Afghan war is costing.....

[Topaz]

By the Montreal Gazette, it costing 22 Billion from 2001-2012. This does not included salaries of regular force military personnel. 11 Bil. is for long term care for vets. www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=71d53d5-a121-490c-991c-99f0583f2728 I think the cost will be higher by the time we leave, the US has spend 2 trillion on both wars so far.

[eyeball]

Sorry, this url contains an invalid document id.

Morris is going to be some pissed I bet. If its any consolation though I wouldn't doubt if it's costing even more.

Edited September 19, 2008 by eyeball

[capricorn]

By the Montreal Gazette, it costing 22 Billion from 2001-2012.

Good info. But an election is on and Dion's campaign promises estimated to cost over $80B is catching my attention.

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=808072

[bush_cheney2004]

How much is that per year...about 2 billion? That is just chump change.

[Smallc]

How much is that per year...about 2 billion? That is just chump change.

Not when your actually trying to balance a budget. There are many priorities. I agree that we should be in Afghanistan, but an extra $2B a year could do a great deal for infrastructure or military upgrades so that we're ready for what comes next. Always a balancing act I guess.

[Topaz]

Sorry, this url contains an invalid document id.

Morris is going to be some pissed I bet. If its any consolation though I wouldn't doubt if it's costing even more.

Try "goggling" canadian cost of Afghanistan war and there's a link to the Montreal Gazette story at the bttom of the page.

[kimmy]

Not when your actually trying to balance a budget. There are many priorities. I agree that we should be in Afghanistan, but an extra $2B a year could do a great deal for infrastructure or military upgrades so that we're ready for what comes next. Always a balancing act I guess.

If people support what Canadian forces are doing in Afghanistan, they have to understand that it doesn't happen for free. If $2 billion a year is the price tag, then that should be part of the discussion of whether our involvement there is worth it. If people oppose Canada's role in Afghanistan, the financial cost as well as the cost in lives is a legitimate topic of discussion. It's a relevant piece of the debate.

Personally, I am very proud of the role Canada has taken in Afghanistan, even though it has not been cheap or easy.

-k

[Smallc]

Personally, I am very proud of the role Canada has taken in Afghanistan, even though it has not been cheap or easy.

I agree and I do support the mission. Its just that sometimes you say what if when you think of where the money could have been spent. I'm not saying we shouldn't be there.

[Wilber]

I agree and I do support the mission. Its just that sometimes you say what if when you think of where the money could have been spent. I'm not saying we shouldn't be there.

All wars are expensive and wasteful. Unfortunately, some of them are necessary in spite of it.

[jdobbin]

If people support what Canadian forces are doing in Afghanistan, they have to understand that it doesn't happen for free.

I think the costs in money are of concern but less so than that of lives both lost or injured in a fight that may not have an end that is identifiable or achievable.

[Rovik]

If people support what Canadian forces are doing in Afghanistan, they have to understand that it doesn't happen for free. If $2 billion a year is the price tag, then that should be part of the discussion of whether our involvement there is worth it. If people oppose Canada's role in Afghanistan, the financial cost as well as the cost in lives is a legitimate topic of discussion. It's a relevant piece of the debate.

Personally, I am very proud of the role Canada has taken in Afghanistan, even though it has not been cheap or easy.

-k

Billions of dollars have been sunk into a war that even the experts don't know if we will win in the long term. Billions of dollars that could have been put into the healthcare system (where people are dying due to long wait times, obsolute or inadequate equipment), a crumbling infrastructure (bridges, roads, buildings)which in many parts of Canada are in critical shape, schools in Canada that are are 50+ years old (other schools that have serious mold problems,) education where many university students come out with $50000+ student loan debt, homelessness, childcare, quality of education and on and on. Monies spent here would have positive impacts on Canadians...monies spent in the war in Afghanistan have virtually no impact on the day-to-day lives of Canadians.

Many say the war in Afghanistan will benefit the people of Afghanistan. If this was the case, why haven't we gone into Zimbabwe, Sudan, Somalia or Burma to improve those countries' people quality of life and to prevent killings. Many say the war will prevent the spread of terrorism in the world. Well if this was the case, why haven't we gone into Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and others that have strong terrorist links. Many compare the Afghanistan war to War World I & II. Well in war world I & II, we were dealing with countries with modern armies that were taking over countries. In the Afghanistan war, we are dealing with a ragtag group that doesn't have an air force, navy and very little heavy duty artillery (such as tanks.) To compare the Afghanistan War to War World I & II is (in my humble opinion) borders on ludicrous

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that a few people in Afghanistan are living better lives because we are there and I believe that the Canadian soldiers over there are doing great work. I'm one of those people who believe that you can support the soldiers but not the war. We've been there long enough and if NATO wants to stay there long-term then they should some other country (within NATO) to take over what the Canadians are doing now...I have a feeling that NATO would have a hard time getting takers.

