EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Price of 9/11
NEW YORK – The September 11, 2001, terror attacks by Al Qaeda were meant to harm the United States, and they did, but in ways that Osama bin Laden probably never imagined. President George W. Bush’s response to the attacks compromised America’s basic principles, undermined its economy, and weakened its security.![]()
The attack on Afghanistan that followed the 9/11 attacks was understandable, but the subsequent invasion of Iraq was entirely unconnected to Al Qaeda – as much as Bush tried to establish a link. That war of choice quickly became very expensive – orders of magnitude beyond the $60 billion claimed at the beginning – as colossal incompetence met dishonest misrepresentation.
Indeed, when Linda Bilmes and I calculated America’s war costs three years ago, the conservative tally was $3-5 trillion. Since then, the costs have mounted further. With almost 50% of returning troops eligible to receive some level of disability payment, and more than 600,000 treated so far in veterans’ medical facilities, we now estimate that future disability payments and health-care costs will total $600-900 billion. But the social costs, reflected in veteran suicides (which have topped 18 per day in recent years) and family breakups, are incalculable.
Even if Bush could be forgiven for taking America, and much of the rest of the world, to war on false pretenses, and for misrepresenting the cost of the venture, there is no excuse for how he chose to finance it. His was the first war in history paid for entirely on credit. As America went into battle, with deficits already soaring from his 2001 tax cut, Bush decided to plunge ahead with yet another round of tax “relief” for the wealthy.
Today, America is focused on unemployment and the deficit. Both threats to America’s future can, in no small measure, be traced to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Increased defense spending, together with the Bush tax cuts, is a key reason why America went from a fiscal surplus of 2% of GDP when Bush was elected to its parlous deficit and debt position today. Direct government spending on those wars so far amounts to roughly $2 trillion – $17,000 for every US household – with bills yet to be received increasing this amount by more than 50%.
Moreover, as Bilmes and I argued in our book The Three Trillion Dollar War, the wars contributed to America’s macroeconomic weaknesses, which exacerbated its deficits and debt burden. Then, as now, disruption in the Middle East led to higher oil prices, forcing Americans to spend money on oil imports that they otherwise could have spent buying goods produced in the US.
But then the US Federal Reserve hid these weaknesses by engineering a housing bubble that led to a consumption boom. It will take years to overcome the excessive indebtedness and real-estate overhang that resulted.
Ironically, the wars have undermined America’s (and the world’s) security, again in ways that Bin Laden could not have imagined. An unpopular war would have made military recruitment difficult in any circumstances. But, as Bush tried to deceive America about the wars’ costs, he underfunded the troops, refusing even basic expenditures – say, for armored and mine-resistant vehicles needed to protect American lives, or for adequate health care for returning veterans. A US court recently ruled that veterans’ rights have been violated. (Remarkably, the Obama administration claims that veterans’ right to appeal to the courts should be restricted!)
Military overreach has predictably led to nervousness about using military power, and others’ knowledge of this threatens to weaken America’s security as well. But America’s real strength, more than its military and economic power, is its “soft power,” its moral authority. And this, too, was weakened: as the US violated basic human rights like habeas corpus and the right not to be tortured, its longstanding commitment to international law was called into question.
In Afghanistan and Iraq, the US and its allies knew that long-term victory required winning hearts and minds. But mistakes in the early years of those wars complicated that already-difficult battle. The wars’ collateral damage has been massive: by some accounts, more than a million Iraqis have died, directly or indirectly, because of the war. According to some studies, at least 137,000 civilians have died violently in Afghanistan and Iraq in the last ten years; among Iraqis alone, there are 1.8 million refugees and 1.7 million internally displaced people.
Not all of the consequences were disastrous. The deficits to which America’s debt-funded wars contributed so mightily are now forcing the US to face the reality of budget constraints. America’s military spending still nearly equals that of the rest of the world combined, two decades after the end of the Cold War. Some of the increased expenditures went to the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the broader Global War on Terrorism, but much of it was wasted on weapons that don’t work against enemies that don’t exist. Now, at last, those resources are likely to be redeployed, and the US will likely get more security by paying less.
Al Qaeda, while not conquered, no longer appears to be the threat that loomed so large in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. But the price paid in getting to this point, in the US and elsewhere, has been enormous – and mostly avoidable. The legacy will be with us for a long time. It pays to think before acting.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


83 Comments so far
Show AllThe surveillance, inside the US, according to whistleblowers, also started long before 9/11, and shortly after the Bush Administration came into office. But no, we are NOT to question why!
