Aug 22, 2011 6:43pm

US Military Intervention in Libya Cost At Least $896 Million

ABC News’ Luis Martinez (@LMartinezABC) reports:  The cost of U.S. military intervention in Libya has cost American taxpayers an estimated $896 million through July 31, the Pentagon said today. 

The price tag includes the amounts for daily military operations, munitions used in the operation and humanitarian assistance for the Libyan people.  

The U.S. has also promised $25 million in non-lethal aid to the Libyan Transitional National Council, half of which the Defense Department has already on MRE’s (military lingo for Meals, Ready to Eat).   

The military delivered 120,000 Halal MRE’s to Benghazi in May and a second shipment that included medical supplies, boots, tents, uniforms, and personal protective gear in June. 

While Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi appears on the way out, NATO says flight missions over Tripoli will continue, with the U.S. playing a role in helping to keep a tight window over the area that’s been in effect for weeks. 

Over the past 12 days, U.S. planes have flown 391 sorties for a total of 5,316 since April 1, according to figures provided by the Defense Department.  That total includes 1,210 airstrike missions over the same three and a half month period. The U.S. has also conducted 101 Predator drone strike missions in Libya. 

A U.S. official credited NATO flight cover over the past many months with allowing the Libyan rebels enough time to eventually regroup and begin their pushes.   

One significant offset to the cost of U.S. involvement in the flights worth noting is the sale of military equipment to allies also involved in the cause.  Pentagon officials say the sale of ammunition, replacement parts, fuel, and technical assistance to allies since March has totaled $221.9 million.

User Comments

Did the Pentagon really wait to release that until it was determined NATO won, or is this just one of those amazing coincidences?
Yeah, it must be a coincidence.

Posted by: Oliver Shagnasty | August 22, 2011, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

Thats a good deal for a win. The war in Afghanistan costs 2 billion a week with zero prospect of victory.

Posted by: John | August 22, 2011, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm

I was young, but remember President Eisenhower’s farewell speach warning about the Military-Industrial complex. He was right!

Posted by: Scott | August 22, 2011, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm

They say “estimated 896 million” Darn close to a trillion. Another Obama trillion up in smoke, literally!

Posted by: Mike Hernan | August 22, 2011, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

My mistake…nearly a billion. Still a big waste.

Posted by: Mike Hernan | August 22, 2011, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm

It’s only a billion dollars now, but the humanitarian relief and costs of nation building will be far more. the Libyans will quickly forget that they asked for help and that we gave them help. Libya will spiral into civil war, considering the US legitimated a transitional authority which has no power inside of Libya since they were living abroad. If this sounds familiar, it is because the US did the same thing in legitimating and installing Mr. Chalibi of the Iraqi National Congress in Iraq.

Posted by: toogood2betrue | August 22, 2011, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm

what is america getting,any strategic value, any oil? what about the people in us who need it, charity begins a home? After iraq it was all the countries who did nothing that got the oil.

Posted by: bernard ross | August 22, 2011, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm

oh, and the costs of weapons and ammunition and associated costs with smuggling and transferring weapons to the rebels is “black” money so that won’t be reported by the Pentagon since a different agency would have done that.

Posted by: toogood2betrue | August 22, 2011, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm

Lol, Mike your math needs a little work. 896 million is close to 1 BILLION, not 1 trillion.

Posted by: Tyler | August 22, 2011, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

Gee, no wonder we are in a Depression… God help us if somebody bothers to STOP throwing money and our children’s futures to pursue imagined vendetta’s overseas, with somebody else’s money, and most importantly somebody else’s KIDS!
Can the country survive another 4 years of Bush’s 3rd term!?!

Posted by: IdiocyfromABC | August 22, 2011, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

Yay! We got rid of another dictator! Now we can sit back and watch Libya, Egypt and others take on an even worse political situation. The devil you know…

Posted by: John McCarty | August 22, 2011, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm

How is Obama going to get the next leader out of Libya?

Posted by: marg1 | August 22, 2011, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm

Not bad….less than 1 billion to successfully oust a ruthless dictator. How much did Bush’s wars cost? 5 TRILLION? 5000 times more. I’m glad I voted for Obama!

Posted by: DKD | August 22, 2011, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm

Obamster spends that on golf in a week. I should say, you spend that much on obamsters golf in a week.

Posted by: Fritz | August 22, 2011, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

Maybe present-dent Bumbling Barry Oblamo will use his campaign cash to pay for his illegal war?

Posted by: Darrel | August 22, 2011, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

When the rebel government falls prey to tribal infighting will NATO/US take sides and provide air support to their favorite faction.

Posted by: Will | August 22, 2011, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

Zero American casualties, at a cost of less than $1 billion, K-Daffy looking for a spider hole. Contrast that to the Bush Blunders. Looking for a ‘Mission Accomplished” banner. Word is there’s one out there, barely used.

Posted by: Bill Adkins | August 22, 2011, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

What a bargain. I just saw where a US family with kids was living in their car here in Mt. Dora, Florida, victims of the Obama/Reid/Pelosi economy. But they no doubt are happy they could make the sacrifice to fund the killing of Libyan kids and the installation of a militant Islamic regime more hardline than Gadaffi, and the Obama vacation to Martha’s Vineyard.

Posted by: ObamaIsGodAwful | August 22, 2011, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

A bargain at twice the price for the defeat of the 40 yr rule of a tyrant responsible for murdering about 200 Americans. Plus the kudos of freeing a Muslim country. In perspective, $890 million ain’t that much. It’s about the same as the Chicago public school system deficit. Or one twentieth of Texas’s budget deficit. (Thanks Gov. Perry) Or the same as how much U.S. consumers spent online the Monday following Thanksgiving last year. Not bad, not bad at all.

Posted by: Jonny | August 22, 2011, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm

Obama spends 1 billion dollars to help Islamic extremists take over Libya and any of this is good for the United States? Am I missing something here?

