11 ms·

Iran War Cost Tracker

• TSiege 7mo ago
  Cost is not the first thing I care about in war, but I felt like this is a useful site for tracking the money we're lighting on fire in order to pursue this conflict Civilian costs are real, unjustified, and incalculable.
  • keybored 7mo ago
    That’s good. But it seems that the American anti-war discourse is slanted towards the cost of it. Maybe because the whole political spectrum can relate to “our tax dollars”, while (1) the cost for the military personell might not be a concern for all because it is all-volunteer, and (2) some Americans don’t care what happens to people in other countries. Certainly: American progressives can use this to counter the “fiscally conservatives” (for domestic spending) who are also hawkish.
    • hedora 7mo ago
      Remember: The opinions of people that either didn't vote or voted for Trump are all that really matter this November (unless the Democrats somehow lose voters, but the polls suggest that is unlikely). Those are the votes that need to be won over to make any sort of difference during the second half of the Trump administration.
• martythemaniak 7mo ago
  Why is the US at war?
  • zardo 7mo ago
    To bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ.
  • kraftman 7mo ago
    Distraction
  • blktiger 7mo ago
    https://youtube.com/shorts/jFRTZGgmGo4?si=0gYc8JPCzVD_TD__ https://youtube.com/shorts/jFRTZGgmGo4?si=0gYc8JPCzVD_TD__
    • mitthrowaway2 7mo ago
      Oh wow, I never truly realized it before, but his speech really used to be a lot more coherent across long sentences than it is these days.
      • slg 7mo ago
        People should be able to separate the man from his politics and look at this apolitically. I don't see how anyone can see the way his speech patterns have changed over the years and not conclude that he has had a sharp cognitive decline. It's baffling that we don't talk about it, especially after we just went through this with Biden and had the whole retrospective about how that was ignored. Now here we are doing the exact same thing again immediately.
        • vjvjvjvjghv 7mo ago
          Anybody who has observed somebody age over decades knows that there is a huge difference between being 70 and 80. And it’s another big decline when they approach 90. The democrats denied this with Biden and now the republicans are denying it with Trump. Maybe we should get people that are way beyond normal retirement age out of political Leadership?
          • throwway120385 7mo ago
            Voters primarily vote for people that look and act like them, and retired people are a massive voting block. Chris Christie saying off-the-cuff that if young people voted in any significant numbers then he would care about what they had to say was a huge money quote. We get geriatrics because people moan about how our vote doesn't matter while not voting.
        • throwway120385 7mo ago
  • MengerSponge 7mo ago
    To occupy media cycles? To start the rapture?
  • jcgrillo 7mo ago
    Midterm elections later this year
  • rebolek 7mo ago
    You're asking dangerous questions, comrade.
  • csours 7mo ago
    "Why?" is the hardest of the questions. For any particular person, you can tell a story that satisfies "Why?". But for a large number of people, you have to answer "Why?" for one sub-group at a time. In other words, there's not a single answer that will answer this in a satisfying way. To answer a different question: It appears that the Israeli government and military wanted to bomb Iran again, and the United States executive branch and military decided to help out. This is an incomplete and unsatisfying answer. Sorry.
    • maeln 7mo ago
      > In other words, there's not a single answer that will answer this in a satisfying way. There could be one, but it would be a book-sized answer (and probably a Tolkien one, if not more). Every conflict is multi-faceted and happened for a variety of reason, some mattering more than other. Any conflict involving the middle east and you have to go back almost 80-years of history to really provide a satisfying answer. Control of world oil supply, trades with China, opportunistic war to appease local voter pool, diversion from problematic affairs, diplomacy with Israel (which as it own thousand fold reasons for this war), Iran being left weak after losing most of their local allied militia, internal uprising due to a economical crisis caused in part to the removal of the agreement on nuclear and the trade ban that followed ... They all probably play a part.
  • dexzod 7mo ago
    Greater Israel project
  • tarkin2 7mo ago
    Because, like Venezuala, they were selling their oil to China, which would allow China to attack Taiwan and take the US's supply of advanced semi-conductors for its weapons and military dominance
    • aeve890 7mo ago
      >which would allow China to attack Taiwan anytime now. trust me bro.
