PALUBA
April 19, 2024, 10:38:40 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Ovde možete pogledati te poručiti knjigu "Ešalon" jedan od autora je srpski podoficir i naš global moderator Kubovac
"Istorija razvoja sovjetskih i ruskih radara, komandno-informacionih sistema i sistema automatizacije"
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Za ubijenog talibana 50 miliona $  (Read 3732 times)
 
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
80sBoy
vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321



« on: October 07, 2010, 09:43:33 am »

Killing Each Taliban Soldier Costs $50 Million


Killing 20 Taliban costs $1 Billion / Killing all the Taliban would cost $1.7 Trillion

By Matthew Nasuti

October 05, 2010 "Kabul Press" - --  The Pentagon will not tell the public what it costs to locate, target and kill a single Taliban soldier because the price-tag is so scandalously high that it makes the Taliban appear to be Super-Soldiers. As set out in this article, the estimated cost to kill each Taliban is as high as $100 million, with a conservative estimate being $50 million. A public discussion should be taking place in the United States regarding whether the Taliban have become too expensive an enemy to defeat.

Each month the Pentagon generates a ream of dubious statistics designed to create the illusion of progress in Afghanistan. In response this author decided to compile his own statistics. As the goal of any war is to kill the enemy, the idea was to calculate what it actually costs to kill just one of the enemy. The obstacles encountered in generating such a statistic are formidable. The problem is that the Pentagon continues to illegally classify all negative war news and embarrassing information. Regardless, some information has been collected from independent sources. Here is what we know in summary and round numbers:

1. Taliban Field Strength: 35,000 troops

2. Taliban Killed Per Year by Coalition forces: 2,000 (best available information)

3. Pentagon Direct Costs for Afghan War for 2010: $100 billion

4. Pentagon Indirect Costs for Afghan War for 2010: $100 billion

Using the fact that 2,000 Taliban are being killed each year and that the Pentagon spends $200 billion per year on the war in Afghanistan, one simply has to divide one number into the other. That calculation reveals that $100 million is being spent to kill each Taliban soldier. In order to be conservative, the author decided to double the number of Taliban being killed each year by U.S. and NATO forces (although the likelihood of such being true is unlikely). This reduces the cost to kill each Taliban to $50 million, which is the title of this article. The final number is outrageously high regardless of how one calculates it.

To put this information another way, using the conservative estimate of $50 million to kill each Taliban:

It costs the American taxpayers $1 billion to kill 20 Taliban

As the U.S. military estimates there to be 35,000 hard-core Taliban and assuming that no reinforcements and replacements will arrive from Pakistan and Iran:

Just killing the existing Taliban would cost $1.75 Trillion

The reason for these exorbitant costs is that United States has the world’s most mechanized, computerized, weaponized and synchronized military, not to mention the most pampered (at least at Forward Operating Bases). An estimated 150,000 civilian contractors support, protect, feed and cater to the American personnel in Afghanistan, which is an astonishing number. The Americans enjoy such perks and distinctions in part because no other country is willing to pay (waste) so much money on their military.

The ponderous American war machine is a logistics nightmare and a maintenance train wreck. It is also part-myth. This author served at a senior level within the U.S. Air Force. Air Force “smart” bombs are no way near as consistently accurate as the Pentagon boasts; Army mortars remain inaccurate; even standard American field rifles are frequently outmatched by Taliban weapons, which have a longer range. The American public would pale if it actually learned the full story about the poor quality of the weapons and equipment that are being purchased with its tax dollars. The Taliban’s best ally within the United States may be the Pentagon, whose contempt for fiscal responsibility and accountability may force a premature U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan as the Americans cannot continue to fund these Pentagon excesses.

If President Obama refuses to drastically reform the Pentagon’s inefficient way of making war, he may conclude that the Taliban is simply too expensive an enemy to fight. He would then have little choice but to abandon the Afghan people to the Taliban’s “Super-Soldiers.” That would be an intolerable disgrace.
The problem is not simply within the Pentagon.

