- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 14,348
- Reaction score
- 9,429
Yeah, this is concerning 100%.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-58279900After the 9/11 attacks, the US will have spent $5.8tn waging war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Syria by the end of 2022, according to updated figures from the Costs of War Project at Brown University.
The figure - which includes interest on debt used to finance the wars - will continue to increase in the decades ahead, with healthcare for veterans projected to hit $2.2tn by 2050.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq differ from previous wars as they were mostly funded by borrowing, rather than through taxes and war bonds.
"It's critical we properly account for the vast and varied consequences of the many US wars and counterterror operations since 9/11, as we pause and reflect on all of the lives lost," Neta Crawford, a co-director of the Costs of War Project and chair of the political science department at Boston University, told CBS News.
I don’t agree with the premise that these were borrowed funds. Defense is a constitutionally enumerated power of the federal government so “tax” dollars should go there first. As long as total defense plus war spending was less than total tax receipts then what we were really borrowing for was to pay for unconstitutional programs.https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-58279900After the 9/11 attacks, the US will have spent $5.8tn waging war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Syria by the end of 2022, according to updated figures from the Costs of War Project at Brown University.
The figure - which includes interest on debt used to finance the wars - will continue to increase in the decades ahead, with healthcare for veterans projected to hit $2.2tn by 2050.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq differ from previous wars as they were mostly funded by borrowing, rather than through taxes and war bonds.
"It's critical we properly account for the vast and varied consequences of the many US wars and counterterror operations since 9/11, as we pause and reflect on all of the lives lost," Neta Crawford, a co-director of the Costs of War Project and chair of the political science department at Boston University, told CBS News.
Interesting fact you take out the so called flow through funds the USAF has had $1 trillion less funding over the last 30 years than the Army and Navy
This does not include OCO it was baselineInteresting fact you take out the so called flow through funds the USAF has had $1 trillion less funding over the last 30 years than the Army and Navy
Not to mix up the 2 trillion dollar facts Gen Deptula stated -
1) Non-blue AF budget since 1991 till now adds up to $1 trillion.
2) Army was given an extra $1 trillion in OCO over the AF since 2001 till now. (He states this to provide logic for extra AF funding to the same tune now since just like GWOT was contingency largely on the ground, the upcoming prep for Pacific is a contingency for AF primarily)
What would said weapons even compose of, leftovers from the 60s?