  • pphysch 7mo ago
    According to the Secretary of State Marco Rubio yesterday, we are at war because we knew Israel was going to assassinate Iranian leaders and we would be expected to defend them (and our foreign bases) when they go to war, so we might as well go to war right away. 4D chess.
  • 999900000999 7mo ago
    America needs to have never-ending perpetual wars to sustain its own economy. If we woke up tomorrow and there was just world peace, and America got rid of its military budget millions of people would probably instantly lose their jobs. That's the ultimate reason. They could just as easily declare war against Venus and spend hundreds of billions of dollars sending rocks into space and it would have the same net effect. Actually it would be a bit more positive because to my knowledge nobody's really living on Venus right now.
    • sheikhnbake 7mo ago
      > America needs to have never-ending perpetual wars to sustain its own economy. People don't realize that the Pentagon has strategically, over decades, invested and distributed its supply and manufacturing needs to every single congressional district. Basically ensuring that any representative that votes against the DoD budget will run afoul of constituents employed in some fashion by the military industrial complex.
      • throwway120385 7mo ago
        The military-industrial complex that Eisenhower, a Republican, warned us about.
  • hypeatei 7mo ago
    Christian Evangelicals, war hawks, and a voter base that fell for the "peace ticket" talk.
    • deleted 7mo ago
      [deleted]
  • Drupon 7mo ago
    [dead]
  • throwaw12 7mo ago
    because of Epstein tapes and blackmail by Israel
  • spaghetdefects 7mo ago
    Israel attacked Iran and dragged us into the war as per Rubio: https://x.com/Acyn/status/2028573242173366282 https://x.com/Acyn/status/2028573242173366282
    • bitcurious 7mo ago
      More accurately, Israel was going to attack Iran, and US intelligence stated that Iranian retaliation planning was to target US forces, along with most gulf nations and shipping lanes, so US preempted that retaliation.
      • tw-20260303-001 7mo ago
        Maybe you haven't noticed but they have not preempted anything.
      • bjourne 7mo ago
        That's quite a preemptive form of preemption! Was the US intelligence from the same source that stated that Iraq was acquiring "yellowcake" from Niger?
      • Jtsummers 7mo ago
        If the retaliation was preempted they wouldn't have retaliated, but they have. What the US actually did was provide justification for the retaliation against US bases in the region by joining in the opening salvo.
        • Jensson 7mo ago
          > If the retaliation was preempted they wouldn't have retaliated, but they have Most of the retaliation was preempted but they didn't get all the missile launch sites. They have blown up most by today though so you barely see any Iranian missiles coming out of the country now. If they didn't do the opening salvo you would have seen much more death and destruction than we saw now.
          • 7mo ago
  • Quarrelsome 7mo ago
    because when you give someone the keys to the US military to some people, they lack the imagination to think beyond piracy and raiding. The war in its current inception is Hamas levels of planning. 1. Do a big attack 2. ???? 3. Profit! Depends of if the Iranian state is weak enough to collapse on its own, because I imagine a land assault in Venezuela or Iran would be a horrific mistake due to the terrain.
    • hedora 7mo ago
      This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. If anything Hamas got the US to make an unforced mistake in a game of checkers three moves out. According to the IDF's analysis of captured Hamas documents, step 2 was: "Get Israel to commit so many war crimes that we actually have the moral high ground. Then, regional partners will be forced to support us again, and our recruitment numbers go back up. Do everything we can to ensure the conflict expands across borders to secure future funding and alliances." The crazy thing is the IDF knew this and published the report. Only after acknowledging that it was their only losing move did they start committing a bunch of war crimes! Hamas' public support, funding and recruitment levels were rapidly approaching zero until the Palestinian genocide started. Now they're part of a regional conflict and arguably still hold the moral high ground, depending on how you tally things up. That was fantasy-land for them before the strikes. It's almost like the IDF's funding is contingent on Hamas' continued existence, and, barring that, perpetual regional conflict. It's too bad that civilians always lose in these conflicts, and right-wing criminals almost always win.
