The Obama White House is cutting billions in the sequester aftermath, but it could easily leave or torch 750,000 pieces of major military hardware — worth $36 billion — in Afghanistan after U.S. troops pull out by the end of next year.
Here are the options, according to Face the Facts USA of the George Washington University: Leave the equipment — or destroy it — in Afghanistan; move it to other U.S. military outposts; or transfer it to another U.S. agency or to another country.
The estimated cost for the latter two options: $5.7 billion.
The equipment includes trucks, aircraft, and armored vehicles — most of which are controlled by the Army.
Because the Afghanistan terrain is mountainous and landlocked, transport would be difficult. But leaving it behind intact could put the equipment in the wrong hands.
So, is it best to torch $36 billion in U.S. military assets?
NORM-AL Note: So, if the writer of this little piece is serious — and we certainly believe he is — some folks deep in the bowels of the Pentagon (and, of course, the White House), think it’s smarter to NOT spend $5.7 billion in order to leave $36 billion sitting in the hills of Afghanistan. Or destroy it first and then leave it in Afghanistan. (Somehow in the logic used by today’s gummint guys and gals, that seems better than bringing it home and using it again. Go figure.) All because it’s going to cost $5.7 billion to bring our stuff home…a cost which is peanuts when measured against the deficits the Obama administration is accumulating every year. So, what’s better, to save the 5.7 bil and come home to spend another 36 bil (and lots more now that costs have risen significantly) replacing all those vehicles and planes and choppers and guns and tents and God only knows what else, or bring the stuff home like we ought to?
As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by
NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis