Since we're just bantering back and forth on a high school sports website, I'll say within 3 years, we should be completely drawn down to a force level of not more than 10,000 troops on not more than three remote airstrips/bases with generous, uninhabited security perimeters. Mission of the remaining personnel (which would be supported by any airpower resources needed) would be to hunt/kill terrorist training targets.

Are you saying the 10,000 troops would be long term?

What a tangled web we have weaved!!!!

Are you saying the 10,000 troops would be long term?

 

Long term or until we are satisfied that Iraq can self-police and purge itself of terrorist havens. 10,000 is a heck of a lot more sustainable than 200,000.

Long term or until we are satisfied that Iraq can self-police and purge itself of terrorist havens. 10,000 is a heck of a lot more sustainable than 200,000.

I don't know how to say this, but I agree again.

 

It's the Apocalypse I tell ya. :lol:

I don't know how to say this, but I agree again.

 

It's the Apocalypse I tell ya. :lol:

 

That's 2 for 2. I'm going to quit while I'm ahead! :lol:

WE did'nt start the war they did. We will have to do what ever it takes to insure our countrry's safety. If you want to get serious about ending the crises in Iraq , well youll have to start a revivle. Prayer and only prayer to the one and only God, by born again Christians will end it. And I'm sure that vwill work. Think of the oft repeated stories in the old teastament. God still answers prayer's by rightious people.

WE did'nt start the war they did. We will have to do what ever it takes to insure our countrry's safety. If you want to get serious about ending the crises in Iraq , well youll have to start a revivle. Prayer and only prayer to the one and only God, by born again Christians will end it. And I'm sure that vwill work. Think of the oft repeated stories in the old teastament. God still answers prayer's by rightious people.

 

"They" were not in Iraq before we invaded. The fact remains that we can't fund the war at its present level forever and it is breaking our military.

I find it hard to beleive that we are spending more for defense now than we did for the Vietnam War. (using all the inflationary adjustment)

I find it hard to beleive that we are spending more for defense now than we did for the Vietnam War. (using all the inflationary adjustment)

In terms of defense spending per dollar GDP, US defense spending is near historic lows and much less that it was during the Vietnam war. I don't think 4% of our GDP is too much to spend for the world's best military. (We rank 27th in the world in terms of spending per GDP$.)

In terms of defense spending per dollar GDP, US defense spending is near historic lows and much less that it was during the Vietnam war. I don't think 4% of our GDP is too much to spend for the world's best military. (We rank 27th in the world in terms of spending per GDP$.)

 

 

The costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have never been part of the annual defense budget. They have always been special emergency appropriations bills and have not been "on the books" so to speak. Therefore, they are not in your 4% number. I guess we'll just keep printing treasury bills and borrow the money to pay the cost.

The costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have never been part of the annual defense budget. They have always been special emergency appropriations bills and have not been "on the books" so to speak. Therefore, they are not in your 4% number. I guess we'll just keep printing treasury bills and borrow the money to pay the cost.

Last year, spending in Iraq amounted to less than 1 percent of the total economy -- about as much as Americans spent shopping online and less than half what they spent at Wal-Mart. Total defense spending is 4 percent of gross domestic product, the figure that measures the nation's economic output. In contrast, defense spending ate up 14 percent of GDP at the height of the Korean War and 9 percent during the Vietnam War. (emphasis added)

 

The Cost of War, Unnoticed

Last year, spending in Iraq amounted to less than 1 percent of the total economy -- about as much as Americans spent shopping online and less than half what they spent at Wal-Mart. Total defense spending is 4 percent of gross domestic product, the figure that measures the nation's economic output. In contrast, defense spending ate up 14 percent of GDP at the height of the Korean War and 9 percent during the Vietnam War. (emphasis added)

 

The Cost of War, Unnoticed

 

Accotding to that article the difference is that this war is being fought more on credit than Korea or Vietnam. Whether it's a lower percentage of the GDP don't you think that % will be adjusted by the interest we pay on the war debt? So when the war is finally tallied up (many years from now) the % will probably significantly higher, right?

Last year, spending in Iraq amounted to less than 1 percent of the total economy -- about as much as Americans spent shopping online and less than half what they spent at Wal-Mart. Total defense spending is 4 percent of gross domestic product, the figure that measures the nation's economic output. In contrast, defense spending ate up 14 percent of GDP at the height of the Korean War and 9 percent during the Vietnam War. (emphasis added)

 

The Cost of War, Unnoticed

 

According to that article the difference is that this war is being fought more on credit than Korea or Vietnam. Whether it's a lower percentage of the GDP don't you think that % will be adjusted by the interest we pay on the war debt? So when the war is finally tallied up (many years from now) the % will probably significantly higher, right?

According to that article the difference is that this war is being fought more on credit than Korea or Vietnam. Whether it's a lower percentage of the GDP don't you think that % will be adjusted by the interest we pay on the war debt? So when the war is finally tallied up (many years from now) the % will probably significantly higher, right?

The annual cost of the Iraq War will never likely approach the cost of the Vietnam or Korean wars. We are no longer using large numbers of our most expensive one-time-use weapons such as cruise missiles either, like we were during the war's "hot" phase.

 

Now that the the evidence that the surge is workig is coming in, opponents of the war are shifting their arguments from body counts to cost. The lengths to which politicians will go to undermine their own side to win elections is pretty amazing.

The annual cost of the Iraq War will never likely approach the cost of the Vietnam or Korean wars. We are no longer using large numbers of our most expensive one-time-use weapons such as cruise missiles either, like we were during the war's "hot" phase.

Now that the the evidence that the surge is workig is coming in, opponents of the war are shifting their arguments from body counts to cost. The lengths to which politicians will go to undermine their own side to win elections is pretty amazing.

 

You might be right about politicians but I can assure you my arguments are from just my view of the costs both in people and monies. I haven't shifted my arguments from one side or another and I don't believe H has either. I care about America as much as anyone but I am willing to discuss all the aspects of her endeavors both wise and unwise. To be honest, the above is true too with those who look at this war and change their viewpoints to maintain support for it. That too is pretty amazing.