Posted by: abobinmn | August 22, 2011, 8:05 pm 8:05 pm

No fan of of Gadhafi, but it was just stupid, not to mention against us law to try to assassinate him in his family home. H. Chavez is already pulling all his assets out of the US and NATO countries getting ready so he can take the first shot. And we are going to take the high road…
This stupid act has needlessly endangered the US and Europe beyond any ones imagination

Posted by: enough | August 22, 2011, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm

It is a shame when ANY PRESIDENT puts a war overseas as more important than protecting the ongoing invasion within our own country

Posted by: jim bob | August 22, 2011, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm

I find it hard to believe 35,000 sorties cost only 900 million. Theirs always the hidden expenses. And the hidden hidden expenses. Of course theirs the kickback to the Obama re election campaign.

Posted by: MadCharles | August 22, 2011, 8:41 pm 8:41 pm

One significant offset to the cost of U.S. involvement in the flights worth noting is the sale of military equipment to allies also involved in the cause.
===========
How is that an offset? Would they not have made these purchases from us if we weren’t involved?
So has President Obama gone to Congress for authorization for this yet?

Posted by: MayBee | August 22, 2011, 8:41 pm 8:41 pm

Nothing like going into further debt to help build the Caliphate. The baby boomers that control our government really have no idea what they are doing. Or do they?

Posted by: Mike Alright | August 22, 2011, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm

Chinese were getting to comfortable with Libyan oil, and we could not have that, so now we own the place for a measly 896 million. 30,000 chinese were evacuated when we went in, and now are scattered all over Africa. We need the oil in Africa and have enlisted hollywood movie stars like DiCaprio and Cloony to claim humanitarian crisis when we are needing a pipeline instead.

Posted by: Hank Fillups | August 22, 2011, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

Not only will the rebels have to unite in their desire to have a stable govt. but they will not get help from NATO or the USA if they have any Islamofascist parts. The tribes will have revenge. 900 million is not a bad cost…..ifif if the Libyans have a democratic republic with free enterprise as the outcome. If not, Obama will not be able to crow much.

Posted by: Glenn Koons, LB, Ca. | August 22, 2011, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

Wait a minute. We have billions that were confiscated from Khaddafi’s accounts in the US – when we knew that Kahadafi was done – that we will, ultimately, give to the new Libyan government. Why wouldn’t we first deduct the cost of our activity in the Libyan transformation before we return the money. That money will probably just be stolen by the new replacements any way until a – more or less – real government takes over.

Posted by: Gordy | August 22, 2011, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm

That’s the price of rushing into a civil war before knowing who the rebel are, who’s funding and supporting them, where they are getting their weapons, who their leaders are, whether the are socialists, communists or Islamic extremists, and what is their plan is when the revolution is over – what type of government will they install,
We’ll soon find out the answers to these questions, and what we wasted our money on.

Posted by: John C | August 22, 2011, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm

I laugh at the progressives here that are crowing about “Obama’s Victory”. The same destructive anti-war protesters when Bush was in office suddenly become pro-war!…………….However, to declare that there is freedom in Libya is a bit to soon to call. Hopefully, a legitimate fair and peaceful government will assemble. However, the past history in Islamic countries, even those that have a mostly secular leader is not good. Predominantly Muslim countries either want a Strongman or an Islamic leader. Only Turkey has remained freer and even that is due to change. So, you Obama supporters, you can’t call this a success until we can be sure that tribal civil wars breaking out, an Islamic caliphate. If that happens, then Obama’s war, along with NATO will be an abject and dangerous failure for the world.

Posted by: littleleers | August 22, 2011, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm

Why would the right wings laugh at progressives who are for this “war” ? This one was for helping people revolt against their oppressive regime, not about unilaterally calling a change of regime when its people are not for a change of the said regime … a slight nuance that I wish some short minded people would be able to understand.
This is exactly what freedom nations should do, help people [to not being killed] who are toppling a dictatorship rather than invading a country for, supposingly, bringing freedom by force …

Posted by: David | August 22, 2011, 9:12 pm 9:12 pm

Why have we spent almost a billion bucks since March 31st on a non-American issue? Americans are hungry and homeless. Now Obama is going to send $25 million in non-military aid? It is disgraceful that he cares more about people in another country than he does his own people here in America.

Posted by: samwoods | August 22, 2011, 9:24 pm 9:24 pm

Why would the right wings laugh at progressives who are for this “war” ? This one was for helping people revolt against their oppressive regime, not about unilaterally calling a change of regime when its people are not for a change of the said regime … a slight nuance that I wish some short minded people would be able to understand.
This is exactly what freedom nations should do, help people [to not being killed] who are toppling a dictatorship rather than invading a country for, supposingly, bringing freedom by force …
Posted by: David | Aug 22, 2011 9:12:32 PM
Many far right extremists are extremely confused and blinded by fear and hate and other strong emotions that block all reason from penetrating.
A study called Cultures of the Tea Party was presented to the American Sociological Association today. It breaks down the cultural attitudes of Tea Party loyalists. Through an analysis of polling data and interviews with tea partiers, it found that the four primary characteristics most associated with Americans sympathetic to the Tea Party are “Authoritarianism, ontological insecurity (fear of change), libertarianism and nativism (negative attitudes toward immigration and immigrants)– never mind that authoritarianism and libertarianism are in direct conflict. (sheesh!)
The study also found that there are many inconsistencies in their views of the Constitution. (surprise!– not)

Posted by: Kimberly | August 22, 2011, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm

waste of money… are we gonna go to syria too? why just libya. there was some hidden intention in this that doesnt help the american people AT ALL. I want to know what it is all about!!! Sick of American politics and the hypocrisy. It’s a joke and we need to end it. Throw out these hooligan politicians and burn their vacation houses they go to while we the people wait in line for jobs.

Posted by: Phil Bergen | August 22, 2011, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm

This is a bargain then. How much has Failure-in-Chief Bush’s folly in Iraq cost us? Something like 3 Billion a month and there is still no end in sight.
President Obama got Osama bin Laden, got the Samoli terrorists holding the American hostages, and now despots everywhere are falling because of the Obama Doctrine. Thank God for competent leadership again.

Posted by: SFnomad | August 22, 2011, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm

I don’t believe that figure for a minute. Our military can’t be engaged in any area for that price particularly for the months we have been there, let alone flying missions to protect the ships, and firing missiles. It had to run into the billions.