Also, the Bush Administration, never had a single meeting of "the principles", e.g., heads of the CIA, FBI, NSA, State Dept, etc, in the months prior to 9/11. Was that so, there was deniability in place, while some in those agencies, used the full power of NSA's newly buttressed domestic surveillance system to track would be hijackers while a plan was hatched to dovetail a red flag event?
But don't ask those questions either, because even on CD, you will be lashed and quartered, for not holding up 9/11 Orthodoxy.
I've yet to hear such a reference to such group think intransigence, relative to such refusal to look at or recognize, the vast body of evidence that counters the official narrative, but it fits quite well. Anyone is welcome to use it.
the USer reliance on ruse to justify war makes me wonder: were there actually any ex-colonists press-ganged into her majesty's navy?
Our university professor Stiglitz wrote:
"The attack on Afghanistan that followed the 9/11 attacks was understandable..."
Was it?
Don't other nations, when struck by terrorist acts, consider such acts to be crimes whose perpetrators must be sought by the methods of the police, apprehended and tried by the courts of the State, not by special military tribunals? In other words, don't other nations consider terrorist acts as crimes, to be dealt with by the police, not acts of war, to be prosecuted by the military?
After the terrorist attacks of 2008 in Mumbai, the United States ran over to India to beg the Indian authorities not to treat the attacks as acts of war, which would have started a war with Pakistan, since, according to the Indians, a Pakistani group had orchestrated them.
In the eyes of the United States, it is only acceptable (and, apparently, understandable, according to our university professor) for the U.S. (and, of course, Israel) to treat a terrorist act as an act of war, but not for another country to do so.
Why is that?
"The September 11, 2001, terror attacks by Al Qaeda were meant to harm the United States, and they did, "
How do you know it was Al Qaeda.???? A broad assumption... I know the government said so, but the government also said if Vietnam fell to the communists, all the other countries around it would...
Do you mean to tell me a rat tag loose group with no access and only box cutters committed this crime??.. Come on!!.... Although I have no theories of my own, but that story is for 7 yr olds..
It is a certainty that the two towers of the World Trade Center were BLOWN UP with explosives. Also, of course, so was WTC7.
It is impossible to rationally believe anything else.
Anyone who still believes they were NOT blown up with explosives is- to be kind- mistaken.
Or maybe just not paying attention. But in that case, there is really no excuse for such lack of education and ignorance. The evidence is before our eyes, and easy to locate and view.
Start with the raw high-quality videos of the exploding buildings.
That's about all a person needs to see.
The answers have been hidden in plain sight.
The WTC towers were blown up with high-tech American weapons and demolitions. That could not have been done by anyone in the airplanes.
9/11 was not just an horrendous crime, but treason.
It was done by traitors in the highest places of government and the military within our own country.
And THAT is what Americans refuse to believe or face, despite the overwhelming evidence.
This falsely-premised article enables and defends that treason. I hope that is not your intention. But you are part of the problem, not part of a solution, as long as you continue to repeat the al Qaeda fairy tale.
The attack on New York 10 years ago was the biggest crime in our history. Yet, today, ten years later, he only Americans who truly wish to see it solved are ridiculed and shunned and laughed at as "conspiracy nuts".
But what is TRULY nutty is to believe a building is falling down when it is going UP, and thousands of tons of concrete are being disintegrated into dust in mid-air before your eyes- many eyes. Millions of eyes.
But people say, against all reason, "It can't be an explosives! It just can't be! How could it be?"
But it WAS.. That is what matters, not what it COULD be, or MIGHT be, or COULDN'T be, but what it WAS, and what it IS.
It was an inside job using demolition explosives and most likely also military ordnance (bombs, missiles, or both), all made in the U.S.A,. and owned by the United States government.
The OTHER Price of 9/11 IS MUCH GREATER and more damaging.
Every nation has it's share of goons, reprobates, psychopaths and authoritarian types just waiting for an opportunity to come out from under their rocks and prey and oppress the rest of the nation.
9/11 gave the fascist fucks that opportunity. I say 9/11 occurred deliberately just to give them that opportunity but that's another subject.
The point is that the putrid, human decency destroying, fascist price of 9/11 is upon us and will destroy us far more effectively than a monetary price will.
This is a clumsy article by Stiglitz, as people have noted, although he likely got the numbers correct on the cost of the wars.
From what I understand, Osama bin Laden predicted that Dubya would go oppressive, both at home and abroad via imperial wars. He thought it would cause the U.S. public to lash out against U.S. policies, while increasing Al Qaida recruits.
Posted by Siouxrose
Sep 5 2011 - 3:42pm
“This type of thought process ten years after is obscene. As is the focus on financial costs taking priority over all the unjustified dead!”