      • Quarrelsome 7mo ago
        > This strike isn't even close to Hamas-levels of planning. Yes it is, its an attack without any surefire plans for later stages of the war. While they might fluke it, I don't see how just missiling a bunch of targets and murdering a nation's leader really achieves tangible change. Its like a bully taking a swing at someone in class, they can, so they do, but there's no thought about end outcomes. They might get lunch money, or get away with doing it, but they could also get detention, or be suspended or expelled. The Hamas plan was something like: 1. we murder them 2. they retaliate horrifically 3. ??? 4. the intifada goes global and lebanon and syria and maybe other arab nations all rise up and attack israel. and that remains my issue with the US plan, there isn't one. Either have ground troops ready or militias in place and armed. Don't just start a war for a laugh and if you do; then take it seriously. We're talking about worst case outcomes for hundreds of thousands if not millions and the US is currently just treating with the seriousness of a casual hand of poker.
  • gtsop 7mo ago
    [dead]
  • morkalork 7mo ago
    I love that this was downvoted and greyed out. Don't think, don't ask questions. Since when was that part of the hacker ethos?
• bawolff 7mo ago
  Wouldn't some of these costs be present either way? Without a war US would still have aircraft carriers, they would just be floating somewhere else. On the other side, it seems like this is not tracking interceptor costs (presumably due to it being classified), which have certainly been used extensively and are extremely expensive. For that matter i doubt we have a very clear picture of how much ordinance has been used in general. [To be clear, im not doubting war is very expensive]
  • butILoveLife 7mo ago
    Maybe, its opaque how its calculated. But you are keeping people on high alert, refueling further away, etc...
  • bubblewand 7mo ago
    A carrier operating at sea on the other side of the world is a ton more expensive than a carrier in port at home. The Ford in particular would probably be in port now if not for these back-to-back expensive adventures, they’ve been deployed for a remarkably long time now. (As for whether this reflects only those added costs, I don’t know)
    • bawolff 7mo ago
      True. Honestly i think my main opinion is that we have no idea what the number is, but its probably a large one.
    • lefstathiou 7mo ago
      Carriers aren't meant to hang out at port at home. The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years.
      • idontwantthis 7mo ago
        They aren't all deployed at all times and the Ford is more than overdue to be in Port. The sailors are notably suffering on this deployment and there is a ton of deferred maintenance.
• butILoveLife 7mo ago
  We better get a liberal democratic Iran government out of this. We better remove and halt nuclear powers for the rest of my life. I suppose pick either, and it was successful. My personal polymarket says we wont get either. Trump and Israel ruin their reputation. But reputation matters close to 0 in international relations, which is why they don't care.
  • roughly 7mo ago
    Unfortunately, I think "Theocratic Iran with the bomb" is on the "good" side of the distribution of potential outcomes here.
    • mhb 7mo ago
      You're right. It is unfortunate that you think that.
  • viccis 7mo ago
    There's next to no chance that whatever comes out of the end of this will be a "liberal democratic Iran government". Obama started a route in that direction with the lowered sanctions and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action from 2015. Iran having a democratic government doesn't really help the GOP war hawks so of course they trashed it. The same happened with North Korea in the 90s with the Agreed Framework that had some promise before GWB torpedoed it to please his oinking base. I also think that nuclear powers mean regional stability. Ukraine gave up its nukes in the 90s and we saw what happened there.
  • avidiax 7mo ago
    > We better get a liberal democratic Iran government out of this. > We better remove and halt nuclear powers for the rest of my life. Neither of those things is a guaranteed outcome of this. Depending on who you ask, it's not even a likely outcome. The IRGC remains the most powerful group in Iran. Probably a military junta is a more likely outcome, plus or minus a civil war to establish it.
  • spaghetdefects 7mo ago
    I'd be happy with the permanent removal of US bases from the Middle East.
• roughly 7mo ago
  Next time someone asks how we're going to pay for, eg, free school lunches, keep this site in mind.
