WASHINGTON (MCT) — The air war in Syria and Iraq has already cost nearly $1 billion and ultimately could cost as much as $22 billion per year if a large ground force is deployed to the region
http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/cost-of-air-war-against-islamic-state-already-near-1-billion-as-strategy-shifts-1.305511
Feb 7, 2014
On Friday, President Obama added his signature to legislation that will cut $8.7 billion in food stamp benefits over the next 10 years, causing 850,000 households to lose an average of $90 per month. The signing of the legislation known as the 2014 Farm Bill occurred at a public event in East Lansing, Mich.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-signs-food-stamp-cut
$90 per month is a lot of money to people who need food
That is such a pittance for the federal government, why did they do that?
To save money?
They cannot be serious that ISIS is so much more important that 850,000 Americans who are starving.
All of a sudden, money is no problem.
Where are the debt conscious Republicans that just wouldn't shut up before?
Imagine a headline, "ISIS causes 850,000 Americans to go hungry"
Imagine the outrage from the corporate media
http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/cost-of-air-war-against-islamic-state-already-near-1-billion-as-strategy-shifts-1.305511
From Stars and Stripes - you guys claim to support the troops....
Cost of air war against Islamic State already near $1 billion as strategy shifts
By Tom Vanden Brook
USA Today
Published: September 28, 2014
F-15E Strike Eagle
A pair of U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles fly over northern Iraq early in the morning of Sept. 23, 2014, after conducting airstrikes in Syria.
Matthew Bruch/USAF
WASHINGTON (MCT) — The air war in Syria and Iraq has already cost nearly $1 billion and ultimately could cost as much as $22 billion per year if a large ground force is deployed to the region, according to an analysis by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
The study, due to be released Monday, shows a range of costs based on sustained but low-intensity combat up to a force of 25,000 U.S. troops on the ground.
President Obama and the Pentagon have ruled out the the use of American boots on the ground, making the most expensive option the least likely. Yet as Todd Harrison, the lead author points out, war is "an unpredictable enterprise" and the ability to forecast its costs is limited.
Meanwhile, there are signs that the war may be shifting toward lower-intensity conflict. Already, pilots are finding fewer Islamic State buildings and infrastructure to destroy in Syria, hoping to pick off smaller enemy targets as they pop up, according to senior Defense Department officials. The Islamic State is also known as ISIL.
The move to combat patrols from mass attack to individual targets — a process called "dynamic targeting" by the military — is reflected in types of bombs and missiles fired. It also stems from the fact that, for all its bravado of claiming a caliphate over a broad tract of the Middle East, the Islamic State has few trappings of a traditional government — buildings, utilities or bridges, for instance.
The initial attacks last Monday focused on headquarters buildings, communication antennas and a terror training camp and barracks. Air Force planners, based on images provided by spy planes, identified targets in Syria. But a Defense official who was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing campaign said there are few fixed targets left for U.S. forces to strike.
An airstrike Friday could well be the template for the foreseeable future, the official said. Two U.S. F-15 fighters and two F-15s from Saudi Arabia were patrolling the sky over Syria when four tanks pilfered by Islamic State fighters were spotted. The jets promptly destroyed them.
Air Force pilots dropped 59 bombs in Syria with laser sensors that allow them to track and destroy vehicles traveling even at highway speeds, data from the Air Force show. The Air Force also fired 44 Hellfire missiles, which are often fired by Predator and Reaper drones. Both unmanned aircraft have been flying missions in Syria.
Over the weekend, U.S. and coalition forces fired on ISIL tanks, armored vehicles, checkpoints and safehouses, among other targets in Iraq and Syria, the U.S. Central Command said in a statement Sunday.
Harrison's estimate for this type of war, with about 2,000 U.S. troops on the ground in a support and advisory capacity, could cost up to $320 million per month, or $3.8 billion per year.
The early assessments show the strikes were successful, damaging or destroying the sites that were chosen, according to a senior officer who was not authorized to speak publicly.
While it may be more difficult, and airstrikes grow less frequent, significant damage has been inflicted the Defense Department official said. The presence of U.S. and allied warplanes means IS fighters will have more difficulty communicating, resupplying fighters in Iraq and moving on the battlefield.
