Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US to spend $413bn more on Afghan war

Press TV – November 21, 2010

A decision by US President Barack Obama to extend the presence of American troops in Afghanistan beyond 2014 is likely to increase the remaining cost of the unpopular war to USD 413 billion.

The US president, who was expected to announce an exit strategy from Afghanistan at the recent NATO summit in Lisbon, pushed for an indefinite postponement of troop withdrawal instead.

Obama declared in a nationally televised address in December that the transfer of the US forces out of Afghanistan would begin in July 2011. He, however, later redefined the previous timeline stating that Afghan forces would only begin taking the lead for security across Afghanistan by 2014.

On Saturday, NATO Secretary General said the US-led military alliance will remain in Afghanistan for as long as it takes to finish off its enemies there.

The newly defined deadline comes with a heavy price tag at a time when the US and many of its allies are facing increasing deficit cuts at home.

“I don’t think anyone is seriously talking about cutting war funding as a way of handling the deficit,” said Todd Harrison, a Defense funding expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Calculating costs based on USD 1.1 million per soldier per year, Harrison assesses that the new description of the deadline will cost the American taxpayers an additional USD 125 billion through 2014 alone.

The remaining war cost had been estimated to be USD 288 billion assuming that the troops involved in Obama’s surge would be withdrawn by 2012.

November 21, 2010 - Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite

2 Comments

  1. Oh no, we couldn’t cut the “extortion fee” .. um, I mean war funding now could we?
    This is a war of AGRRESSION for Israel, nothing more. The only mission is to fight Israels enemies and spend MONEY.

    Like

    Comment by BigQuestion | November 22, 2010

  2. “I don’t think anyone is seriously talking about cutting war funding as a way of handling the deficit,”

    Yo, has anyone gotten back with Rumsfeld to find out why the Pentagon could not account for $2.2 Trillion with a T prior to the 9-11 total defense failure? We’ve spent trillions on wars and yet another worse-than-useless department of Spending Money with No Results since then, and this “funding expert” thinks you can’t seriously discuss cutting defense to handle the deficit? You can’t be serious about handling the deficit WITHOUT taking on the endless war business and security state that sprang from that failure of all the defense we’ve already seriously funded. Bilking the American people for trillions, while creating more and more enemies abroad hasn’t worked yet. Maybe the next trillion, the next war, the next million enemies created will finally bring peace within our lifetime. Oh right, we don’t talk that way any more. The security state is permanent and it always need more, more money and more sacrifices.

    Like

    Comment by G Street | November 22, 2010


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.