6 ms·

Pentagon asks for $200bn for Iran War

81 points by master_crab 7mo ago

JoyBundle 7mo ago
[flagged]
rolph 7mo ago
sophies choice? fund a war, or fund DHS.
basisword 7mo ago
I thought it wasn't a war until congress approves it?
- Havoc 7mo ago
  Special military operation
  - red-iron-pine 7mo ago
    putin is laughing
- whatever1 7mo ago
  Do we now call it a war? I thought it was an excursion?
  - unsnap_biceps 7mo ago
    Legally the administration claims it's not a war. Publicly they all call it a way. "They have no shame, do they? They don't even bother to lie badly anymore. I suppose that's the final humiliation" - Senator Mon Mothma, Andor
- alex_suzuki 7mo ago
  At least it’s “ahead of schedule”!
  - dessimus 7mo ago
    Is it? Haven't seen POTUS on a carrier flight deck with a "Mission Accomplished" banner yet, so we got at least 15 years of war ahead.
    - alex_suzuki 7mo ago
      https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c24d410m3g4t?post=asset%3A057504ce-1b95-4328-85fd-20689b21f9c8#post https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c24d410m3g4t?post=asset%3A0575...
      - dessimus 7mo ago
        I don't know that I'd trust the words of a President that "starts a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate." https://youtu.be/5KV_nIgg008 https://youtu.be/5KV_nIgg008
- toast0 7mo ago
  I think the country isn't officially at war without an act of congress, but whether a conflict is a war is probably a property of the conflict and not government declarations of the beligerants or the legallity of their participation. Anyway, the Department of Whatever its name is needs money.
- mey 7mo ago
  Unless laws are enforced, the laws don't matter.
- cosmicgadget 7mo ago
  "Bombing campaign" is kinda clumsy. Can we just have a colloquial use of the term that differs from the legal one?
- jfengel 7mo ago
  It's not a war even if Congress approves it. It's still just "an exercise of the War Powers Act", which is not technically the same thing. To actually be a war Congress has to declare war. But they passed the War Powers Act so that they wouldn't have to do that. In theory, the War Powers Act is limited to 60-90 days unless Congress approves funding. Which they may -- a bill to refuse funding failed. Which isn't the same thing, but even if they can't pass the authorization, it's not clear if that actually matters to anybody.
  - goatlover 7mo ago
    A rose by any other name applies here. It is a war regardless of how the US government wants to legally dance around the term.
makeitrain 7mo ago
Should probably ask Congress for permission as well?
- simion314 7mo ago
  Ask Elon Musk, he has an AI that he can use to cut money from the poor ang give it to Trump family and his billionaire pedo friends to continue this war, true genius negotiation this Trump, in fact I can't believe he did not received the Nobel Peace Prize. Seriously what is in MAGA heads now, they voted this guy because they claimed Biden was spending money on wars like helping Ukraine, and now the peace maker, Trump needs a ton of money for his own wars.
sebmellen 7mo ago
“Oceania was at war with Eurasia; therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia” But on a more serious non-political note, what is the end game here? It's not hard to see a future with a barren and destroyed landscape of Middle Eastern energy infrastructure, where neither the Gulf states nor Iran can reliably produce and export their energy due to continual risk. The US can never fully defang Iran, unless it happens internally. And from history, we know that aerial bombing campaigns typically don't reinforce the civilian will for revolution. So now we have a pariah state with a decapitated leadership structure, an array of Gulf states who cannot reliably defend their energy assets, and no will for a global detente because of the thousands of entangled interests that sit in the Gulf region. Either this festers, or escalates, but no party seems to be willing to step down and accept a loss.
- rapsey 7mo ago
  Whatever israel wants.
- calvinmorrison 7mo ago
  that's a huge boon for US dominance actually. Exporting oil for $$$, china having no way to get massive quantities of cheap oil, etc.
  - idiotsecant 7mo ago
    Yes, foreign nation building with murky win conditions and a steadily increasing cost ledger are famously pretty good for US dominance
  - sebmellen 7mo ago
    Russia and the US, from a “market share” standpoint, will be massive benefactors… but the knock-on effects of having a crippled global energy economy will be significant. As much as it may seem like a narrow political win for the US to prevent Chinese access to energy infrastructure, China will continue to electrify. At the same time, the US is still massively dependent on shipping and industrial outputs from China. It's all entangled. As are the interests of most energy companies.
ck2 7mo ago
Actual true cost of Iraq + Afghanistan war was $8 TRILLION https://theintercept.com/2026/03/17/trump-iran-war-cost/ https://theintercept.com/2026/03/17/trump-iran-war-cost/ total spent on war and military from 2002-2021 was $21 TRILLION https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militarization-since-9-11/ https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militariz...
- cosmicgadget 7mo ago
  $421B per year. It is nice to see inflation hasn't hit military campaigns as hard. Or maybe it has since there isn't yet an occupation.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
newobj 7mo ago
Why is this flagged?
- sebmellen 7mo ago
  Probably because it's 'political' news — but I don't think this is political as such. The Pentagon is (or should be) an inherently non-political government agency. @dang curious on your thoughts here though.
  - unsnap_biceps 7mo ago
    It's completely intertwined to current United States politics and, I understand the hypocrisy of this statement as I'm commenting on it, doesn't really bring out meaningful discussions. The same arguments are made by both sides over and over again. I flagged it because, to me, the discussion is better suited somewhere else.
  - tstrimple 7mo ago
    Politics has always been a lame excuse. If there's an article shitting on California's politics, it doesn't get flagged and there is no talk about "no politics on HN". Just tons of "California Bad" posts. If there's an article praising something political in Austin, TX. Same thing. No complaints about politics. Lots of posts about "California Bad". It's almost like the problem isn't politics. But the "politics" a certain segment of HN doesn't like.
mopsi 7mo ago
To put this into perspective, the US provided Ukraine with $64.62bn of military aid and $50.72bn of humanitarian and financial support in the four years between January 2022 and December 2025.
- foogazi 7mo ago
  And that is to hold off an invasion against a nuclear superpower neighbor
  - cosmicgadget 7mo ago
    Whose conventional military was designed to invade Europe. That military is now decimated and the economy behind it is in real trouble.
burnt-resistor 7mo ago
No more wars, America first, and lower prices. /s Defense contractors, apocalypse prophecy crusaders, and Lindsey Graham love it though. It's $200B not going to housing, food, healthcare, elder care, scientific advancement, or infrastructure and it's limited munitions not going to Ukraine to help defeat Putin. "Almost over" but needs 180 days of funding without Congressional authorization for the declaration of war.