Destroying the Islamic State, as Obama's strategy calls for, will require ground forces to re-capture territory and a legitimate government to hold it.
Ground forces will make the decisive difference against ISIL fighters, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters Friday. Preferably not U.S. boots on the ground, he said.
"If you're suggesting that I might, at some point, recommend that we need a large ground force to counter ISIL, the answer to that is also absolutely," Dempsey said. "But it doesn't have to be Americans. In fact, ideally, for the kind of issues we're confronting there, the ideal force — in fact, the only truly effective force that will actually be able to reject ISIL from within its own population, is a force comprised of Iraqis and Kurds and moderate Syrian opposition."
House Speaker John Boehner, appearing on ABC's This Week Sunday, said that if no other nation can provide the needed troops for an on-the-ground force, he would support sending U.S. troops. "We have no choice," Boehner said. "These are barbarians. They intend to kill us. And if we don't destroy them first, we're gonna pay the price."
U.S. troops would also be expensive. A force of 25,000, backed by airpower, would cost as much as $1.8 billion per month, or as much as $22 billion per year, according to Harrison's estimate. The ground force accounts for 80% of those costs.
©2014 USA Today
Visit USA Today at
www.usatoday.com
Distributed by MCT Information Services
At the same time - and these are also a sizable contingent of military families:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-signs-food-stamp-cut
President Obama signs $8.7 billion food stamp cut into law
02/07/14 03:40 PM—Updated 08/25/14 09:29 AM
facebook twitter 9 save share group 568
By Ned Resnikoff
On Friday, President Obama added his signature to legislation that will cut $8.7 billion in food stamp benefits over the next 10 years, causing 850,000 households to lose an average of $90 per month. The signing of the legislation known as the 2014 Farm Bill occurred at a public event in East Lansing, Mich.
NewsNation with Tamron Hall, 2/7/14, 3:02 PM ET
Pres. Obama signs Farm Bill
The food stamp cuts are one component of a massive omnibus bill which also includes billions of dollars in crop insurance and various other programs and subsidies involving American agriculture. Before he signed the legislation, President Obama praised it as an example of bipartisan problem-solving that would help create jobs and move the American economy forward.
“Congress passed a bipartisan Farm Bill that is going to make a big difference in communities across the country,” said the president.
Obama’s remarks also focused heavily on economic inequality, which he has previously called “the defining challenge of our time.” The Farm Bill, he said, would “give more Americans a shot at opportunity.”
When House Republicans originally argued for a food stamp cut of between $20.5 billion and $39 billion, the White House threatened to veto both of those proposals. During his Friday speech, the president did not say whether he was satisfied with the final $8.7 billion figure, or even mention the cuts at all. Instead, he praised the food stamp program and said that the final Farm Bill preserved much-needed benefits.
Related: The hunger crisis in America’s universities
msnbc Live, 2/7/14, 3:40 PM ET
Farm bill is hurting our neediest citizens
“My position has always been that any Farm Bill I sign must include protections for vulnerable Americans, and thanks to the hard work of [Senate Agriculture Committee chair Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich] and others, it does just that,” he said.
Stabenow, who played a key role in Farm Bill negotiations, fully embraced the cuts in a speech delivered shortly before the president took the stage.
“This is a nutrition bill that makes sure families have a safety net just like farmers do,” she said. “The savings in food assistance came solely from addressing fraud and misuse while maintaining the important benefits for families that need temporary help.”
Speaking to reporters on Air Force One before the speech, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack made much the same point, saying that the $8.7 billion cut “probably makes the program more legitimate than it was.”
In fact, the benefits reduction would eliminate the state-level “Heat and Eat” policies currently employed in 15 states and Washington, D.C. Left-wing opponents of the Farm Bill, including Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., expect the burden of burden of the cuts to fall disproportionately on the elderly and disabled.
“Poor people are getting screwed by this Republican majority [in the House] and Democrats in my opinion aren’t doing enough to push back,” he said. “I wish there had been more of a fight from the White House and others.”
McGovern also admitted to being “puzzled” by the White House’s silence on hunger and food stamp cuts. He predicted that Republicans’ success in getting a several billion dollar food stamp cut meant that they would soon try again for even more.
“They know they can’t get a $40 billion cut right off the bat, so what they’re doing is they’re chipping away at it,” he said.