  • BJones12 7mo ago
    Given 50 million schoolkids in the US and a cost per meal per child of $4, the current number represents 10 meals. At 1 meal a day that would be 2 school weeks, at 2 meals a day that would be 1 school week.
    • sheikhnbake 7mo ago
      2 school weeks of lunches for less than a week of war costs is a pretty good argument for school lunches. Especially as costs of this start to balloon the longer it goes on.
    • roughly 7mo ago
      We've been at this for 2.5 days, and the president is suggesting this could last a month or more. I suspect the long term ROI on free school lunches is going to far exceed that of this war, as well.
      • cvoss 7mo ago
        The government's job is not to maximize its ROI. For example, (and I make no argument about whether the current situation does this), protecting its citizens is of extreme moral importance, even if it's very very expensive and unlikely to somehow feed back into the economy in a way that recoups the cost long term.
        • roughly 7mo ago
          Then surely universal health care, strict anti-pollution measures, and worker safety efforts are next on the list, alongside access to healthy food and efforts to reduce the number of miles the average person needs to drive daily.
• FrustratedMonky 7mo ago
  Wow. That escalated quickly.
• joecool1029 7mo ago
  This seems really low considering one of the early warning radars taken out cost around $1bil on its own.... and it's possible a second one was at least damaged. (one in Qatar the other in Bahrain)
  • google234123 7mo ago
    The only footage I've seen is damage to maybe a satellite receiver. Have you seen proof of the radar damage
    • spaghetdefects 7mo ago
      [flagged]
      • joecool1029 7mo ago
        Not helpful, this is an AI generated post. We do have actual video of that one radome in Bahrain getting directly struck (from multiple angles). It's possible it was a satellite communication antenna and not a radar. But the still images shown with before/after are AI generated. (the surrounding buildings are completely different in the before/after image). The radar that is likely to have been damaged is the one in Qatar, here is reporting from an NPR editor using Planet satellite imagery: https://nitter.net/gbrumfiel/status/2028227786750476627 https://nitter.net/gbrumfiel/status/2028227786750476627
  • nosmokewhereiam 7mo ago
    NSA (Naval support) Bahrain lost a ground station (maybe two), not a radar.
    • dmix 7mo ago
      I believe Qatar(?) lost part of a THAAD system which is expensive. But that money has already been spent.
  • Havoc 7mo ago
• goestoo 7mo ago
  Why are the fonts so small? I have a hard time reading anything.
• rebolek 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  • lyu07282 7mo ago
    At this point the media apparatus that shaped all these people's brains in the comments here must've cost more than the wars they simp for.
  • gtsop 7mo ago
    [dead]
• hybrid_study 7mo ago
  https://bsky.app/profile/rbreich.bsky.social/post/3mg4ige7o752c https://bsky.app/profile/rbreich.bsky.social/post/3mg4ige7o7...
• tokyobreakfast 7mo ago
  How much money was set on fire for Ukraine? Where does that fall in relation on the righteousness rubric?
  • Jolter 7mo ago
    It was not set on fire, it was ”invested” in dead Russian soldiers.
  • wiseowise 7mo ago
    [flagged]
  • benrutter 7mo ago
    Certainly a lot less per day, but regardless, the two wars have very different aggressors. If the US has an argument that Iran was a real threat, it certainly hasn't tried to make it yet. Conversely, Ukraine had no choice about whether to be in a war. It's easy to be cynical around "righteousness" but morality means something. I hope Americans with any kind of influence or vote are introspecting hard right now on what they feel confortable with.
  • incognition 7mo ago
    Analysts from the Penn Wharton Budget Model and other experts suggest the total drain on the U.S. economy could reach $210 billion due to supply chain disruptions and energy spikes if the conflict is not resolved within the month. Ukraine has been $200bn over 2+ years
• 4gotunameagain 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  • bawolff 7mo ago
    US has tons of interests in the region. This is just as much for america's benefit as it is for Israel's.
