Posted on 10/09/2009 5:54:20 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
There has been a lot of talk in the White House these days about the costs of health care reform and recovering the economy. But there is another debate raging in which money is playing an important role in the decision-making process: the war in Afghanistan.
Gibbs said that although cost is not the determining factor in the Afghanistan debate, it is a consideration. The cost of 1,000 troops is $1 billion per year, according to Gibbs.
“It's something we certainly have to be mindful of,” Gibbs said. “We don't have unlimited money. We certainly don't have unlimited troops.”
Tomorrow President Obama is scheduled to meet with his National Security team about Afghanistan and Pakistan for the fourth time. The White House says this will be the first meeting in which they discuss details about a potential troop increase.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
The Kenyan announced his Afghan strategy in March and is just now discussing details with his National Security team?
Since when does the cost of anything bother Obozo? I am sure he can just make something up.
let me guess
the chain of command right.
It is the only thing the left can keep saying for this delay.
Imagine if we get attacked, it will be months before bozo thinks of what to do.
In history the obama voters will go down as the dumbest voters this country has ever seen,
They will go down as a cult who could never see the truth and followed their master blindly.
From the article: “The cost of 1,000 troops is $1 billion per year, according to Gibbs. “It’s something we certainly have to be mindful of,” Gibbs said. “We don’t have unlimited money.”
The sheer arrogance is astounding. These communists have spent almost $2 TRILLION dollars in just 9 months and they are crying about a BILLION to help our troops in harms way? If we aren’t in it to win it, then get the hell out, NOW.
I am appalled at the ignorance, arrogance and lack of substance of this administration and their criminal cronies, foreign and domestic.
Gibbs said that although cost is not the determining factor in the Afghanistan debate, it is a consideration. The cost of 1,000 troops is $1 billion per year, according to Gibbs.
“It’s something we certainly have to be mindful of,” Gibbs said. “We don’t have unlimited money. We certainly don’t have unlimited troops.”
If Americans don’t see this POS for what he is they are dumber than I thought....let’s spend a trillion $$$ on a stimulus package that does nothing and at the same time cut a few corners on national defense to save a few $$...
We do have our priorities. They just happen to change as soon as the speech is over.
Who in their right mind thinks the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize will send more troops to Afghanistan or anywhere else? Receiving that “award” will cut the legs right out from under our troops...
Stars and Stripes yesterday inferred that John F’n Kerry thinks he is going to be the one deciding how many to send and how much to spend.
my thoughts exactly....he will weaken this nation further by appeasing our enemies to live up to his “award”....
Oh, Yeah - and we have all those blithering idots in Detroit to take care of - we can't possibly spend money on our troops.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm going to throw something!!!!!!
yeah since their thinking about spending $22 billion on new WH helicopters...oh yeah..remember the $6 billion they thought were too expensive and not needed, so they turned them down...well they’re back...only costing almost 4 times as much...
Cost? They are worried about cost? Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.... holy crap...Hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhaha.....
Y’all ain’t gonna believe this.
Since when has the WH ever been concerned about cost?
Obama would rather spend the money on a surge for Detroit
and Chicago!
And who in their right mind would believe Obama DIDN'T have a clue he was up for the Peace Prize?
HE HAD TO HAVE KNOWN about it. That's why he delayed his decision on sending the requested troops to Afganistan.
Now we need to prove it.
sw
i couldn’t have said it any better myself....
A billion to support 1,000 troops? That’s a million per man. That is hard to imagine.
I’m sure if you take the total defense budget and divide it by the number of active duty military, you might come up with something like that. But that would be a completely disingenuous calculation, including fixed costs that would be incurred anyway. The incremental costs of deploying the troops to Afghanistan are what matters, and they are nothing like $1 million per soldier.
When can I vote? I am going to vote every time I can to vote-out these morons and their supporters at EVERY level of government down to dog-catcher. My head is ready to explode every day.
“Thats a lie”
He can increase the debt three fold, load up detroit and not worry about security?
While O dithers more troops die!
They don’t have unlimited money? What an insult to the men and women who put their lives on the line. They have unlimited money to give to their political cronies.
I think the troops should stay to defend the people of the Unitied States and other peaceful nations.
LLS
No. Of course not. The long lines of moochers in Detroit are using it all up instead.
We know what the Administration's priorities are.
Bump
My son graduates HS this year. I have pushing him to join the armed services. He wil sit around this small town and never amount to anything if he does not land a cushy state job..
Now I am ready to support him and even (Lord forbid) live with him longer if it means keeping him from playing political games.
If obama drafts, I will leave my life behind and move to Canada to keep my son out of their anti God games.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.