# Libya too?! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 16, 2011, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595 "2011-02-16T16:37:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 46
**Author:** ![Commissar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c68b51/32.png) [@Commissar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Commissar)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/901 "2011-03-23T07:28:23Z")
It appears that the US has now launched over 160 cruise missiles against Libya; each one of them costs at least $1,000,000. Furthermore, it has been estimated that the weekly cost of the no-fly zone will be upwards of $300,000,000. [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-role-in-Libya-costs-millions-and-could-rise/articleshow/7769706.cms](http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-role-in-Libya-costs-millions-and-could-rise/articleshow/7769706.cms) It’s a good thing that the US government is operating on such an enormous budget surplus and has a treasury bursting with untold billions of dollars just begging to be spent. It would have been difficult to justify this ridiculously expensive military adventure otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/902 "2011-03-23T08:14:29Z")
Readers should note that these economic figures come from the Times of India,[the same paper that claimed it cost 200 million, _per day_, for Obama’s to visit Mumbai.](http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-to-spend-200m-a-day-on-Obamas-Mumbai-visit/articleshow/6862467.cms) A report that[the Pentagon (among others) dismissed as absolutely absurd and comical.](http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/11/pentagon-dismisses-reports-of-34-warships-for-obama-trip-security.html) Which isn’t to say that Commissar’s new-found concern over the health of America’s capitalistic economy isn’t touching, but let’s take stock of the facts first. The Tactical Tomahawk, for example, does not cost 1 to 1.5 million, but [roughly 3/4 to 1/2 of that.](http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/fy06-order-346m-for-473-tactical-tomahawk-block-iv-cruise-missiles-02027/) Just to point out one factual error that the Times of India got wildly wrong. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/903 "2011-03-23T08:24:43Z")
In after the edit: even if we assume that the US is using its most recently purchased cruise missile stock, [it got those for about 1.06 mil each, far short of the 1.5 mil claim.](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2010/12/dod-contracts_4431.htm) And while that’s undoubtedly a lot of money, cleaving to the basic facts obviously aids such discussions. ---
**Author:** ![DWMarch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dwmarch/32/1010_2.png) [@DWMarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DWMarch)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/904 "2011-03-23T08:24:52Z")
> [@Commissar](#): > > It appears that the US has now launched over 160 cruise missiles against Libya; each one of them costs at least $1,000,000. The missiles are already paid for. It’s not like 160 million was taken out of current revenues to support the mission. Those missiles were sitting on ships either waiting to be fired or taken out of service at the end of their useful lifetime. In any case, they were bought and paid for a long time ago. So what is more wasteful- buying $160 million worth of missiles and letting them rot in storage or buying $160 million dollars worth of missiles and dumping them on whom it may concern? It’s not like the Navy can turn around and re-sell them to someone else to get their money back. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/905 "2011-03-23T10:05:22Z")
And, as far as I can tell, only the very first wave was new-generation Tomahawks. Rest of it is old stock, due to be replaced with new stock. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/906 "2011-03-23T10:22:31Z")
Well, even if the missiles were a billion bucks each, I guess we’re dealing with the type of communism that’s intensely concerned with the bottom line and not so much with all that ‘international brotherhood’ stuff. ---
**Author:** ![WreckingCrew](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wreckingcrew/32/4080_2.png) [@WreckingCrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WreckingCrew)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/907 "2011-03-23T12:39:42Z")
> [@Commissar](#): > > It appears that the US has now launched over 160 cruise missiles against Libya; each one of them costs at least $1,000,000. Furthermore, it has been estimated that the weekly cost of the no-fly zone will be upwards of $300,000,000. > > [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-role-in-Libya-costs-millions-and-could-rise/articleshow/7769706.cms](http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-role-in-Libya-costs-millions-and-could-rise/articleshow/7769706.cms) > > It’s a good thing that the US government is operating on such an enormous budget surplus and has a treasury bursting with untold billions of dollars just begging to be spent. It would have been difficult to justify this ridiculously expensive military adventure otherwise. No problem, when they foreclose, the PRC will be paying for it all in the end. Thanks bro! ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/908 "2011-03-23T14:54:53Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Well, even if the missiles were a billion bucks each, I guess we’re dealing with the type of communism that’s intensely concerned with the bottom line and not so much with all that ‘international brotherhood’ stuff. I’d still consider it tax dollars well spent, too. ---
**Author:** ![Commissar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c68b51/32.png) [@Commissar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Commissar)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/909 "2011-03-23T16:34:55Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Readers should note that these economic figures come from the Times of India,[the same paper that claimed it cost 200 million, _per day_, for Obama’s to visit Mumbai.](http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-to-spend-200m-a-day-on-Obamas-Mumbai-visit/articleshow/6862467.cms) A report that[the Pentagon (among others) dismissed as absolutely absurd and comical.](http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/11/pentagon-dismisses-reports-of-34-warships-for-obama-trip-security.html) > Which isn’t to say that Commissar’s new-found concern over the health of America’s capitalistic economy isn’t touching, but let’s take stock of the facts first. > > The Tactical Tomahawk, for example, does not cost 1 to 1.5 million, but [roughly 3/4 to 1/2 of