Posted by: Unreal | August 22, 2011, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm

$896 million would have helped a lot of people here in the U.S. Too bad the leaders in D.C. see us as expendable at best and nonexistent at worst.

Posted by: whatever | August 22, 2011, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm

Less than 1 billion dollars and zero U.S. casualties. That’s good.
Irag and Afghanistan cost tax payers over a billion dollars a day.

Posted by: MrUniteUs | August 22, 2011, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm

What’s the USA’s mission in Libya? Personally, I don’t get it. One day Al Qaeda is our enemy and the next day they’re our ally, fighting for freedom in Libya. Isn’t eastern Libya a known hotbed of Al Qaeda terrorism and an “incubator” of Al Qaeda terrorists who went to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight our troops in years past? Yes, I believe that’s who Al Qaeda is. From what I understand, Al Qaeda and democracy don’t mix. So, why are we US taxpayers footing the bill for this? I guess one reason is we had no debate in Congress over whether it made sense to go in there in the first place.

Posted by: Harold | August 22, 2011, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm

The US should at least be able to recover the cost by taking that much in oil profits from Gaddafi.

Posted by: Osama Bin Laden | August 22, 2011, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm

Help al-Quaeda?

Posted by: HW | August 22, 2011, 10:26 pm 10:26 pm

Sorry, I meant SFNOMAD – Google Chrome sucks and can’t load and properly arrange web forms properly. At least not as good as Firefox.

Posted by: Soccer | August 22, 2011, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

Libya’s oil goes to Europe, we get none. We must get out of Nato, bring our troops back for our defense on the Mexican border. That billion spent for Nato could be spent on the border with upgrades on technology for flight surveillance and across the border intelligence, such as (informers)catch them at the start.

Posted by: D Roamer | August 22, 2011, 10:39 pm 10:39 pm

We spent money which we DO NOT HAVE without any Congressional oversight or approval… just more Thrashing of the US Constitution.???
Will obo(zo) blame Bush also?? BTW Congress and most current Democrats gave BUSH the OK to start a war in Iraq…

Posted by: Len | August 22, 2011, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm

The Next Dictator removal is needed for Obamma

Posted by: Texasgene | August 22, 2011, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm

I’m sure the Democrats budgeted for this unlike how they condemned Bush for not budgeting for Iraq. Yeah right.
ANd of course Obama never went to COngress for permission as Bush did.

Posted by: jschmidt | August 22, 2011, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm

CBS News:
“The latest posting by the Treasury Department shows the national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama’s watch. The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $14.639 trillion. It’s the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president. The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. The debt now is rising at a pace to surpass that amount during Mr. Obama’s four-year term.”

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | August 22, 2011, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm

.. and now that the Lybian ” fighters for Freedom and Democracy” have already written aconstitution that promises to follow SHARIA LAW .. and Egypt is turning “loose” the Knuckleheads to bomb Israel…Is Obozo happy??? Will he claim Victory or LIE about the “muslim Spring” as a Victory for freedom???

Posted by: Len | August 22, 2011, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm

Obama is a moron.

Posted by: Gunny G | August 22, 2011, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm

We want a part of the oil for helping get rid of this tyrant!!! Did we make that a part of the agreement? If not? Why not?

Posted by: Chukkal | August 22, 2011, 11:07 pm 11:07 pm

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Aug 22, 2011 10:52:14 PM
What is the origin of each piece of the current debt? If you chart the debt, you’ll find that 43% of it originates from the Bush era and Republican leadership. Still, it’s a problem long term. So, what do you suggest? The implementation of Hooverist/Hayekian economic policies in a sluggish economy? Taking the option of increased revenues off the table completely in direct opposition to S&P’s recommendations? And how do you feel about Republicans supporting a tax hike in direct opposition to their pledges?
Republican opposition to Obama’s proposal for a payroll tax cut extension constitutes support for a tax hike and yet nearly every Republican in Congress has signed Norquist’s and Americans for Tax Reform’s pledges not to raise taxes. Right wingers are big on pledges.
In the not-so-distant past, Norquist himself has referred to the refusal to extend temporary tax cuts as a tax hike and a violation of the pledge.
I say most Republicans are hypocrites, but maybe– maybe– not all.
For example, Henry Bloch — co-founder and chairman emeritus of the tax preparation company H&R Block and a registered Republican — agrees with Warren Buffet and says that “the wealthy have a debt to this country. They can afford to pay it and they should.” He added that the Republican push to protect tax breaks for millionaires in order to promote job creation is “baloney“.

Posted by: Kimberly | August 22, 2011, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm

Posted by: Harold | Aug 22, 2011 10:13:37 PM
You do sound very confused. Let’s clear up some of your confusion. The revolution in Libya began as peaceful public protests, but then large urban crowds were subjected to tank, mortar, artillery, and cluster bomb attacks. After that,the “rebels” armed themselves and the fight began. In both Tunisia and Egypt, the military or office corps refused to open fire on the protestors. Not so in Libya. Deploying the military against non-combatants is a war crime, and the way it was done was also a crime against humanity. The French and the British led the charge on the NATO intervention. There may have been concern a protracted struggle would allow Libya to be radicalized, leaving an opening for al-Qaeda to move in and spread. There likely are extremist elements among the rebel forces but extremist elements make up only a portion of the resistance to Gadhafi.
It seems bizarre to me that some people are comparing the situation in Libya to the war of aggression on Iraq. In this case, the Arab League voted in favor of imposing a No Fly Zone over Libya and that was the trigger that led to everything else. As David Cameron noted, This will be a Libyan-led and Libyan-owned process with broad international support. Unlike the situation in Iraq, the US military footprint is small and the Libyans own the outcome.

Posted by: Kimberly | August 22, 2011, 11:39 pm 11:39 pm

Our troops are stretched thin. Does anyone dispute this? Why divert valuable assets to this engagement?

Posted by: RJ Seevers | August 22, 2011, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm

My, aren’t we lucky that the new “Government” of Libya is going to be sheparded by Sharia “law” and that we spent almost ONE BILLION $ in order for women to be abused, married off as 12 year old girls, stoned on the whim of men of Judges of Sharis “law”, and the general populace to have hands and feet cut off…..or eyes put out. THANK YOU Secretary of State Clinton, President Obama and Obama Advisor Powers-Weinstein for this great move “forward”. This is real progess.