    • jsphweid 7mo ago
      > This is just as much for america's benefit as it is for Israel's. Citation needed.
    • evklein 7mo ago
      "Interests." I'd love to know what the price per barrel the U.S. has paid in the last few years when you factor in additional costs incurred due to involvement in Iraq and Syria.
      • hedora 7mo ago
        We're certainly paying more than it'd cost to just drive EVs. Retail fuel prices are already higher than that, even ignoring subsidies, military operations and environmental externalities.
      • bawolff 7mo ago
        While oil is a major interest its hardly the only one. USA is still playing at being world hegemon in competition with china and to a lesser extent russia. Maintaining alliances is a part of that.
        • Jtsummers 7mo ago
          > USA is still playing at being world hegemon in competition with china and to a lesser extent russia. Maintaining alliances is a part of that. The US has been actively disrupting its most critical alliance, NATO, recently. Threatening to invade an allied nation's territory or force them to hand it over to us to prevent an invasion. Now threatening to block trade with NATO nations. The current administration is doing a terrible job of maintaining alliances.
• jmyeet 7mo ago
  There are a bunch of videos showing how expensive it is to fire certain weapons eg [1]. Not only are there our direct costs but we're also supplying several allies with munitions and weapon systems and paying for them ourselves. Also, yes carrier groups exist anyway, but operating them in a combat zone halfway around the world is way more expensive. Operation Epstein Fury [sic] is a giant white elephant and I think more Americans should know how much this is costing as well as why we're doing it, which is simply to support American imperialism with a lie similar to the IRaq WMD lie and that is that Iran is "weeks away" from nuclear weapons, a lie that's been told and propagated since at least 1992 [2]. President Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the expanding military-industrial complex in his 1961 farewell address [3]. Every bomber, every plane, every missile has an eye-watering cost when you put it int erms of schools, houses or healthcare. The recent ICE budget, for example, could've ended homelessness. Not for the year. Forever. Israel begged every president since Reagan to invade Iran. They all declined. Until now. And many suspect we're going to run out of anti-missile munitions long before Iran runs out of ballistic missiles. Just remember, every used munition eneds to be replaced. That's a new contract and new profit opportunity. It's why in so many post-WW2 conflicts you'll find American weapons on both sides. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6mWI8Q6IwA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6mWI8Q6IwA [2]: https://www.tiktok.com/@therecount/video/7612744750713589023 https://www.tiktok.com/@therecount/video/7612744750713589023 [3]: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwight-d-eisenhowers-farewell-address https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwigh...
• stopbulying 7mo ago
  Could add: Civilian casualty ratio by party (Civilian casualty ratios in recent conflicts and declared wars)
• rkal23 7mo ago
  Maybe it will be offset by selling LNG at 50% higher prices to the dumb Europeans. Blowing up Nordstream was the first step, Qatar stopping LNG production the second. Perhaps take Greenland while the EU is completely dependent.
• hk__2 7mo ago
  *for the US.
• stopbulying 7mo ago
  United States involvement in regime change: 1952–1953: Iran [BP], 2026: Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... 2025 United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_strikes_on_Iranian_nuclear_sites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_strikes_on_... 2026 Iran massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres 2026 Iran conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_conflict https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_conflict
• tw04 7mo ago
  [flagged]
• fishingisfun 7mo ago
  the lives lost though. the children killed.
• t1234s 7mo ago
  Which contractor is selling the most munitions? LM, Raytheon, etc..
  • deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
• benj111 7mo ago
  I'd rather have a tracker to show how close the Orange One is to his coveted Peace Prize.
  • cdrnsf 7mo ago
    He stole María Corina Machado‘s and has the much coveted one from FIFA too.
• RobRivera 7mo ago
  Oh boy - defense accounting I LOVE this game. Quick quick, give me a quote on the coffee maker on the AWACS.
• Stromgren 7mo ago
  I saw the cost of the three downed planes somewhere else and thought the price was huge. Now I see that it’s comparable to “First Tomahawk salvo”.