One of many spot on, appreciated remarks you and Elizabeth H have made recently in your comments to CD posted articles. However, as to your particular dialogues with other commenter’s; ‘your bedside manner’ could use some improvement. Especially when you are in you ‘school marm’ mode.
“When a "new" name shows up and tries to sound intellectually astute, but can't spell, I am suspicious of the post and the poster.” With good reason…. Hmmm- like?
Your hang up on spelling priority over what is being said in an opinion post is your problem and from that quirk –even worse, it gives cause for presumption for you to judge and be suspicious of both the post and poster. That is ‘Red Queen stuff”” OFF with their heads!
I rarely post anymore because I find the regulars of the select mutual admiration society“ who post here the most, and whose general reputations are known and who opinions we can trust in” monopolize the quantity of postings that end up being posted so it is hardly worth the effort. Perhaps others of “new name’ posters who have an opinion to express could save their time if you had a list of qualities they must have to submit-
Must be a good speller, typist and have your post edited for typos, grammar before submission. If the requirement is met then, by means of a further system of judgment by the mutual admiration society, unworthy articles could be given a quick run-down of their merits/lack of, and would require less valuable time and effort debunking-giving more time to pat each other on the back.
You may question the motive behind my remarks; but I assure you they are not an insidious way to cause disrespect to you and your group but to highlight a condition that is obvious to many besides me.
PAY: The spelling mistakes do offend me, and I don't always point them out. It's also hardly my imagination, that many people change their screen names (some have the decency to mention this, others do not), so the premise of a "new name" is often a camouflage. If someone responds to my post, and if they raise ideas they cannot spell, I think that does deserve to be called to the mat. We all, myself included, make typos, and quite a few people here miss the boat on the it's versus its issue, even there versus their... I am a former English teacher, and I think there is something to be said for respecting a standard!
The sun and Venus are both now in Virgo, a Mercury-based sign that relates to both language and perfection-seeking. I am also in the process of doing a very tedious line by line edit of galleys to a 400 page book. If our greatest treasure is time, and the finite span of mortal hours we've been given, and if I can use mine (at least 6 today) to correct my own work, why should I (or anyone else) expect less of those who post here?
Like I said, the typo here or there is one thing... if you were driving all over the road, would someone not have the right to call you on that? This is the information highway, so the metaphor applies. What happens to a society where there are NO standards? Sorry. I don't care if a few people see me as "The Spelling Nazi," the issue is valid. And I hold myself back from playing editor to others' mistakes more times than I call posters to "the mat." It's EXCRUCIATING to read the lousy grammar, and spelling errors of people that ought to know better. Generally if one reads books, or even the articles posted each day on CD, their language skills should improve.
Have a good night.
Sioux Rose.
I think many people like pay, mistake constructive criticism for perjorative criticism. My Father was a writer and was always correcting my English, but I always welcomed it and when I started college I really appreciated it. And I am sure if he were still alive today, he would still be doing it!
Having said that, I prefer intelligent, political dialogue to proper syntax, but it is better if one, like you, can post both.
Paul
Ok, I think all the comments posted so far are either mildly disappointed by this article or downright hostile. I liked the article and I am most bored by playing the lone straight man in this vignette. The extreme far left has so overwhelmed CD that reality and that which is possible are simply overlooked by an ever greater percentage of posters.
This article is an attempt to railroad the left with rationality and reasonableness. Railroad the whole damn planet with it. Think railroad, and robber barons.
VO: "In the end, the war had its valid proponents and opponents, but was it actually any good for your investment portfolio/for the deficit?"
It is shocking you glance over the first paragraph and entirely approve the invasion. Is it for the sake of the "Labor"???,!!!
Mr Stiglitz, if in your opinion it is fine for us to attack, bomb, and kill Afghans, then you may as well put your photo next to Pinochet, Hitler, Rumsfied, Stalin and the like.
Moreover, your rhetoric gives justification to everyone elese to attack everyone else. Why didn't we invade India over nukes. Or Pakis for that matter(nukes again)? Shouldn't we go after Saudis for providing all the pilots of 9 eleven?
Accepting invasion of a foreign, independent country, that has done no harm to us may seem fine to you. More so if your tax $ has paid for that country army, government, guerilla, as well as infrastructure. You may want return on your investment.. Good luck. Read some history chapters about that part of the world (and don't dare to call it Afghanistan, for it is not). Go back to Babylon or Roman Empire.
Locals never cared for gas or your pipelines. All they wanted was the infidels out. Apparently they still do.
Pity on ppl who don't read or understand history.
