuesday Sept. 2, 2003. Tikrit is the hometown ousted leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites). (AP Photo/Murad Sezer)
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - A U.S. occupation of Iraq (news - web sites) that relies on the creation of two new Army divisions could cost up to an estimated $29 billion annually, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (news - web sites).
Relying on existing soldiers serving one-year tours would cost as little as $8 billion a year but would mean the force would steadily shrink as troops were rotated out of Iraq, the study said.
The report, released Tuesday, was requested by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., one of Congress' most outspoken critics of Bush administration policy in Iraq. In remarks on the Senate floor, Byrd said the report "is quantified evidence that the long-term occupation is straining our forces close to the breaking point."
The nonpartisan budget office said the Army could not keep a force in Iraq of its current size beyond March 2004 if it retains its current policy of rotating most troops out of the country after a year. The force would have to shrink to no more than 64,000 under that policy — down from the more than 180,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq and neighboring countries, the report said.
Creating two new divisions would allow a force of up to 129,000 personnel, CBO said.
The study excluded any cost estimates for rebuilding Iraq, which administration officials have said could cost billions of dollars.
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030902/capt.1062531707.iraq_us_msr101.jpg
U.S. Army soldiers Spc. Teaance Peters of Sulphur Spring, Tx., foreground, and Spc. Chad Anderson of South Dakota both from the 14th Engineering Battalion of the 4th Infantry Division patrol the Tigris river in Tikrit, about 110 miles (180 kilometers) northwest of Baghdad, Iraq (news - web sites), Tuesday Sept. 2, 2003. Tikrit is the hometown ousted leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites). (AP Photo/Murad Sezer)
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - A U.S. occupation of Iraq (news - web sites) that relies on the creation of two new Army divisions could cost up to an estimated $29 billion annually, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (news - web sites).
Relying on existing soldiers serving one-year tours would cost as little as $8 billion a year but would mean the force would steadily shrink as troops were rotated out of Iraq, the study said.
The report, released Tuesday, was requested by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., one of Congress' most outspoken critics of Bush administration policy in Iraq. In remarks on the Senate floor, Byrd said the report "is quantified evidence that the long-term occupation is straining our forces close to the breaking point."
The nonpartisan budget office said the Army could not keep a force in Iraq of its current size beyond March 2004 if it retains its current policy of rotating most troops out of the country after a year. The force would have to shrink to no more than 64,000 under that policy — down from the more than 180,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq and neighboring countries, the report said.
Creating two new divisions would allow a force of up to 129,000 personnel, CBO said.
The study excluded any cost estimates for rebuilding Iraq, which administration officials have said could cost billions of dollars.