Posted by: Yeeeech | August 22, 2011, 11:52 pm 11:52 pm

So, Obama’s investment in installing Sharia Law in Libya was only a Billion, I wonder at what cost it will be if he is reelected and installs it in the US?

Posted by: Kevin Leddy | August 22, 2011, 11:54 pm 11:54 pm

One Billion spent, who is paying for this? There wasn’t any approval from Congress. After WWI the U.S. forgave debts. After WWII the U.S. forgave debts, sans Finland who paid their debt. Now, the question: if Representatives, who are hired to take care of the taxpayers money, how can they forgive debt? That would be like me borrowing from Susan and loaning to David, then telling Susan, I have forgiven David’s debts. It is immoral, central banking is immoral.
Audit the Federal Reserve. We don’t believe we owe near the amount the central bank has stuck the taxpayers with. 1.2 trillion to bail out their buddies around the world in ’08 and they say, we have been payed back. What proof do they offer? They offer their “word” that they made a few billion on the deal and suffered no loss. Proof? None is forth coming.

Posted by: Gardentoolnumber5 | August 23, 2011, 12:16 am 12:16 am

We’ve merely traded one terrorist for a whole PACK of terrorists.
‘Improvement,’ Obama-style.
And his supporters have been blanketing the internet over the last day, gushing and sneering about Obama ‘scoring another one.’ This shows you what utterly unprincipled people they are, A) openly declaring that ALL they care about with Libya, Egypt, bin Laden, etc is how much it helps Obama politically and B) supporting such things via tactics that they openly disdain under any other circumstance.
But whoops…it appears this thing in Libya is already making fools out of them.
It’s fast becoming a cluster-you-know-what, for both Libya and Obama.

Posted by: Lee | August 23, 2011, 12:19 am 12:19 am

Wait, if its Bush’s fault that the economy is bad and the economy is bad because of Bush’s foreign wars then Escalating inAfghanistan and then adding Libya to the list of foreign wars means that Obama is no better than Bush. What happened to all those promises of change? Sure he pulled troops out of Iraq and then turned right around and added them to Afghanistan. Now we are in Libya too? What has Libya done to us lately? When did congress authorize this illegal war? Does any of this sound familiar? Libs, you sure are gullible. Stalin called your kind “useful idiots”.

Posted by: Historyshowsus | August 23, 2011, 12:23 am 12:23 am

Our cost in Libya is less than one/half of what every single day in Iraq and Afghanistan costs us and we have been involved in Libya for 6 months.

Posted by: CarolO | August 23, 2011, 12:40 am 12:40 am

And…your point, Carolo?
We’re still nearly a billion dollars down from Libya, which was not even a legal war — and for what?
The chaos we see there now…and the chaos that is to come?
How is trading a single terrorist for a pack of terrorists an improvement?
Can you even answer these questions?

Posted by: Lee | August 23, 2011, 12:46 am 12:46 am

When the ‘no fly zone’ was implemented over Libya six months ago, our President involved the US without prior notification to Congress as required by law. His excuse was we were only going to be involved for a few days until NATO took command of the operation. At the end of 90 days he refused to report our involvement to Congress and did not obtain Congressional authority to continue military action as required by law. His excuse then was ‘we were not involved in hostilities’ so the law didn’t apply. How in the world have we managed to spend a Billion Dollars on a military activity that we supposedly are not involved in? Surely our TV Star president didn’t lie to the American People!

Posted by: Old Man | August 23, 2011, 1:43 am 1:43 am

Can I just get one of those MRE’s???
I’m just a hungry american that don’t want to hurt anyone.

Posted by: Slick | August 23, 2011, 1:45 am 1:45 am

Iraq and afghanistan cost 177 million per day. How is $896 million less than half of 177 million? More Obama math LEE?

Posted by: Jmac5280 | August 23, 2011, 1:53 am 1:53 am

Please, break out the “Mission Accomplished” banner.
Gaddaffi is alive and well in Tripoli.

Posted by: Bill | August 23, 2011, 2:03 am 2:03 am

And they are complaining about military pensions. They bomb Libya short fuel prices then their buddies make allot of money.

Posted by: NoMoreMrNiceGuy | August 23, 2011, 2:38 am 2:38 am

Wasn’t this suppose to only take a couple days? Seems like its taken longer. Must just be me. I personally don’t see the strategic significance of taking out a tin-pot dictator after 40 years he took power. Why didn’t we just go after Castro instead? At least he’s in our neighborhood (sans oil of course).
We’re suppose to be out of money too. I guess they can abandon their plans to put the military vets on welfare and food stamps and kick granny under the bus to balance out Social Security.

Posted by: Dr B | August 23, 2011, 2:52 am 2:52 am

Why would a Nobel Peace Prize laureate countenance a (soon-to-be) billion dollar military intervention in Libya? To maintain jobs in America? Those tomahawks have to be replaced. Those MREs have to be put together. If he didn’t know it – or fully appreciate it – before he was elected, BHO would have been informed shortly thereafter that military intervention abroad maintains good-paying jobs back home in the USA.

Posted by: Joseph Durocher | August 23, 2011, 3:28 am 3:28 am

Let’s see:
Kearsarge Amphibious Strike Group:
USS Kearsarge, USS Ponce plus 7 escorts in reinforced escort group!
2,500 Marines!
Bataan ASG:
USS Bataan plus 2 other Amphibs and escorts!
USS Mount Whitney Amphibious Command Ship!
Air Force:
42nd Tactical Fighter Wing: 54 F-15 Eagles and F-15E Strike Eagles!
Unknown number of other Air Units
1 $31,000,000 F-15E most likely hit by AAA and a total loss! Crew incommunicado!
Assorted munitions including Tomahawk Cruise Missiles and weapons given away to the Libyan Rebels!
Most likely Special Forces Teams on the Ground providing Military Advisors!
5-6 Months of continuous operations!
IT JUST DON’T ADD UP!