The hapless U.S. State Department is equally to blame. It:

1. Continues to sit on the sidelines of this war;

2. Refused for nine years to deploy an adequate number of civilian experts;

3. Continues to hire abusive and disreputable security contractors;

4. Failed to fight for the needs of Afghan civilians; and

5. Has made little effort to win their hearts and minds.

A crucial statistic that demonstrates this is to compare military and security expenditures by the United States in Afghanistan with expenditures for civilian aid, such as reconstruction. That statistic is as follows:

Money spent on Military/Security: $365 billion Money spent on Afghan civilians: $8.5 billion

This latter number spells out “FAILURE.” U.S. diplomats and USAID officials have failed to improve the lives of ordinary Afghans and as a result they have accomplished the impossible. Their lack of resolve and interest has made an increasing number of disillusioned Afghans view Taliban rule as potentially an improvement.
Appendix (Supporting Information)

Taliban Field Strength:

The figure of 35,000 is based on an interview given by General Stanley McChrystal earlier this year.

Taliban Soldiers Killed:

The Pentagon refuses to disclose the total number of Taliban killed each month in Afghanistan by coalition forces, special operations personnel and the CIA. One reason became obvious during Operation Moshtarak in Marjah earlier this year. The Pentagon and NATO refused to specify the actual number of Taliban casualties in Marjah because the number was embarrassing low. American, NATO and Afghan forces reportedly suffered more casualties (killed and wounded) than they inflicted on the Taliban, making Marjah a military defeat for the West (if casualties determine victory or defeat).

To fill the gap created by Pentagon silence on this issue, media groups have published their own Taliban casualty count based on official and press reports. That count is inflated as the U.S. military labels everyone it kills a “Taliban militant,” even if they are criminals, drug traders, war lords or civilians defending their homes. As a result of the Pentagon’s lack of credibility on this issue, this author assumes that only 50% of those labeled as Taliban actually are.

The Associated Press has reported that 3,800 militants were killed in 2008, and 4,500 in 2009. Pro-NATO blogs, such as the web site “Terrorist Death Watch,” have calculated that 3,667 terrorists have been killed in Afghanistan since January 1, 2006, (about 700 per year). The author assumes that an average of 2,000 hard-core Taliban are killed each year

U.S. Military Costs:

Total military expenditures in Afghanistan are not clear as the Pentagon does not release all of its direct and indirect cost for the war. While most direct costs are known, billions of dollars in CIA and special operations costs are improperly classified and remain hidden. In addition, the indirect costs for the war (i.e., military regular pay, equipment depreciation, wear & tear, long term health costs, Pentagon support costs within the U.S., USTRANSCOM transportation costs, transport hub costs such as Manas air base, costs for borrowing funds etc.) are not precisely known. Independent studies conducted of the Iraq war are available and they calculate that the indirect costs equal or exceed the direct costs.
What we know about Pentagon direct costs is as follows:

- From 2001, to April 2009, the Pentagon directly spent $171.7 billion in Afghanistan.
- From May 2009, to the present, the Pentagon directly spent an additional $166.3 billion. This is an incredible increase over the past 17 months.
Monthly expenditures have also seen a staggering increase.

- October 2009, the Pentagon was directly spending $3.6 billion a month.
- February 2010, the Pentagon was directly spending $6.7 billion a month.
- October 2010, with the addition of 35,000 more combat and support troops into Afghanistan, the number must be close to $8 billion a month.
Some estimates place direct Pentagon Afghan war costs for all of 2010, at $105 billion.

U.S. State Department Costs:

Officially the State Department and USAID have expended about $35 billion in Afghanistan since 2001. According to most audits, about 75% or $27.5 billion has been spent on training, housing and equipping the Afghan security services, and road construction with the balance ($8.5 billion) being spent on civilian projects. Much of this $8.5 billion has been wasted on dilapidated schools and minor “trophy” projects in Kabul.

