costofwar.com
What costofwar.com is (and what it is not)
Costofwar.com reads like two different websites stitched together.
On one hand, the homepage is packed with blog-style posts about the financial and human toll of wars (“How Much Did the War on Terror Cost?”, “Cost of Afghanistan War”, “Cost of Iraq War”), plus “Tactical Intel” posts about gaming topics.
On the other hand, its own “About Us” page describes “Cost Of War” as a first-person shooter with a narrative, “seamless multiplayer integration,” and a development team doing ongoing updates. That page is written like a game studio’s marketing copy, not like a public research project.
So the practical takeaway is simple: costofwar.com is primarily positioned as a gaming brand and content site, not an academic or policy research hub.
Why people mix it up with the Costs of War project at Brown University
There’s a separate, well-known “Costs of War” research project housed at Brown University’s Watson School that studies the consequences of U.S. post-9/11 wars and broader U.S. military operations and spending.
That Brown project has a long-running public footprint, including major summary reports. In 2021, Brown University’s news office reported that the Costs of War project estimated the post-9/11 wars had cost around $8 trillion and were associated with roughly 900,000 deaths (as direct war deaths tallied in their reporting).
When costofwar.com uses similar phrasing and headlines, it’s easy to assume it’s the same thing. It isn’t. The “About Us” framing is the clearest clue.
What costofwar.com actually publishes
If you browse the site, you’ll see three main content patterns.
First, “war cost” explainers. The War on Terror post, for example, repeats a widely circulated estimate that costs exceeded $8 trillion by 2021, then adds broad sections on military spending, reconstruction, debt, alliances, and casualties.
Second, gaming lifestyle content. One piece argues that war games can reduce stress, improve cognitive skills, and build social connection. It also links out to a casino site as a suggested alternative activity, which is an unusual fit for a page that is nominally about warfare’s societal cost.
Third, straight-up gambling affiliate-style posts. There’s an “Online Casinos 101” article that promotes specific gambling sites, including crypto/“no verification” language, and it’s categorized under “Behind the Frontlines.”
That mix matters because it changes how you should interpret the site. A page can contain true facts and still be an unreliable place to learn, especially if the overall publishing model is optimized for clicks and referrals rather than accuracy, methods, and sourcing.
How to judge the reliability of its “war cost” numbers
If your goal is to understand the cost of war in a serious way, you need more than a headline number. You need to know what’s included and how it’s counted.
The Brown University Costs of War project is explicit that its totals include multiple categories that many casual summaries skip: direct war funding, related increases in base budgets, veteran care (including future obligations), homeland security spending, and interest on borrowing for these wars.
Costofwar.com sometimes repeats numbers that appear consistent with Brown’s published toplines (like the “$8 trillion by 2021” figure). But in the article text that’s visible on the page, there’s not much detail about methodology, uncertainty ranges, or primary references.
That doesn’t automatically make the numbers wrong. It does mean you should treat them as a starting point, then confirm them against sources that show their math.
A quick way to do that in practice:
- Look for a primary source link (a report, dataset, or official budget line item).
- Check whether the figure is “spent so far” versus “spent + projected obligations” (veteran care and interest can change the story fast).
- Check whether it’s limited to U.S. federal costs or includes allied spending, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction by other governments.
- Check whether deaths are “direct deaths from war violence” or include “indirect deaths” from disease, displacement, and collapsed health systems (these are often much larger, but harder to estimate).
Even Brown’s reporting is careful about scope. For example, Brown’s 2021 summary discussed a death toll range for direct war deaths and noted that indirect deaths are not fully captured in that tally.
If you want rigorous war-cost research, where to look instead
If what you want is public-facing research with transparent scope and a track record, the Brown University Costs of War site is the obvious comparison point. It organizes work across human, economic, social/political, and environmental costs, and it has an “About” page that clearly lays out its purpose, institutional home, and research goals.
It also posts “Findings” with concrete claims tied to specific contexts and time windows. For instance, it has published figures on U.S. military aid and operational spending connected to the wars that followed the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack, and it timestamps those estimates and related casualty/displacement figures.
That kind of timestamping and scoping is what you want when “latest” numbers are moving targets.
How to use costofwar.com without getting misled
Costofwar.com can still be useful, but you need to use it the way you’d use an unsourced explainer: as a map of topics, not as the final authority.
A good workflow looks like this:
- Use it to identify the bucket you care about (military spending, veteran care, debt interest, reconstruction, civilian casualties).
- Pull the key number it mentions and write it down with the date it claims.
- Cross-check with a primary or research source (for U.S. post-9/11 war totals, Brown’s Costs of War reporting is one place to start).
- Be cautious when the same site also runs gambling referral content, because it’s a signal that the business model may not be “accuracy first.”
If you’re citing numbers publicly (a report, an article, a presentation), cite the primary research source rather than costofwar.com.
Key takeaways
- Costofwar.com presents itself mainly as a gaming brand site, and its “About Us” page describes an FPS game, not a research organization.
- The site mixes “cost of war” explainers with gaming content and gambling/online casino promotion, which affects how much trust you should place in its factual claims.
- A separate, reputable “Costs of War” research project exists at Brown University, with clearly stated goals and published findings.
- The widely cited “$8 trillion by 2021” estimate for post-9/11 wars is associated with Brown’s Costs of War reporting, and costofwar.com repeats that topline without much visible methodology on-page.
- Use costofwar.com for topic discovery, then validate numbers with primary research before you rely on them.
FAQ
Is costofwar.com affiliated with Brown University’s Costs of War project?
No. Costofwar.com’s own “About Us” page describes a first-person shooter called “Cost Of War,” while Brown’s Costs of War project is housed at Brown University’s Watson School and publishes research on the consequences of U.S. wars and military spending.
Why does costofwar.com talk about the War on Terror costing $8 trillion?
That figure aligns with a major Costs of War report highlighted by Brown University in 2021. The issue is not that the number can’t be real, it’s that costofwar.com’s post doesn’t foreground the underlying sourcing and scope the way the research project does.
Does the mix of casino content mean the war-cost posts are false?
Not automatically. It means you should assume the site’s priority may be traffic and referrals, so you should verify claims elsewhere before repeating them. The presence of promotional gambling content is clearly visible on the site.
What’s the fastest way to fact-check a cost figure mentioned on costofwar.com?
Take the claim, note the date, then compare it to a primary research source that explains what’s included (military operations, veteran care, interest, homeland security, and so on). Brown’s Costs of War reporting is one example for post-9/11 war costs.
If I’m writing a paper or report, should I cite costofwar.com?
If you’re citing a specific number about war costs, it’s safer to cite the underlying research source (or an official budget document) rather than a secondary blog post. For post-9/11 totals, Brown’s Costs of War materials are designed for public citation and explain scope and components.
Post a Comment