Posted by: Michael | August 23, 2011, 4:34 am 4:34 am

he did it with congress’s open arms. did he susspend habeus corpeus? not one American boot on the ground lost here. not so with a & a. tsk tsk

Posted by: wendy | August 23, 2011, 4:35 am 4:35 am

Most of what is published in this article is incorrect. Very little accurate information about Libya has been written in the American media.

Posted by: Yes | August 23, 2011, 4:37 am 4:37 am

Oh and for those Frizzhead oops I mean Obama fans out there!
Saddam Hussein was many times worse than Qaddafi yet you claim invading Iraq was a war crime?
Where is the outrage over this then?

Posted by: Michael | August 23, 2011, 4:38 am 4:38 am

Soon we will be hearing on the news how Al Qaeda has taken Egypt and Libya and other countries. Their unrest will never end. Can we then look at the fact that Obama praised these rebels and enabled them? Does that mean he supports rebels. Does that mean our servicemen and women are now to fight just to put Al Qaeda into power. I still feel that down the road the wrong people will be in power. Just like in the USA.

Posted by: samiches4 | August 23, 2011, 4:55 am 4:55 am

How naive are some of these comments. Obama is supporting AL Qaeda and Taliban fighters who, if they ever do take power, will pose more of a threat to the US. The Muslim Brotherhood is already rising to power in Egypt. Sharia law is what the “Libyan REBELS” want to use as their NEW CONSTITUTION! We did this in Afghanistan and look how that turned out.
Democracy??? Don’t make me laugh!

Posted by: tr | August 23, 2011, 6:28 am 6:28 am

1 Billion Dollars and not a peep out of the usual liberal hypocrites.

Posted by: ounceoflogic | August 23, 2011, 6:44 am 6:44 am

Obama could have created 448 part time jobs with that money.

Posted by: mojo | August 23, 2011, 7:12 am 7:12 am

No More Bush wars! Obama inherited everything bad from GW Bush. Poor Obama Bush made him spend all that money in Libya…..Ehh? What’s that? This is Obama’s war that was only supposed to last a couple of days? Why doesn’t the news media tell us the truth anymore?

Posted by: ricardo maxwell | August 23, 2011, 7:13 am 7:13 am

I love all the tea party bashing going on. The anti-American “progressives” must have received the talking points from the American communist party… errr… I mean… Democrat party. The tea party is a philosophy and not really a formally organized party. It consists of Republicans Democrats Independents and others that are sick and tired of the tax and spend culture of Washington and the ever increasing size of intrusive government.

Posted by: ricardo maxwell | August 23, 2011, 7:24 am 7:24 am

This must be a whitewash. The math doesn’t add up at all. The cost of the Libyan conflict has go to be astronomically higher. Probably closer to a 100 billion.

Posted by: Wayne | August 23, 2011, 8:06 am 8:06 am

Wait! Obama will send in more money to rebuild Libya!
Obama has already increased foreign aid by 40%!
Borrowing from China to give to foreigners is insane!

Posted by: dareisay | August 23, 2011, 8:20 am 8:20 am

Where is Code Pink????

Posted by: BPatMan | August 23, 2011, 8:22 am 8:22 am

Don’t worry, as soon as the need comes, the left will focus blame on the right and our troops. They will again openly spit on our troops. My predition is as soon as a Republican takes the white house the communists left will change their tune.

Posted by: chuhyona | August 23, 2011, 8:24 am 8:24 am

Interesting how it was only going to be a few days – now it has been months and over a billion has been spent outside of Congressional approval (The GAO should be calling for heads) – but the hew and cry then was that we were only backign NATO and it was their deal and the Conservatives where tryign to spin it like it was Obama’s invasion – hmmmmm what do we hear from the Dems now – lauding over how Obama got it done. They can’t even keep their lies straight anymore.

Posted by: sgd | August 23, 2011, 8:24 am 8:24 am

Dream on. Oblather sent the US military into Lybia months ago, no way it’s only 1B. Some dweeb is passing on WH BS trying to make people think it didn’t cost that much. Not drinking kool-aid.

Posted by: Nico | August 23, 2011, 8:25 am 8:25 am

So why did he get the Nobel Peace prize again?

Posted by: shugland | August 23, 2011, 8:28 am 8:28 am

posted by: SFnomad….How much has Failure-in-Chief Bush’s folly in Iraq cost us? Something like 3 Billion a month and there is still no end in sight.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0′bammy is to blame for that one!
If YOU can blame Bush, then Bush can claim this billion dollar WASTE too!

Posted by: shugland | August 23, 2011, 8:31 am 8:31 am

Wow.
And to think that the blind partisan sheeple that follow Obama claimed that it was only a couple million. The numbers released completely fly in their face.
Probably won’t see those sheeple around on this blog today.

Posted by: Kate | August 23, 2011, 8:33 am 8:33 am

I saw a comment asking where is code pink.
Good question! Where are they?
They stated their protest was for the war and not partisan.
I think that everyone knows better, especially after this.
Their new name is code hypocrite.

Posted by: Kate | August 23, 2011, 8:35 am 8:35 am

The cost of the war is nothing. Wait till it’s over and we have to borrow more money from China to rebuild the country so that they can install a new government that will hate us.

Posted by: Government=waste | August 23, 2011, 8:42 am 8:42 am

days not weeks huh….starting to look like years if not decades…..where can I get the cost for Obowma’s forth non war in Syria???

Posted by: Lellie | August 23, 2011, 8:45 am 8:45 am

The Obama still has HOPE that it will turn out alright for Him….

Posted by: Jimmie | August 23, 2011, 8:48 am 8:48 am

OMG!!!
How can a war cost nearly a trillion dollars that has only been waged since April without troops being on the ground????
Somebody is being heavily compensated or there is some massive corruption going on at our expense!
Does the buck stop with Obama? Or will he just blame others. I think we all know the answer and it is about as pathetic as it gets.
How many of his blind supporters will give him a free pass over this? I bet almost all. I also bet that those supporters will use the same tired logic of “yeah but Bush….” They are such tools.