• throwaw12 7mo ago
  This doesn't include generational damage in sentiment: * Europe is in trouble because they can't get gas from Russia, Qatar stopped supplying gas * Japan is in trouble because Middle East supplies its 75% of oil, which is blocked now * Ukraine is in dilemma, because US giving every support to Israel, but not to Ukraine * Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain is asking questions, if US can't defend us and is moving all defensive missiles to protect Israel, why should we even be ally with them in the future, they're scared even more (except UAE) that people might overthrow those kings if things continue this way * Africa understood its better to work with China, than with US
  • flyinglizard 7mo ago
    The disruption in gas supply will be very short. Weeks, at most. The gulf states will be very happy to see the Islamic Republic gone, they are living in its shadow for a long time now. Now, Ukraine and Israel need very different kinds of support, and things like US withholding intelligence from Ukraine have nothing to do with Israel.
    • hedora 7mo ago
      Iran has been bombing production facilities across a bunch of US allies. It's unclear how quickly those will be rebuilt. Also, the US is probably bombing Iranian production, which means countries like China will be looking for additional sources.
    • throwaw12 7mo ago
      I wonder why Israel should get any support, do you support killing children and bombing schools? Ukraine, I understand, because it was attacked, but Israel, who was oppressing people for so many years with prisons full with Palestinian kids and teenagers long before Oct 7th, I really don't understand. Except, for Epstein reasons (blackmail), other than that, there is no reason US should support Israel, in any way
      • dttze 7mo ago
        [dead]
• Quarrelsome 7mo ago
  not providing universal healthcare is a choice, as seen directly here. Its distressing to have US politicians make false claims that Europe's universal healthcare being something they "indirectly pay for", because even if Europe spent all their money on defence the US (albeit mostly the GOP) would still resist providing universal healthcare both tooth and nail.
  • danny_codes 7mo ago
    Universal healthcare is cheaper than our system of healthcare by a factor of 2 (comparing other OECD countries). If we raised taxes and implemented universal healthcare we’d save about $1T a year. Cost isn’t the relevant factor, it’s politics. Or more accurately, naked bribery that we, for some insane reason, call “lobbying”.
    • DarmokJalad1701 7mo ago
      > If we raised taxes and implemented universal healthcare we’d save about $1T a year If it saves $1T, then why does it require raising taxes?
      • Quarrelsome 7mo ago
        idk maybe those savings are not upfront but are more around productivity improvements and so on.
      • mekdoonggi 7mo ago
        Because currently the working population pays what is effectively a tax for health insurance. I pay over $450 a month for a family plan, and that's cheap and subsidized AND I need to pay for copays/deductible/coinsurance. So taxes could go up $5k/yr but if I got health insurance, I'm better off. The savings would take longer to realize because they come from better contracts, better preventative care, increased screenings etc.
      • danny_codes 7mo ago
        Healthcare Spending in the US is split across private and public expenditure. Under universal healthcare the public would pay more, but net spending would decrease.
• wnevets 7mo ago
  But universal healthcare is too expensive.
  • IAmGraydon 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    • gravisultra 7mo ago
      This is a valid criticism. Whenever there is a push to improve life for US citizens, we are told that we do not have the funds. Yet, here we see an essentially unlimited budget to fight Israel's war of aggression against Iran, with zero benefit to US citizens. In fact, the costs (financial, moral and human) that we will pay for this excursion will be astronomically high.
      • mhb 7mo ago
        If budgets are what interest you, maybe consider why Iran spent over $500B developing offensive nuclear weapons. Instead of peaceful pursuits or defenses against its supposed aggressor over 1,000 miles away.
        • gravisultra 7mo ago
          Budgets using my money interest me. Do you have a source for that $500B claim?
        • krisoft 7mo ago
          > maybe consider why Iran spent over $500B developing offensive nuclear weapons. To protect themselves from the exact scenairo happening right now? The reason why Putin is sleeping peacefully in his bed while Khamenei is dead under rubble is that one has nuclear deterent while the other din't have that protection. > supposed aggressor I don’t know if there is anything “supposed” about that aggressor given the present situation.
