Cost of War

[brionon]

Does anyone know the cost to the British people of the invasion of Iraq, besides the cost in lives, please ?

[Drusilla1S]

Sadly, I was only able to find a running cost for the US taxpayer and have been unable to find figures for UK citizens, which says a lot about British secrecy in these matters, or would that be classified as leftist paranoia?

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

[brionon]

Drusilla, Thanks for trying.

[madein1978]

I think at last count it was running at �1.4 millon, give or take 100,000!

[flashpig]

That seems like a bargain for a war.

But then the m key is kinda close to the b key.

[Loosehead]

The trouble is the cost figure will be artificial. What you mean is how much more does it cost than it already costs just to have the troops anyway. The answer is only transportation and extra fuel and ammo that they otherwise wouldn't use. In reality it doesn matter where the troops are they still cost.

[madein1978]

Sorry, you are quite right, I meant 1.4 BILLION. That key is kinda close!!

[madein1978]

But are you really surprised, our wonderful Labour government is very good at wasting our money on things we neither need nor want!!

[Ward-Minter]

Whatever the figure of war remember to subtract the cost of our military in peace time.

Soldiers are not paid anymore nor eat any different, fire more shells etc all because they are at war. And I can assure you the home-based forces are paid very little overtime!!

The Navy do not use anymore fuel etc etc.

Therefore the (EXTRA) cost of war may not be as high as some figures suggest.

[NapoleonSolo]

I think the military get combat/field pay

[vehelpfulguy]

Everyone who has answered has assumed you mean cost as in money.

What about the cost as in the bombings we had last year, or the cost of increased fear of terrorism amongst the UK population, or the cost of a potential civil war in the UK in the next few years.

[Ward-Minter]

Napeleon it is all incorporated together now. They call it the X Factor, which I do not like.

see here

[jake-the-peg]

�3.1 billion up to march last year quoted here:

http://www.financialdirector.co.uk/accountancyage/news/2142580/taxpayers-bear-cost-iraq-war

To be politically unbiased and provide some context the Falklands is reckoned to have cost �1 billion which is about �2.1 billion in 2001's money. ( I'm sure there's a more modern historic inflation calculator somewhere but I couldn't find it quickly)

[jump79]

Among the non-financial costs-- I would say bad publicity, such as the recent case in Iraq. Though many people know it is not representative of the British army as a whole, those in Iraq (and the rest of Middle East) may not see it the same way, and it only helps the terrorist groups gain the local support of the people aas well as more new recruits for their cause.