Posted by: Angie | August 23, 2011, 8:49 am 8:49 am

If we are intervening, then why is Gadhafi still in power? This is laughable. Again, more money wasted for what? This is none of our business other than to keep the Military Industrial Complex alive and well at the expense of our warrior’s lives. Enough of this nonsense, bring our warriors home.

Posted by: psadie | August 23, 2011, 8:57 am 8:57 am

Seems like business as usual in the U.S. No matter who holds power in Washington we are still at war. We still have troops in Germany and Japan for crying out loud!!!

Posted by: Dan Whorton | August 23, 2011, 9:03 am 9:03 am

Who is Obama going after Shia or Sunni? And Why?

Posted by: Question | August 23, 2011, 9:17 am 9:17 am

BHO, Commander-in-chief, three wars; socialism. November 2012: no more BHO; no more BS!

Posted by: CincinnatusAmericanus | August 23, 2011, 9:21 am 9:21 am

Families homeless and hungry and Obama gives the rebels a billion dollars in backing…WHY?
Still In Iraq and Afganistan, bombing in Yemen and Libya..yet just slaps the hand of Syria and his Iranian counterpart as Iranians Kill american soldiers.. Which countries are Sunni and which are Shia?

Posted by: Question | August 23, 2011, 9:23 am 9:23 am

Oh I don’t mind, just take my VA pensions and my Social Security to pay for this justified war. After all they are instituting Sharia law now in their constitution in the crap hole, men died in WWII for that country.

Posted by: john swanson | August 23, 2011, 9:24 am 9:24 am

That’s TRILLION not billion!

Posted by: JP | August 23, 2011, 9:25 am 9:25 am

NATIONAL DEBT RISES BY $3 MILLION EACH MINUTE…
( insert picture of Obama eating ice cream)

Posted by: Question | August 23, 2011, 9:25 am 9:25 am

Obama sets record: $4,247,000,000,000 debt in just 945 days…
One the extremist left radicals are proud of… it will help destroy America

Posted by: Question | August 23, 2011, 9:29 am 9:29 am

Obama loves getting involved in places that have no bearing on US security …Syria wil be next. I am so glad they gave him the Nobel Peace Prize.

Posted by: Bill | August 23, 2011, 9:43 am 9:43 am

Reading the posts ABC? The people are not happy with the annointed one. Of course you won’t report that, will you?

Posted by: Bob Johnson | August 23, 2011, 9:46 am 9:46 am

If the rebels win,none of this will matter. If they can’t finish the job and can’t take Tripoli Obama will look like a fool.

Posted by: Nephron | August 23, 2011, 9:53 am 9:53 am

It is still better than $2 Billion per week spent in Iraq during the height of crisis. I admire Obama for this strategy. Spending less, no American casualties, involving the masses in change of Libya. People say what is the exit strategy. There is no exit strategy because we are not in it. Nice and simple.

Posted by: chan26 | August 23, 2011, 9:54 am 9:54 am

“U.S. Involvement in Libya Action Would Last ‘Days, Not Weeks” – Barack Obama, March 18, 2011

Posted by: JustAGuy | August 23, 2011, 9:56 am 9:56 am

Please help me understand how our President can spent almost a billion $ on a War that was Not approved by Congress. Does the Law not apply to him? He’s been feeding us a bunch of lies since the beginning of this, “will take weeks, not days…no Americans used in hostile situations”, etc…lies, lies lies. He is either purposefully ignoring our laws or is just dumb. Which is it?

Posted by: Peanut | August 23, 2011, 10:02 am 10:02 am

If the rebels win,none of this will matter. If they can’t finish the job and can’t take Tripoli Obama will look like a fool.
Posted by: Nephron | Aug 23, 2011 9:53:19 AM
I disagree. The rebels want Sharia law. Obama and the media seem to ignore this little tidbit.

Posted by: wheresmymoney | August 23, 2011, 10:02 am 10:02 am

Carter #2. Look at what happened when Carter drove out the Shah of Iran. Boy, that made things better! NOT.

Posted by: wheresmymoney | August 23, 2011, 10:07 am 10:07 am

“At Least …” $900m, eh?
That’s an understatement if I’ve ever heard one. I bet it’s “At Least” twice that figure. Let’s say $2 BILLION+ … minimum. Do the math. Just what does an American Aircraft Carrier Group cost in toto? The hundreds of sorties? The munitions, the troops and sailors, the CIA and Spec Ops on the ground? The munitions?
All that wasted money on a beef that had Ø to do with the United States.
Now, if Europe wants to repay us for protecting the uninterrupted flow of oil to THEM, well wouldn’t THAT be the right thing to do?
Which means it’ll be a cold day in hell.
~(Ä)~

Posted by: Rocketman | August 23, 2011, 10:13 am 10:13 am

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 19% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-four percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -26.
This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama. The previous low was -24 reached yesterday and also in September 2010. Additionally, the level of Strong Approval matches the lowest yet recorded. By way of comparison, President Bush had ratings near the end of his second term in the minus 30s.
Woot! Woot!

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | August 23, 2011, 10:15 am 10:15 am

Maybe some of this money should be used at home to help out our economy?
Go gogle/Yahoo: DailyJobCuts
-

Posted by: Jeff | August 23, 2011, 10:20 am 10:20 am

This cost a Billion Dollars?
That’s alright, they are about to steal over 400 TONS of gold from Libya, that will cover the cost of this and protect JP Morgan who over leveraged Venezuela’s gold and leave change behind for the greedy bastards who started all this.
By the way folks, if you’re confused as to who runs the show, lemme help you.
If a select few banks are “too big to fail” and the United States and the American people are not, who really runs it all?

Posted by: Tommy | August 23, 2011, 10:55 am 10:55 am

“U.S. Involvement in Libya Action Would Last ‘Days, Not Weeks” — Barack Obama, March 18, 2011

Posted by: JustAGuy | August 23, 2011, 10:56 am 10:56 am

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 44% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 38% would choose the Democrat instead. Republicans bounced back to a seven-point lead last week after the gap between the parties had narrowed to just two points following the deal to raise the federal debt ceiling.
Democrats enjoyed a seven-point lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot – 42% to 35% – when Barack Obama took office as president in late January 2009.

