Allan Grayson: This is going to cost a BILLION!!! or more

[bigdarryl]

He said that's coming out of Briton

[unblock]

1. duh.

[Little Star]

2. Grayson is low balling this, me thinks.

[wandy]

10. Grayson is just putting up a number. Good. No one else has................

We can talk about deficits, talk about budgets and the burden of food stamps at great length.
Alas when it comes to WAR our government falls to some form of demonic possession.

Their eyes glass over. The M.I.C begins to salivate and rub the inside of their pockets.
Talking heads foam at the mouth and even the normally senseable begin mindlessly chanting USA USA USA in a fevered dream of empire.

It is not a pretty sight.
You would think we would learn.
Hell, we haven't recovered from the hangover caused by our last two optional wars of necessity.

And our own children go hungry.

[Little Star]

11. +1

[alsame]

3. And this is why America can't

have nice things.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

4. Yep.

Meanwhile our infrastructure is crumbling.

[JaneQPublic]

5. Unit cost for a Tomahawk missile = $1.4M

According to this source:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm

Of course, you can add in the cost of the destroyers and aircraft carriers involved, but they weren't built special for this mission, nor were they in mothballs prior to this; if they weren't serving this mission, they'd be off doing exercises somewhere else.

Same goes for the cost of human resources. They aren't hiring new sailors especially for this mission.

And despite all the hairpulling and clutching at pearls here on DU, there WILL NOT BE BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

Jesus, people, I don't recall your hair catching on fire like this during the buildup to Libya involvement. You really are buying all the crap that Rand Paul and all the other teabaggers are selling on this issue.

[bigdarryl]

7. Times that by 200 because that's the number

Of missiles that are targeted in Syria.This is NUTS and any Congressional or Senate democrat voting yes on this might be in serious trouble in 2014.Obama doesn't have to worry about reelection.As Joe Madison says there is life after an Obama Presidency

[JaneQPublic]

8. $1.4M X 200 = $280M

That's still far less thanthe $1B that Grayson cited.

[Lucky Luciano]

12. Logistics are also expensive.

Aircraft carriers/destroyers to the middle east cost a bunch even if we shoot zero missiles.

[AdHocSolver]

13. If the $280M replacement cost for the missiles used were spent, instead, on...

...education, research and development, or improving infrastructure, the multiplier effect from the latter expenditures would return far more than $1B to the economy.

The costs cited by Grayson would be the opportunity costs due to replacing missiles instead of investing that money in research, education, and the like.

For a more definitive discussion of opportunity cost, see the description at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

[Autumn]

6. How many children and old people here in our country, in need

will loose more in an already stretched thin safety net so that this attack can be paid for? Obviously the priorities of our elected leaders are severely fucked up.

[polichick]

9. Their priorities have to do with their investments in...

the mic - and in the campaign donations coming from the same place.

On edit: Not to mention their future positions as lobbyists for the mic.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. And if we did 50 strikes a year, we might make a dent in the deficit by stopping them

There's a lot of good reasons not to go into Syria. But a billion dollars isn't one of them.

[grahamhgreen]

15. Way more. As it escalates, could cost trillions again

[Left Coast2020]

16. I hope he makes similar distinctions in future debates.

People can relate to the billions wasted on war--in comparison to rebuilding broken bridges, schools, etc.

I remember the last time someone said it would be easy/quick.