Outsiders (CBO) had solid estimates of Iraq costs

[Barrett808]

WASHINGTON - Months before the U.S.-led war in Iraq, independent and congressional analysts made remarkably accurate predictions of the costs of a post-war occupation, even as the Pentagon refused to do so, or gave very low estimates.

The discrepancy is gaining new attention with lawmakers complaining of the costs as they approve the president's request for $87 billion to occupy and rebuild Iraq. The House approved the package Thursday, and the Senate is expected to do so Monday.

"We were all hit with sticker shock: $87 billion is a huge number," said Rep. Zack Wamp, R-Tenn., during House debate Thursday night. "I'm going to grit my teeth and vote yes tonight and say that we cannot afford to fail in Iraq."

Bush administration officials repeatedly insisted before the war that they could not estimate how much the war or the postwar occupation might cost.

But the Congressional Budget Office, for example, estimated in September 2002 that occupying Iraq would cost between $1 billion and $4 billion a month.

The current figure? About $4 billion a month.

(more)

http://www.starbanner.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20031101/NEWS/211010356/1004/NEWS01

[jbfam4]

1. hummmmm

The people who got the facts right are gone and those who got it wrong are still working for this administration.

What's wrong with this picture?

[Voltaire99]

2. Anyone who cared to read this information...

...could have used it to raise objections to the impending invasion.

What does that tell you about the lawmakers now seeking to recast themselves bravely as war critics?