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | August 23, 2011, 11:09 am 11:09 am

HHmmmm…. we just spent 1 billion dollars to liberate Al Qaeda…. EXCELLENT !!! I’ll make sure I write my next check to the IRS for DOUBLE the amount requested… BEST NEWS I HAVE HEARD ALL DAY !!!!

Posted by: steve maplewurst | August 23, 2011, 11:15 am 11:15 am

Can’t this guy be put in jail for perjury and misappropriation of funds?

Posted by: Lazarus | August 23, 2011, 11:16 am 11:16 am

This whole so-called “Arab spring” is some kind of a deal with the Saudis and with Iran with “benefits” for certain “globalists”. It is a counter balance to bring Israel to its knees, and to line someone’s pockets. BHO is only an untrained “puppet” in their hands. The Executive branch serves their masters.

Posted by: Gaul | August 23, 2011, 11:26 am 11:26 am

Phew…well, good thing it only took a couple of days NOT MONTHS. Oops! REPULSIVE how The Media™ conveniently forgets any lie that dribbles out of the mouth of Barry/Nancy/Harry/Maxine.
Altho it is quite funny that the only military operation that’s actually succeeding is the one the Vacationer-in-Chief desperately tried to distance himself from.

Posted by: WokeUpAnd | August 23, 2011, 11:31 am 11:31 am

The figures cited in this article sound way low. I think you need to add a few zeros to each.

Posted by: SmallThoughts | August 23, 2011, 11:38 am 11:38 am

So a Billion to blow up a bunch of stuff….maybe a Trillion to put everything back?…no worries the US Tax Payers are good for it

Posted by: Jimmie | August 23, 2011, 11:39 am 11:39 am

Oh that Obama…spending millions to promote democracy around the world…ummm…now who does that remind you of dems….sheezzee……hypocrisy..

Posted by: Parallex View | August 23, 2011, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm

*If you think the US will get a 1 billion discount when we buyoil, THINK AGAIN.

Posted by: a p garcia | August 23, 2011, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm

There’s no purpose to what Obama is doing in Libya. This Marxist is NOT promoting a democracy in the Middle East. He has no game plan at all, which means terrorists will fill the power vacuum when Khadaffi is gone. On second thought, maybe THAT is Obama’s game plan.

Posted by: RLABruce | August 23, 2011, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm

A couple of things. First, in both Tunisia and Egypt, the military or office corps refused to open fire on the protestors. Not so in Libya. Deploying the military against non-combatants is a war crime, and the way it was done was also a crime against humanity. The French and the British led the charge on the NATO intervention. There may have been concern a protracted struggle would allow Libya to be radicalized, leaving an opening for al-Qaeda to move in and spread. There likely are extremist elements among the rebel forces but extremist elements make up only a portion of the resistance to Gadhafi.
Establishing transparent, accountable, and inclusive institutions of governance will be the responsibility of the Transitional National Council (TNC),, and this will be key to determining Libya’s political future.
It seems bizarre to me that some people are comparing the situation in Libya to the war of aggression on Iraq. In this case, the Arab League voted in favor of imposing a No Fly Zone over Libya and that was the trigger that led to everything else. As David Cameron noted, This will be a Libyan-led and Libyan-owned process with broad international support. Unlike the situation in Iraq, the US military footprint is small and the Libyans own the outcome– as they ought.

Posted by: Kimberly | August 23, 2011, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm

Pres Obama should be impeached for violation of the war powers act and perjury. Just saying.
Lie: This is not a war, its ‘kinetic
action’
Lie: This will take days not weeks
Lie: I’m the anti-war president
Lie: We shouldn’t be involved in nation
building
Trust the government, folks… everything is fine… nothing to see here. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of DEAD civilians across the globe at the hands of our dear leaders (Bush/Obama)
Wake up folks!
RON PAUL 2012
Veterans for RON PAUL
Law Enforcement for Ron Paul

Posted by: JL | August 23, 2011, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm

Hope:(you get your govt check in da mail)
Change:(from your house to an apartment)
Yes We Can! (turn your world upside down)
Ha ha ha! SUCKERS!

Posted by: D Cheney | August 23, 2011, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm

But, of course, Obama says aren’t at war because our forces are operating under the auspices of NATO. Yeah, that BS logic also means we weren’t at war in WWII because our forces were part of the Allied Command! The media’s silence on this President’s ACTUAL illegal war (as they couldn’t stop screaming about when it was Bush) is deafening.

Posted by: Aries4 | August 23, 2011, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm

Question for you Kimberly:which “war of aggression in Iraq” are you referring to? Is it the war where Sadaam Hussein invaded Iran or the war where Sadaam Hussein invaded Kuwait? Those are the main wars of aggression in Iraq that I’m aware of.

Posted by: Holly Mackerel | August 23, 2011, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm

Answer for you Holly Mackerel: The invasion of Iraq by the United States was neither in self-defense against armed attack nor sanctioned by a UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force by member states. Therefore it was a war of aggression. To contrast that with Libya, the French and the British led the charge on the NATO intervention; the Arab League voted in favor of imposing a No Fly Zone over Libya and that was the trigger that led to everything else, AND the UN voted in favor of ‘all necessary measures short of an occupation force.’

Posted by: Kimberly | August 23, 2011, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm

Wow, just a Billion Dollars to remove a dictator and install a new theocratic-dictatorship, Sharia-Law country for Al Qaeda to thrive in! Success!!!!

Posted by: Sparky222 | August 23, 2011, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm

Wow, just a Billion Dollars to remove a dictator and install a new theocratic-dictatorship, Sharia-Law country for Al Qaeda to thrive in! Success!!!!

Posted by: Sparky222 | August 23, 2011, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm

I Hope the American Government gets smart and takes the cost of liberating Libia right out of their oil wells, and delivers free Oil to the United States until the bill is opaid in full!

Posted by: Machismo | August 23, 2011, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm

Oh Kimberly, you poor thing. Please look up how many UN resolutions Saddam violated before you dig yourself all the way to China.
Don’t let your hatred for Bush, or your love for Obama distort the real history.
I’m currious. What is your definition of “serious consequences” in the context of W saying it to Saddam? I heard it and KNEW it meant war.

