washingtonpost.com Analysts Expect Long-Term, Costly U.S. Campaign in Afghanistan
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Since the invasion of Afghanistan eight years ago, the United States has spent $223 billion on war-related funding for that country, according to the Congressional Research Service. Aid expenditures, excluding the cost of combat operations, have grown exponentially, from $982 million in 2003 to $9.3 billion last year.
The costs are almost certain to keep growing. The Obama administration is in the process of overhauling the U.S. approach to Afghanistan, putting its focus on long-term security, economic sustainability and development. That approach is also likely to require deployment of more American military personnel, at the very least to train additional Afghan security forces.
Later this month, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is expected to present his analysis of the situation in the country. The analysis could prompt an increase in U.S. troop levels to help implement President Obama's new strategy.
Replies
12
SoWal InsiderAuthor
teabagging warhawks, fiscal conservatives, vegans, islamofascist bounty hunters, players of the electro-theremin please weigh in.
Beach Fanatic
teabagging warhawks, fiscal conservatives, vegans, islamofascist bounty hunters, players of the electro-theremin please weigh in.
Hmm - who would have thought that it would be so much cheaper to fight murdering thugs half way around the globe for most of the decade than to fund congressional pet causes (read buy democratic votes) under the guise of a stimulus package? Apparently, we should fight more and pander less in order to bring down the deficit.
Beach Fanatic
teabagging warhawks, fiscal conservatives, vegans, islamofascist bounty hunters, players of the electro-theremin please weigh in.
Dont hold back Bob.....
SoWal InsiderAuthor
Hmm - who would have thought that it would be so much cheaper to fight murdering thugs half way around the globe for most of the decade than to fund congressional pet causes (read buy democratic votes) under the guise of a stimulus package? Apparently, we should fight more and pander less in order to bring down the deficit.muderous thugs, is that like union thugs or gooks, nips, krauts?
Beach Fanatic
muderous thugs, is that like union thugs or gooks, nips, krauts?
NO NO....Un American,swastika displaying,bible thumping,southern,racists,rednecks.etc.......
Bob...we need a "beer summit"!
SoWal InsiderAuthor
NO NO....Un American,swastika displaying,bible thumping,southern,racists,rednecks.etc.......with american beer
Bob...we need a "beer summit"!
Beach Fanatic
NO NO....Un American,swastika displaying,bible thumping,southern,racists,rednecks.etc.......
Bob...we need a "beer summit"!
Don't give Bob a beer - he's already drunk on his own whiskey.
SoWal InsiderAuthor
Don't give Bob a beer - he's already drunk on his own whiskey.repub stimulus is to shoot missles and build more va hospitals
Beach Fanatic
with american beer
if that's what you like.....this is America
SoWal InsiderAuthor
if that's what you like.....this is Americano budweiser, owned by waloons
Beach Fanatic
no budweiser, owned by waloons
right...I forgot....PBR maybe?
SoWal Insider
Don't give Bob a beer - he's already drunk on his own whiskey.
Somebody has moonshine? Groovy
right...I forgot....PBR maybe?
I still digg PBR!
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.