81 points by master_crab 7mo ago

JoyBundle 7mo ago

[flagged]

rolph 7mo ago

sophies choice? fund a war, or fund DHS.

basisword 7mo ago

I thought it wasn't a war until congress approves it?

Havoc 7mo ago
Special military operation
- red-iron-pine 7mo ago
  putin is laughing
whatever1 7mo ago
Do we now call it a war? I thought it was an excursion?
- unsnap_biceps 7mo ago
  Legally the administration claims it's not a war. Publicly they all call it a way. "They have no shame, do they? They don't even bother to lie badly anymore. I suppose that's the final humiliation" - Senator Mon Mothma, Andor
alex_suzuki 7mo ago
At least it’s “ahead of schedule”!
- dessimus 7mo ago
  Is it? Haven't seen POTUS on a carrier flight deck with a "Mission Accomplished" banner yet, so we got at least 15 years of war ahead.
  - alex_suzuki 7mo ago
    https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c24d410m3g4t?post=asset%3A057504ce-1b95-4328-85fd-20689b21f9c8#post https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c24d410m3g4t?post=asset%3A0575...
    - dessimus 7mo ago
      I don't know that I'd trust the words of a President that "starts a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate." https://youtu.be/5KV_nIgg008 https://youtu.be/5KV_nIgg008
toast0 7mo ago
I think the country isn't officially at war without an act of congress, but whether a conflict is a war is probably a property of the conflict and not government declarations of the beligerants or the legallity of their participation. Anyway, the Department of Whatever its name is needs money.
mey 7mo ago
Unless laws are enforced, the laws don't matter.
cosmicgadget 7mo ago
"Bombing campaign" is kinda clumsy. Can we just have a colloquial use of the term that differs from the legal one?
jfengel 7mo ago
It's not a war even if Congress approves it. It's still just "an exercise of the War Powers Act", which is not technically the same thing. To actually be a war Congress has to declare war. But they passed the War Powers Act so that they wouldn't have to do that. In theory, the War Powers Act is limited to 60-90 days unless Congress approves funding. Which they may -- a bill to refuse funding failed. Which isn't the same thing, but even if they can't pass the authorization, it's not clear if that actually matters to anybody.
- goatlover 7mo ago
  A rose by any other name applies here. It is a war regardless of how the US government wants to legally dance around the term.

