http://rt.com/usa/news/billion-war-iraq-us-215/
The way out of Afghanistan for the U.S. depends on Afghan soldiers and cops’ ability to secure their own country. Yet the Pentagon is cutting funding for those Afghan forces by nearly half.
Pentagon wants $3 billion for the War in Iraq that we thought was over
Published: 14 February, 2012, 00:25
(AFP Photo / Tyler Hill)
The American public has been told that the Iraq War is a thing of the past. Even still, the US Department of Defense is asking the federal government for almost $3 billion for “activities” in a country that they shouldn’t be in.
The last US troops were supposedly withdrawn from Iraq just before 2012 began, but after years of a war that abruptly ended this past December, the Pentagon still wants billions to continue doing…something in Iraq. According to the latest budget request, the DoD think around $2.9 billion should cover the cost of “Post-Operation NEW DAWN (OND)/Iraq Activities.”
In a report published Monday by Wired.com, they acknowledge that the funding that the Pentagon wants now is almost as bizarre as the war itself. For nearly $3 billion, the DoD says that will be able to afford “Finalizing transition” from Iraq. Only two months earlier, however, President Obama celebrated the end of the Iraqi mission. At the time, some critics called the ending of the war as more of a catapult for Obama re-election campaign than anything else. Now with the revelation that the US Defense Department still wants billions for a war America is told it isn’t fighting, the alleged ending of Operation New Dawn seems just as questionable as its mysterious beginning.
After “ending” the war last year, the US government handed Iraqi operations over to the State Department. Three billion dollars — the amount that the DoD wants for a war they aren’t waging — makes up around one-ninth of the State Department’s entire annual budget. In 2012, the Pentagon had asked for $11 billion to fight the War in Iraq — which was, at the time, an actual war.
But as the death toll stands at over 4,000 US casualties after nearly eight years overseas, it is clear by the latest cash request that the US, as many had expected but had not hoped, is not ready to just walk away just yet.
On the bright side, it might be easier to foot the cost of this make-believe war than you would think. Suspiciously, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction announced in January that upwards of $2 billion that the US was holding onto for Iraq had mysteriously disappeared.
and part two ......
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/02/u-s-cuts-own-exit-strategy/
U.S. Cuts Cash for Its Own Afghan Exit Strategy
- By Spencer Ackerman
- Email Author
- February 13, 2012 |
- 3:28 pm |
- Categories: Af/Pak
The way out of Afghanistan for the U.S. depends on Afghan soldiers and cops’ ability to secure their own country. Yet the Pentagon is cutting funding for those Afghan forces by nearly half.
Tucked in the Pentagon’s $88.5 billion budget for war funding for the next year is a request for $5.7 billion for the Afghan National Security Forces. That’s down from the $11.2 billion that Congress approved for the last fiscal year. Which is kind of odd, since the President explicitly tied the withdrawal of American troops to the build-up of their Afghan counterparts.
“Our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan security forces move into the lead,” President Obama said in June. “By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security,”
On Monday, Pentagon comptroller Richard Hale told Danger Room that the deep budget cut isn’t necessarily at odds with the President’s goal. According to Hale, the U.S. spent “heavily” in past years on getting trucks, weapons, helicopters and other equipment for the Afghans. Now, there’s no need to buy so much gear. Hence the shrunken budget.
“Don’t take that reduction in any way as a sign of our reduction in commitment,” Hale said during a Monday afternoon briefing on the budget.
“We’ve still got more to do in training,” he added. “But we think the $5.7 [billion], based on the best judgment of our commanders over there, is adequate funding to fully support roughly 352,000 in the Afghan National Security Forces.”
Hale said the reduced funding was the recommendation of the International Security Assistance Force, the NATO war command led by Marine Gen. John Allen. “They’re quite comfortable with it.”
The Afghan forces have grown exponentially in the last two years. Hale said the new funding plan still assumes the Afghan forces will ultimately total 352,000, NATO’s current goal.
But there’s a long, long way to go with the Afghan forces. Most are either illiterate or can barely read. Only one percent of Afghan battalions can fight on their own. The general formerly in charge of training those forces believes the U.S. will have to mentor them until 2017 — but NATO and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced last week that the U.S.-led coalition plans on turning combat over to them next year.
It may be that the Afghans have as much gear as they’ll ultimately need. Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin has made funding for Afghan forces a priority, and could conceivably inject money back into the account. In the meantime, the Pentagon is now accelerating the timetable for turning Afghan security to the Afghans while cutting their funding nearly in half. And NATO still expects those forces will cost $6 billion, annually, even after the U.S. leaves — about as much as it plans to pay in the upcoming year.
No comments:
Post a Comment