What does it cost to add 20,000 'troops' to the US military?

[sinkingfeeling]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/20/us.military.increase/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates will announce Monday that he plans to increase the size of the military by 20,000 troops, a Pentagon official told CNN.

The goal is to ease the strain of deployment, as many troops have faced repeated lengthy rotations in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Gates said last week the military was considering "whether to provide for a temporary increase in the end-strength of the Army that would ease some of the pressures. And, frankly, I expect to be making a decision on that within the next week."

(That's the full story)

I just wonder why no GOP/Blue Dog Rep or Senator ever asks that question.

Edited: To train and send one troop to combat, it's about $400,000. So the cost of 20,000 would be $8 billion.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_cost_of_training_a_soldier_in_the_military

[Posteritatis]

1. Depends on where the money comes from

The Pentagon's going to be shuffling a lot of stuff around internally for the next while, I think. If they cut a project worth $(the cost of training and equipping twenty thousand troops).95 - or worth more than that - and use the savings to increase manpower, I can't say I'm particularly offended by that. Raising the money to put most of two new divisions in the field from scratch, though, would get a wee bit costly.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong - I don't remember precisely at all - but I seem to recall some vast, huge, overwhelming percentage of the US military budget is for the bigger-ticket pieces of equipment and R&D, and increasing manpower on its own isn't terribly expensive as long as you're not putting them on a new carrier or establishing an armored division.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Yep, and we could pay for health care by cutting just 10-15% a year from that budget.

[Posteritatis]

5. Also true

I'm just saying that it's probably possible to cut 10-15% - or hell, a lot more - from the budget without affecting the capability, safety and comfort of the vast bulk of the military's manpower - or even a somewhat expanded manpower - much if at all. You guys are probably better off in that regard than we are in Canada, where every dime going to (actually necessary) new equipment seems to take two from (rather more necessary) support for soldiers in terms of equipment, housing, pay, etc.

[imdjh]

2. That seems a bit high.

But whatever the cost is, it adds up.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. LBJ talked about "temporary" increases too.

And, his lapdog congress approved every dime it cost.

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Whatever the cost, I bet it would be cheaper and more cost effective to buy drones. n/t

[lefthandedlefty]

7. That would do a lot of road repairs

And we need that not more troops