To sum up, the money should be spend within Canada to help Canadians not a sinkhole of a war in Afghanistan without little or no benefit.

Edited September 21, 2008 by Rovik

[gc1765]

Monies spent here would have positive impacts on Canadians...monies spent in the war in Afghanistan have virtually no impact on the day-to-day lives of Canadians.

Who cares if we are helping Canadians or Afghans? People are people, regardless of what country they live in.

Many say the war in Afghanistan will benefit the people of Afghanistan. If this was the case, why haven't we gone into Zimbabwe, Sudan, Somalia or Burma to improve those countries' people quality of life and to prevent killings.

So just because we aren't helping everyone doesn't mean we aren't helping anyone?

[Army Guy]

Has anyone really taken a close look at this 22 bil price tag.....The actual cost of the Afgan mission todate has been 7 Bil,

you can't include something that has not been billed or happened as of yet, such as long term care for our soldiers....nor can you include equipment that was purchased for the mission, as we needed it anyways, and it will used for other missions as well....the 2 Bil for a new LAV fleet has not even happen yet....and how can you charge that to the mission when the entire army is getting them....

The cost have been inflated, for some unknown reason, what is not included is other governmental depts expenses such as aid monies, etc where are those estimates, this is another example of poor media coverage, and some reporter not doing his homework....

The breakdown of the Afghan costs is as follows:

-$7 billion for the cost of the war. This is the incremental cost from late 2001 to 2012. It includes everything from ammunition and fuel to the salaries of reservists and contractors. It does not include the salaries of regular force military personnel.

-$11 billion is the estimated future bill for Veterans Affairs and DND for long-term health care of veterans and related benefits, as well as having to deal with post traumatic stress disorder among troops. Veterans Affairs Canada predicts an increase of 13,000 Canadian Forces members to its client base by 2010. Using American estimates, between 10 to 25 per cent of returning veterans may experience mental health problems as a result of their overseas deployment.

U.S. studies estimate that country’s long-term health care and disability costs for its Iraq and Afghan veterans to be between $350 billion to $650 billion.

-$2 billion for the purchase of mission-specific equipment. That includes everything from Leopard tanks, howitzers, six Chinook helicopters, counter-mine vehicles to aerial drones. Defence officials argue that such equipment will be used on future missions beyond Afghanistan. The figure didn’t include the latest $95 million lease for additional aerial drones.

-$2 billion for the replacement of the military’s LAV-3 fleet. “This fleet is going to be worn out pretty soon from the wear and tear of Afghanistan and will have to be replaced,” said Mr. Perry.

-$405 million for repair and overhaul costs.”

Afgan war

[cybercoma]

Seems like a small price to pay to enjoy the benefits of being a member of NATO.

[Smallc]

Seems like a small price to pay to enjoy the benefits of being a member of NATO.

Shame other countries get to enjoy that benefit while contributing almost nothing.

[cybercoma]

Shame other countries get to enjoy that benefit while contributing almost nothing.

One should be careful not to throw stones in glass houses.

[Smallc]

One should be careful not to throw stones in glass houses.

It has been said many times that the majority of NATO is not pulling its weight in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is supposed to be NATOs main focus right now, yet a few countries are doing most of the heavy lifting. I am aware that other countries contribute more than we do abroad, but they won't do the heavy lifting in many cases.

Canada has always done whatever it could wherever it could do it. The same cannot always be said for some other countries.

[Oleg Bach]

All you have to do is look south and see the results and horrific cost of waging a corporate war called Iraq. Those with connections and investments in war supplies have become even richer. While the average person dishes out on mass billions to sustain a war machine that only harms the economy. The old adage that when in doubt about maintaining a national economy..wage war for profit and the trickle down effect will benefit the nation...bull crap ...! There is no trickledown effect. As Afghanistain costs more and more - and by the way what are the numbers on the expenditure of this venture and adventure? Iraq - collapsed the American economy....There is only so much following to please his masters that Harper can do - then - it becomes the issue of survival of a nation and his very office. Time to bail out before our main industry is weaponry and supportying enterprises - this is no way to run a nation. Perhaps Mr. Harper can start leading and figure out a way to make the house of Canada prosperous and happy without becoming dependent on legal murder and lucrative plundering of duped Canadians....why the hell are we or the Americans involved anyway? There is only one reason - easy money for a few!

[the janitor]

why the hell are we or the Americans involved anyway? There is only one reason - easy money for a few!

And an education for many children in a nation that currently has a 39% literacy rate. You can't have political stability without high literacy.