that.](http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/fy06-order-346m-for-473-tactical-tomahawk-block-iv-cruise-missiles-02027/) Just to point out one factual error that the Times of India got wildly wrong. Had you paid attention, you would have understood that the Times of India was reporting Associated Press numbers, so you’re barking up the wrong tree. Here’s a different link, with the same numbers: [http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US\_US\_LIBYA\_COSTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-23-03-16-14](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_COSTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-23-03-16-14) Would you like to argue that the venerable AP is an untrustworthy hack organization now? > [@DWMarch](#): > > The missiles are already paid for. It’s not like 160 million was taken out of current revenues to support the mission. Those missiles were sitting on ships either waiting to be fired or taken out of service at the end of their useful lifetime. In any case, they were bought and paid for a long time ago. So what is more wasteful- buying $160 million worth of missiles and letting them rot in storage or buying $160 million dollars worth of missiles and dumping them on whom it may concern? It’s not like the Navy can turn around and re-sell them to someone else to get their money back. That is not a persuasive argument. Using a one-time-use tool means that you must either replace it or do without in the future. Do you really believe that the US armed forces will throw up their hands and exclaim, “Well, blew threw our stock of cruise missiles there, uh-yuk! Guess we’ve gotta go back to throwing rocks at our enemies.” I rather doubt that. This is a nation run by warhawks, and you can be sure that Obama and his ilk (or any Republican replacements) will be falling over themselves in an attempt to replace all the munition squandered by its military. As a peddler of death, the US cannot afford to put down its scythe. Oh, and cruise missiles are not a dairy product. They do not go back next week if you do not use them right this minute. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/910 "2011-03-23T16:44:49Z")
Readers will note that, for instance, the Times of India claims that a no fly zone will cost between one and three hundred million per week. The AP, between thirty and one hundred. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/911 "2011-03-23T16:48:44Z")
> [@Commissar](#): > > That is not a persuasive argument. Using a one-time-use tool means that you must either replace it or do without in the future. It will be the latter, since the Tomahawk production line is now closed. ---
**Author:** ![Commissar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c68b51/32.png) [@Commissar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Commissar)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/912 "2011-03-23T16:49:20Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Readers will note that, for instance, the Times of India claims that a no fly zone will cost between one and three hundred million per week. The AP, between thirty and one hundred. I thought you were complaining that the Times of India exaggerated the cost of US cruise missiles? I love it how quick you are to change positions when proven wrong over and over again. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/913 "2011-03-23T16:51:12Z")
It didn’t exaggerate the cost, but it may not be accurate. The first block of Tomahawks cost about a million per unit. The last block cost about half that. The ToI doesn’t know which kind we’re tossing at the Libyans. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/914 "2011-03-23T17:00:55Z")
Readers will note that I both cited that the price figures for Tomahawks are lower than the quoted figures and that the ToI has a history of distortion when it comes to US spending and that the AP article and the ToI article included significant discrepancies such as a 300% increase to the estimate of weekly cost in the ToI. ---
**Author:** ![Commissar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c68b51/32.png) [@Commissar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Commissar)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/915 "2011-03-23T17:13:32Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It didn’t exaggerate the cost, but it may not be accurate. The first block of Tomahawks cost about a million per unit. The last block cost about half that. The ToI doesn’t know which kind we’re tossing at the Libyans. Remember: this is an AP story that has been picked up by Times of India, among others. It is not a Times of India story, so blaming it for repeating AP numbers is pretty silly. Also, for those interested in the subject of the costs of this war, I recommend the following relatively short video clip from CNN: > **[Latest Videos | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/videos)** Favorite part: the Republicans want the feds to cut $2.8 million for nuclear waste disposal - the cost of 2 cruise missiles. Because, hey, recent events have aptly demonstrated that nuclear materials are perfectly safe for all concerned. Good to see that this nation has its priorities straight. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/916 "2011-03-23T17:15:33Z")
> [@Commissar](#): > > Remember: this is an AP story that has been picked up by Times of India, among others. It is not a Times of India story, so blaming it for repeating AP numbers is pretty silly. Actually, blaming the Times of India isn’t silly at all. If they’re going to reprint other people’s articles, then they should be prepared to accept responsibility if those articles are incorrect. That goes for any publication which uses wire stories. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/917 "2011-03-23T17:18:48Z")
The ToI also has details not included in the AP version, like the already menioned 300% increase in their estimate of weekly expenses. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/918 "2011-03-23T17:20:16Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It will be the latter, since the Tomahawk production line is now closed. What will replace it? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/919 "2011-03-23T17:42:36Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > What will replace it? Steel-headed throwing axes, fresh from Europe! Much sharper than those old flint-headed things! For **you,** five beaver pelts each! ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595/920 "2011-03-23T18:01:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > For **you,** five beaver pelts each! Five?!? That’s outrageous! An flint knapping is an art, not like those ugly assembly line _metal_ things! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595.md?page=45) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/libya-too/571595.md?page=47)