Then why did you try? I used the figure that O'Reilly stated, and that Rumsfeld did not challenge.
I did watch the interview, and I’ve been in hearings and such with one expert witness saying ‘A’ and another saying ‘not A’. When the thing that ‘A’ might be is really hard to measure accurately, which is the case here, or the reports of ‘A’ tend to suffer from political or philosophical basis, which is ALSO true on the expenditures, well, you have to find the truth of the argument someplace else, and not waste time arguing what can’t be proved one way or the other.
Rumsfeld was wise and sharp as usual — he didn’t respond to O’Reilly’s blowhard number, because all such numbers are estimates. In regards the cost of the Iraq War the brief Google search I did — or anybody could do — showed the price to be estimated about $700B. That’s closer to $500B, than $1T, or did I fail math?