          • 7mo ago
• arduanika 7mo ago
  It's hard for laypeople to comprehend such large numbers. Could you add a counter that measures it in miles of California high-speed rail? It's got to be over three miles by now at least.
• textech 7mo ago
  The cost doesn't really matter. The US led financial system (which is a glorified Ponzi scheme) is on an unsustainable path. The war in Iran is about resources (force Iran to use US dollars to trade oil, give US more leverage in dealing with China...etc.) and to delay the collapse. You build "digital pyramids" like AI data centers and consolidate power/resources while you still can. Financial cost of the war is largely irrelevant. Whether the outcome will be to your advantage is a different issue but pattern is predictable with historical precedence (Romans...etc.). Unfortunately innocent people pay the price.
• cm2012 7mo ago
  $2b is a rounding error in the USA budget
  • mhb 7mo ago
    [flagged]
  • incognition 7mo ago
    Analysts from the Penn Wharton Budget Model and other experts suggest the total drain on the U.S. economy could reach $210 billion due to supply chain disruptions and energy spikes if the conflict is not resolved within the month
• mcintyre1994 7mo ago
  Wouldn’t most of these costs have been going for a few weeks, given the build up?
• mandeepj 7mo ago
  Orange clown has a strange way of looking at things. He's now saying - He's not starting a war, but rather ending one.
  • joshrw 7mo ago
    Doublespeak
  • mekdoonggi 7mo ago
    It's not strange, it's perfectly intelligible doublespeak.
  • anigbrowl 7mo ago
    At this point he could say 'we have always been at war with Eastasia' and his base would uncritically repeat it.
• hereme888 7mo ago
  For the prospects of the freedom and subsequent prosperity of the oppressed Iranian people, peace in the Middle East, and safety of the commercial shipping routes, I fully approve my tax dollars to the matter.
  • danny_codes 7mo ago
    Yeah that’s the likely outcome given our track record /s
    • hereme888 7mo ago
      Venezuela is undergoing tremendous freedom and hope. My fellow Venezuelans and I are super grateful for the well-planned, surgical mission of the US. They can have all the oil they want and help restore our industries in exchange for their financial benefit and partnership, which is the most recent track record.
      • lukas099 7mo ago
        I think that interventions in the region of interest, the middle east, are more relevant data points than Venezuela.
      • deleted 7mo ago
        [deleted]
      • RiverStone 7mo ago
        Every Iranian I know has the same sentiment right now. Feeling very conflicted in that 1) their country is being attacked, and 2) thankful that the oppressive regime is being destroyed. Cautiously optimistic about the future.
  • leosanchez 7mo ago
    For Pakistanis as well ?
    • hereme888 7mo ago
• ZunarJ5 7mo ago
  Literally anything but healthcare.
• jakeinspace 7mo ago
  Is this missing interceptors? My understanding is those probably dominate total costs at the moment, especially if you include the costs of allied Gulf State and Israeli interceptors. Thousands have been expended already on ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones. Those range from hundred of thousands to multiple millions per shot.
• Paul_S 7mo ago
  Can we subtract the number of dollars that it would cost not to start a war?
  • 13415 7mo ago
    We can't. That would require a carefully conducted cost-benefit analysis of potential outcomes including the costs and benefits of not starting it, with estimates for short-term (3 years), ten years, and twenty year outcomes. Such a study doesn't exist publicly and there is no way you can convince me it exists at all other than showing it to me with evidence that it was written before the US attacked Iran. It's also not usual to make such analyses because the costs of a human life lost are calculated very differently in each domain and are hard to assess. For instance, 13.7M per life is assumed in airline safety but that's not a figure the military would use.
• 2001zhaozhao 7mo ago
  > $2.1B so $7 per person?
• koverda 7mo ago
  neat! I made (vibecoded) and deployed something very similar yesterday https://iranwarcost.com https://iranwarcost.com
• coffinbirth 7mo ago
  Dear Americans, what are the costs of the 165 killed children of the Minab school airstrike[1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike
  • ineedaj0b 7mo ago
    low, if the claims are true iran has 1000ish lbs of 60% uranium. we shall see
  • RiverStone 7mo ago
    I’ll defer to every Iranian I know, the millions of Iranians expats, and millions of Iranians within Iran, who are all cheering us on and celebrating Khamenei’s death.