Posted by: Kate | August 23, 2011, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm

I will not sign a bill with out taxes!
Call my bluff!
This will only take a week!
ONE BILLION DOLLARS……The W made me do it!

Posted by: Jake Dunfee | August 23, 2011, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm

$896 million!!! Gee, we are in a major recession with Obama telling us to tighten our belts and he and his cronies see this as a worthy expenditure!! A promise of one week has turned into 6 months and it still is not officially over……….Notice how there are no “bloody” photos, very few “dead people” shown by the MSM (if this had been Bush’s reign….) And WHO are these rebels? I have yet to find any in depth journalism giving us any idea who they are??? What is their education, job situation, religious affiliation, etc.?
And it seems that the U.S. had asked our “ally” (cough, cough) KSA to send weapons to the rebels. Hmmm, did the Saudi’s pay for this out of their oil money or out of the goodness of their hearts? There will be a power vacuum, much like in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood is rearing its ugly head in Egypt, and they are organized enough to do the same in Libya………. Democracy, western style, cannot flourish in Muslim countries, save for Turkey, which of late has become susceptible to radical Islam. This Arab Spring could well turn into an Islamic Radical Spring.

Posted by: littleleers | August 23, 2011, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm

The Republicans are already saying this cost the US 6 Billion when it’s been estimated at 1 Billion for the whole 5 months.
But a simple reminder, this 1 Billion for 5 months is exactly one/half of what it cost to be in Iraq EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Posted by: CarolO | August 23, 2011, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm

Posted by: Kate | Aug 23, 2011 1:57:20 PM
Oh, Kate, your pity is misplaced. Save it for the tea party. They’re so very, very unpopular.
On topic, was there or was there not either an armed attack or a UN Security Council resolution supporting our war on Iraq? There was neither. It was a war of aggression. Most member governments of the United Nations Security Council made clear that after resolution 1441 there still was no authorization for the use of force.
Don’t be afraid of the words. If you supported the war, own it. I did not until we were there, and then I did. Once there, we had to finish what we started, imho I don’t hate Bush but do think he screwed up by not paying for the wars. He also started banging the drums for war- boom, boom doom– long before he warned Iraq of “serious consequences.” I knew Iraq was in Bush’s sites during the 2000 election. I was surprised by 9/11 and the insinuations that Iraq was involved, but not by the war on Iraq. I’m not sorry that Saddam Hussein was taken out — he was one of the most brutal dictators of the 20th century who committed many atrocities and crimes against humanity– but note that under Reagan we did nothing despite the fact that the specifics of the al-Anfal Campaign were no mystery to the Reagan administration. We supported the genocidal Iraqi government over the pro-Soviet theocracy of Iran.
There’s no denial that there are clear differences between the war on Iraq and our involvement with the NATO intervention in Libya. In Libya, the French and the British led the charge on the NATO intervention; the Arab League voted in favor of imposing a No Fly Zone over Libya and that was the trigger that led to everything else, AND the UN voted in favor of ‘all necessary measures short of an occupation force.’ As David Cameron noted, This will be a Libyan-led and Libyan-owned process with broad international support. Unlike the situation in Iraq, the US military footprint is small and the Libyans own the outcome– as they ought.

Posted by: Kimberly | August 23, 2011, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm

But a simple reminder, this 1 Billion for 5 months is exactly one/half of what it cost to be in Iraq EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Posted by: CarolO | Aug 23, 2011 2:34:40 PM
Good reminder. It’s interesting to Chart the Debt and see what Bush’s economic blunders (e.g. not paying for war) did for us. 43% of the debt originates during his presidency.

Posted by: Kimberly | August 23, 2011, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm

A Billion dollars we don’t have, for a cause that is none of our business, approved without consent from congress. An impeachable offense. Wake up America!

Posted by: Craig | August 23, 2011, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm

Jct: Libyan War of Aggression cost a billion? One B1 bomber costs 2 billion! So who’s complaining about spending half a plane to attack a whole nation.

Posted by: KingofthePaupers | August 23, 2011, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm

So Bush’s wars cost this country 2 Trillion to date, and several thosand lives……………..and all Teabaggers can do is cry impeachment because Obama gets the same results fofr 1 billion.
Its obvious Teabaggers dont understand money, they dont know the difference between a million, a billion and a trillion! To them its like 1 to 2 to 3!

Posted by: Libby | August 23, 2011, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm

Wow, only a little less than a billion. It cost us a few trillion to get OBL and now this. I guess the mass-murder machine is getting more efficient.

Posted by: j r | August 23, 2011, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm

Tell this to George W Bush and crooks supported his wars. $6 trillion + 5000 U.S. soldiers live + over a million innocent Iraqis live.

Posted by: David | August 23, 2011, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm

David (who posted right beneath this), Libya isn’t helping Obama. His new Gallup approval level, as of today, AFTER all this whoopla about him being so great for getting rid of Quadaffi (as if he was actually responsible) is DOWN to 38%…his lowest, ever.
Libya has flopped, for Obama…and this isn’t even counting the coming chaos, over there.

Posted by: Lee | August 23, 2011, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm

This is just a smal amount to pay for all the oil AND water coming in the future. Dont forget NATO Nazis are in this together and all of them will hold their hands open.

Posted by: Mone | August 24, 2011, 7:00 am 7:00 am

$896 Million isn’t much money to help AlQeada and the Libyan people get control of their country. Then again, when it becomes another safe place for muslim extremist terrorists it will seem like a lot of money.
(sigh)

Posted by: Noz | August 24, 2011, 8:51 am 8:51 am

this problem belongs in no one person’s, or party’s hands. this is the result of a foreign policy that has persisted for decades in this country, regardless of who has been in office. military interventions are how this country operates and spreads its influence. for good, or for bad – mostly for bad.

Posted by: openmind | August 24, 2011, 5:07 pm 5:07 pm

We are supplementing big oil at tax payer expense. This not about freedom of the people. It is about Big Oil securing their stake in the Middle East.

Posted by: Rob | August 26, 2011, 10:45 am 10:45 am