On a second thought, Mr Stiglitz, OBL is probably the most content man in the world having won his war. Dead or alive he has wrecked our country, our way of life, our security, our economy. Was it him, or his CIA handlers, or Red Soviet Revenge, or some muslim fanatics we will never know, will we now?
""NEW YORK – The September 11, 2001, terror attacks by Al Qaeda were meant to harm the United States, and they did, but in ways that Osama bin Laden probably never imagined.""
*******************************************
What a crock. Highly demonstrates the timidity of even trying to talk about the fact that the attack on 9/11/01 was a false flag home grown terrorist attack against our country and the planners, plotters and perpetrators are still all walking around in this country free. The attack is still in process because of the intimidation factor of losing respect and credibility by speaking out publicly and denouncing the attack as our own citizens being the actual terrorists.
Then explain just WHO could have accessed both towers and rigged them for EXPLOSIVE demolition and wtc for the classic IMPLOSIVE demolition. WHO REALLY SET THOSE BUILDING FOR DEMOLITION? Or better how were members of a dubious ghost terrorist group(that probably never has existed) able to access the building and set them for demolition? And using an ordinance privy to only the military called thermite? That is not farcical, that is not fantasy. It is what the evidence shows.
And if the author would just acknowledge that he cannot write or speak the truth at least he should say 'that due to current pressure I cannot speak of the attack on 9/01/01 from fear of being harassed' for doing so. Or just say he won't speak of the truth of the attacks as it will cause me harm to my reputation as a reporter.
But still with the 'terror attacks by al qaeda'. If that is all he can say then it is better to just say nothing. This whole article is why I will never stop viewing the documentary videos of the attacks. Why I won't ever stop wonder or hoping the fbi will release all the confiscated security tapes showing the pentagon being hit with WHAT? Even the small video clip that is out shows that what hit was absolutely NOTHING the size of the commercial air liner that is purported to have hit the pentagon.
Joseph E. Stiglitz says:
"The deficits to which America’s debt-funded wars contributed so mightily are now forcing the US to face the reality of budget constraints."
--------------------
No comment at all here about who is evasively being SET-UP by the coming so-called "Super Congress" to PAY FOR this deliberate, intentional, theft, fraud and outright deception via the abolition of the social safety net?
Knock. Knock. HELLO!! HELLO!! Anybody home?
The question is not who won... but who lost.
Are you better off that you were ten years ago? Less secure or more secure.
My sense is the strategy was to have the US oppress itself via an allergic response to itself. It is Our Actions which have defeated us. Sheeple now take off their shoes and remove their belt to pay a traffic ticket. Miss USA frisked to tears flying home. Bye Bye fourth amendment.
Oh, and from surplus to profound debt and deficit. War creates big holes.
History shows that war is debt. Sun Tzu says a long war is a disaster, whomsoever 'wins'.
My conclusion: We are worse off. My question: When are we going to change our direction for, as the saying goes... If we don't change direction, we are bound to end up where we are headed.
Examination of cancer patients among the firefighters, police and other workers involved in the cleaning up at the Twin Tower site after 911 reveal chemical and other contaminations that could not possibly come from the exploding aircraft or the building materials of said towers. They could only come from some high-tech explosive devices used by Pentagon and CIA in covert operations. In other words 911 was an inside job conducted by the US Government, aka the Pentagon or the CIA.
The hurriedly removed steel debris from the site and other measures to jeopardised the forensic investigative work at the site could only do so much. We cannot count on Bush the Third (Barack Obama) to make any "change" to ongoing policy of the US to hide the true nature of 911. All we can do is to keep the story alive and hope that someday in the future truth will emerge after a thoroughly cleasing of our system in a revolution. God Bless Us all
Siouxrose
Thank you for you for the further comments. I appreciate the time taken from you harried scheduled to do so. Your position of ‘there is something to be said for respecting a standard’ is never in question, especially as regards resume’s, essays, and stories and in your realm manuscripts submitted for publication. I too was a teacher of the English language for years; language arts with elementary kids, whole language development with early childhood kids. And then later in over seas countries EFL and ESL to adolescents and adults. From start to finish the message was for students to express themselves both in writing and speaking. Oh so often it was EXCRUCIATING to witnesses teachers with red line pens destroying attempts at the authors writing or spoken language teachers of the ‘grammar first school’ embarrassing struggling student’s attempts of expressing themselves with grammar interruptions in a language other than their own. This is a whole other issue which I prefer to put off at this time.