• tzahifadida 7mo ago
  What would have happened if the US dis not get involved in WWII. We would probably not be here... Not everything is short sighted bean counters. Having major cities explode by nuclear devices in the US will surely cost more.
  • roncesvalles 7mo ago
    [flagged]
    • password54321 7mo ago
      The alternative was not bombing them in the middle of negotiations.
      • roncesvalles 7mo ago
        Persia's only singular civilizational goal right now is nukes. What's funny is, all nuclear engineering programs in US universities (undergrad and grad level) are disproportionately filled with Iranian/Persian students (even as far down as 3rd generation immigrants i.e. those whose parents emigrated during the Shah Pahlavi era). It's unreal how determined that entire culture is to getting the bomb. It's a big hit to their ego that all the other great "academic" civs of the world (Western European, Russian, Chinese, Indian, Jewish) have it except the Persians. And they'll get it eventually. The question is only under what regime.
    • galleywest200 7mo ago
      We had a nuclear deal with them, which was ripped up by the same man currently in charge of the US.
  • Jtsummers 7mo ago
    Iran has been weeks away from a nuke for decades. What evidence is there that they were any closer this time, or that this war was necessary to delay or block their progress?
• jopsen 7mo ago
  What about reparations? :) This is an illegal war of aggressions after all. The justifications all remain fanciful. I mean at least Bush bothered to make it appear legitimate.
• wiseowise 7mo ago
  2 billions in 4 days. Have you said thank you once?
• breakingrules3 7mo ago
  [dead]
• nphardon 7mo ago
  Where does this money go? I see that some is lost value, like in the downed aircraft, but what groups are profiting off this crazy flow?
  • dfxm12 7mo ago
    Defense contractors, the oil companies who get to rebuild, private security, etc. You can do a web search for who profited from the Iraq war. It's mostly all the same. This war also has a religious component to it, as a US combat unit commander has said "the Iran war is part of God’s plan and that Pres. Donald Trump was anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth": https://jonathanlarsen.substack.com/p/us-troops-were-told-iran-war-is-for https://jonathanlarsen.substack.com/p/us-troops-were-told-ir...
• deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
• woodpanel 7mo ago
  What’s the price tag for keeping your empire? IMHO: The US is doing what Russia did 2022 – Act before the window of opportunity closes. Not just vis-a-vis China. Russia being entangled in Ukraine leaves extra opportunities on the menu. Temporarily.
• kartika848484 7mo ago
  should also track all the profits made war is good business
• BoneShard 7mo ago
  it's probably one shot claude creation, all my claude side projects look about the same (so basically ai slop).
• charlie90 7mo ago
  Maybe Im missing something, but the US armed forces had a budget of $850B last year, so thats already $2.3B a day baseline in peace time.
• learingsci 7mo ago
  How is it in comparison to Ukraine, that’s what interests most people. I recall the last admin spending like no tomorrow on Ukraine but obviously Russia is a bigger opponent than Iran.
• bananamansion 7mo ago
  tracking cost is a false equivalent. the cost is measurable but the benefit is intangible. This is a Goodhart’s Law in practice
• ffsickempire 7mo ago
  [dead]
• dcder1 7mo ago
  Israel => 2.7 bil dollars per week, that is roughly 0.4 bil per day (from news) US => 60 mil per day just operations (from news). Likely around 0.1 bil per day, or more. World => 80 mil barrels oil/day x 10 dollars = 0.8 bil per day (from news), on the increase. 5 days of war generated at least 6.5 bil dollars in cost !!! The majority of which is paid by every human on the planet :-) The results include the killing of an 86 year old man who had cancer, about 150 school girls, some 40 radical idiots and various by-standers.
• dplesh 7mo ago
  Thats an easy task. You better come up with a calculator of future US economy benefits due to this war.