makeitrain 7mo ago

Should probably ask Congress for permission as well?

simion314 7mo ago
Ask Elon Musk, he has an AI that he can use to cut money from the poor ang give it to Trump family and his billionaire pedo friends to continue this war, true genius negotiation this Trump, in fact I can't believe he did not received the Nobel Peace Prize. Seriously what is in MAGA heads now, they voted this guy because they claimed Biden was spending money on wars like helping Ukraine, and now the peace maker, Trump needs a ton of money for his own wars.

sebmellen 7mo ago

“Oceania was at war with Eurasia; therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia” But on a more serious non-political note, what is the end game here? It's not hard to see a future with a barren and destroyed landscape of Middle Eastern energy infrastructure, where neither the Gulf states nor Iran can reliably produce and export their energy due to continual risk. The US can never fully defang Iran, unless it happens internally. And from history, we know that aerial bombing campaigns typically don't reinforce the civilian will for revolution. So now we have a pariah state with a decapitated leadership structure, an array of Gulf states who cannot reliably defend their energy assets, and no will for a global detente because of the thousands of entangled interests that sit in the Gulf region. Either this festers, or escalates, but no party seems to be willing to step down and accept a loss.

rapsey 7mo ago
Whatever israel wants.
calvinmorrison 7mo ago
that's a huge boon for US dominance actually. Exporting oil for $$$, china having no way to get massive quantities of cheap oil, etc.
- idiotsecant 7mo ago
  Yes, foreign nation building with murky win conditions and a steadily increasing cost ledger are famously pretty good for US dominance
- sebmellen 7mo ago
  Russia and the US, from a “market share” standpoint, will be massive benefactors… but the knock-on effects of having a crippled global energy economy will be significant. As much as it may seem like a narrow political win for the US to prevent Chinese access to energy infrastructure, China will continue to electrify. At the same time, the US is still massively dependent on shipping and industrial outputs from China. It's all entangled. As are the interests of most energy companies.

ck2 7mo ago

Actual true cost of Iraq + Afghanistan war was $8 TRILLION https://theintercept.com/2026/03/17/trump-iran-war-cost/ https://theintercept.com/2026/03/17/trump-iran-war-cost/ total spent on war and military from 2002-2021 was $21 TRILLION https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militarization-since-9-11/ https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militariz...

cosmicgadget 7mo ago
$421B per year. It is nice to see inflation hasn't hit military campaigns as hard. Or maybe it has since there isn't yet an occupation.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

newobj 7mo ago

Why is this flagged?

sebmellen 7mo ago
Probably because it's 'political' news — but I don't think this is political as such. The Pentagon is (or should be) an inherently non-political government agency. @dang curious on your thoughts here though.
- unsnap_biceps 7mo ago
  It's completely intertwined to current United States politics and, I understand the hypocrisy of this statement as I'm commenting on it, doesn't really bring out meaningful discussions. The same arguments are made by both sides over and over again. I flagged it because, to me, the discussion is better suited somewhere else.
- tstrimple 7mo ago
  Politics has always been a lame excuse. If there's an article shitting on California's politics, it doesn't get flagged and there is no talk about "no politics on HN". Just tons of "California Bad" posts. If there's an article praising something political in Austin, TX. Same thing. No complaints about politics. Lots of posts about "California Bad". It's almost like the problem isn't politics. But the "politics" a certain segment of HN doesn't like.

mopsi 7mo ago

To put this into perspective, the US provided Ukraine with $64.62bn of military aid and $50.72bn of humanitarian and financial support in the four years between January 2022 and December 2025.

foogazi 7mo ago
And that is to hold off an invasion against a nuclear superpower neighbor
- cosmicgadget 7mo ago
  Whose conventional military was designed to invade Europe. That military is now decimated and the economy behind it is in real trouble.

burnt-resistor 7mo ago

No more wars, America first, and lower prices. /s Defense contractors, apocalypse prophecy crusaders, and Lindsey Graham love it though. It's $200B not going to housing, food, healthcare, elder care, scientific advancement, or infrastructure and it's limited munitions not going to Ukraine to help defeat Putin. "Almost over" but needs 180 days of funding without Congressional authorization for the declaration of war.