My ‘beef’ is your tone of taking issues and people to the ‘mat’- that can’t spell and your judgment that makes you “suspicious of the post and the poster.” The point of the comment section at CD is to not only read what the elite members who inhabit the site have to say but hopefully join in the discussion. For many to even attempt such an endeavor is a risk, considering the attitude of some here,and I feel the opinion of outsiders should be encouaged honored. There are ways to correct and point out all sorts of ‘mistakes’ other than taking them to the mat!
I do not join with those who see you as "The Spelling Nazi," but rather as the ‘Red Queen’ with the quick “OFF with their heads” tone and whose own well writen works I mostly enjoy, respect and appreciate. Good evening to you too..
How, I wonder, did those terrorists make World Trade Center Building 7 fall? (take a look, ae911truth.org)
And didn't it look weird when the Twin Towers came down, too fast and too symmetrically?
Take note: the government reports did not include all the information. Knowing what really happened is essential to the health of our national narrative.
Look at the evidence for yourself, as presented by credentialed architects and engineers who dispute the official government reports: ae911truth.org
We need honesty. The way to peace is back through 9/11.
"...but in ways that Osama bin Laden probably never imagined. "
Given that ObL has not even been accused by the FBI--due to lack of evidence--of the crime, he certainly imagined nothing of the kind.
some lies, like this piece, are so large they required Manifest Destiny to create enough room for them...
shore to shore, crossing both the Rockies and the Mississippi, some lies...
why do men like this get to lie, lie, lie? does no one ever call them a liar?
I will: you are a liar, Stiglitz...a warmonger...
are they talking to children not born as of 911, so don't feel they'll be caught in their lies?
doesn't this make you really suspicious of all the things you've been taught?of those you are told you should hold in authority?
it should...
Oh, how is it that I could come out to you,
And be still floatin',
And never hit bottom but keep falling through,
Just relaxed and paying attention?
All my two-dimensional boundaries were gone,
I had lost to them badly,
I saw that world crumble and thought I was dead,
But I found my senses still working.
And as I continued to drop through the hole,
I found all surrounding,
To show me that joy innocently is,
Just be quiet and feel it around you.
And I opened my heart to the whole universe,
And I found it was loving,
And I saw the great blunder my teachers had made,
Scientific delirium madness.
I will keep falling as long as I live,
Ah, without ending,
And I will remember the place that is now,
That has ended before the beginning ...
Oh, how is it that I could come out to you,
And be still floatin',
And never hit bottom but keep falling through,
Just relaxed and paying attention?
5D by the Byrds
For the most credible, short, video of the 9/11 ruse, this is the one to share.
After sending this out, we have had several of our right wing friends who wanted to know more.
http://youtu.be/hZEvA8BCoBw
There is a pattern on this website.
Someone writes, and CD posts, an article highly critical of some action or position of the US government or its allies.
Several people respond with denunciations of the article's author, not for disloyalty to the government but for failing to criticize what the responders believe should be criticized, or for criticizing the right thing for the wrong reason, or on the wrong predicate facts, or in some other way failing to express the responder's particular, nuanced, uniquely correct position.
In this way would could have been developed as further contribution to an increasingly potent common front is instead turned into a wedge, further dividing into smaller and smaller factions the as yet not exactly overwhelming numbers of those who, broadly speaking, are opposed to what the US government is doing at home and abroad.
In my youth such responders would have been suspected of being agents provocateurs.
Perhaps on CD they are rather simply misguided.
Hector- The point many are bringing up is that Stiglitz is a: LIAR. He perpetuates the lie, perpetuates the myth that the USA is Exceptional, that it does not need to tell the truth, that the oligarchy is not using lies to convince the potent common front to doubt themselves. In my youth, and my right now, we recognized those people as actors and agents of the state. If the truth is a wedge, what are you dividing?
Hector’s comments are spot on and yours actually made his point. You shouted and called the author a LIAR. How can Stiglitz listen to you any further? But Hector’s approach to disagreement (look at his very last words) is to treat heartfelt difference of opinion as “simply misguided”. Without hostility a dialogue might continue. But you slammed the door. (Plus, if it turns out the “misguided” saw something we didn’t, there’s less crow to eat.)
Earlier, on this very article, I went off topic (rare for me) and posted a comment about the total absence of anti-religion articles on CD (in-depth treatments). After all, what tyranny has ever existed without the support of priestcrafters? Immediately two posters teed off on me without even considering the merits of my statement. Interestingly, you also posted but did not attack. (Thank you, by the way.)
(Because you were nice in that post, I did you the courtesy of googling that book you recommended. Well, I think the author of it is a user, pandering to egocentricity with a few valid observations used quite spuriously. But if I talked with him, I would tell him he is misguided. Then I would try to get him to understand that different does not mean inferior.)
deleted