Anyone remember back to January 2003, right before we invaded Iraq?  Rumsfeld said the cost of this war would be under $50 billion, and that other countries would probably shoulder a lot of that financial burden.

Well, as it turns out, when Rummy said "$50 billion," he actually meant $3 trillion and counting.  And when he said "other countries," he meant U.S. taxpayers. 

Joseph Stieglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, has estimated that the total cost of this war will be $3 trillion dollars, which he claims is a conservative estimate.  And though the Bush administration has stuck to the assertion that war has only cost us $500 billion, Reuters asserts that this cost is still sapping our economy:

Money was not much of an issue five years ago when President George W. Bush led the country into war in Iraq. Instead, all eyes were on allegations, later proven unfounded, that then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and could use them against the United States.

But $500 billion later, experts worry about the impact on the world's biggest economy, already facing a crippling housing crisis.

"The short-term economic consequences of the war have been manageable and modest. But the long-term consequences will be substantial," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com.

Much of the problem, economists say, is that every month of combat adds more than $10 billion to a U.S. debt that now tops $9 trillion.

Our country is over 9 trillion dollars in debt!  Happy five-year anniversary.  In other words, our President has acted like a teenager with a credit card, and now that the bill is due, he's out the door.  And if you think that there's any way to separate our floundering economy from this costly war, think again—the two are inextricably linked. 

Here is part 2 of Al Jazeera's coverage of the costs of war, including a look at the private defense contractors.  And of course, check out Iraq for Sale.