Izvor: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26521.htm
Logged
Vladimir Ivanović
Stručni saradnik - OMJ
poručnik fregate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4 896


Da sam nomalan, poludio bih.


« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2010, 12:27:31 pm »

Ima ovdje svega.

Izraelci su pravili super vojnika. Elektronika, senzori, oklop, uvježbanost. Prema ovim podatcima izgleda da talibani imaju i bolje i super vojnike. A i amerikanci su pravili super vojnika. A izgleda da su jako loši na zemlji. Imaju nadmoć na moru, vazduhu, elektronskom ratovanju, ali kad je kopno u pitanju tu im nešto nedostaje. Lako je ratovati na livadi. Penjanjem na brda situacija se mjenja. Partizansko ratovanje im je izgleda problem.  A kad vidim onog amerikaca koji na sebi nosi 60 kila opreme, a od njega traže da bude pokretljiv... Znam kako im je. Radio sam na tom terenu.
Pa onda počinju da prave Predatore, pa ubijaju talibane iz daleka, sa visine. Kao u videoigrici. Playstation gdje ubijaju ljude, a sjede u kancelariji negdje u Nevadi. Nakon radnog vremena američki stručnjak za videoigrice ode kući ženi i djeci. Usput svrati u Mekdonalds po ručak i pokupi djecu iz vrtića. A za takvo ubijanje su čak lansirali posebne satelite. Za ubijanje ljudi koji brane svoj način života i svoju teritoriju. Svoj način života brani i Iran, ali amerikanci nemaju muda da ih napadnu. Napali su Avganistan koji je bio oslabljen dugogodišnjim ratovanjem.
 A ubijaju i ljude po Iraku. I to snime. Svi smo čuli za novinara Rojtersa koji je ubijen iz američkog helikoptera. Video kamera za video igrice. Kasnije bude kriv onaj ko to objavi, a ne onaj ko pobije ljude. Imaju online ubijanje.

Nedavno je američki helikopter napao i ubio u SAMOODBRANI u Pakistanu, pakistanku vojsku na pakistanskoj teritoriji. Pilot je reagovao, jer su ovi uperili oružje u njega. Amerikanci su se opravdali. Nisu se izvinili. Bila je samoodbrana.

Prije neki dan su pobili djecu u Avganistanu. Izvinili su se. Bila je greška.

Ili možda ...

Toliko troše na terenu protiv terorizma. Kod kuće u Americi troše još više. Po svijetu troše. A svi znamo da su amerikanci obučavali talibane. Znamo i da su po dolasku amerikanaca u Avganistan skočile proizvodnje svih droga u ovom regionu. A znamo da je CIA trgovala drogom iz centralne i južne Amerike za vrijeme, mislim, sandinista. E sad kad se slože kockice, na jedan od mogućih načina slaganja, ispada da CIA vodi rat u Avganistanu da bi  opet prodavala narkotike i zarađivala. Naprimjer, prodaje narkotike u Rusiji, zarađuje i uništava Rusiju. Ne troši na rat, zarađuje i slabi protivnika. Šesnaest posto proizvodnje narkotika iz Avganistana se troši na teritoriji Rusije.

Sjećam se pranja para u ovoj mojoj državi nakon rata. Dođu neke pare iz "prijateljske" nam zemlje, za neku izgradnju. Uradi se neki bezvezni posao za neke bezvezne pare. Radi se po lokalnim cijenama, a računi se izdaju kao da se to radilo u zemlji koja je dala pomoć. Puno, puno veći. E sad tako i ovaj iznos koji se potrošio na Avganistan. Radi se izgradnja naselja u Avganistanu, radi lokalno stanovništvo za dva dolara dnevno, a u americi se pravdaju pare kao da rade za 100 dolara dnevno. Poslove u Avganistanu dobiju američke firme koje naplate masno posao, koriste lokalnu radnu snagu i pare se opet vrate u Ameriku. Oprane, Legalne.

Poznato je da se obavještajne službe pojedinih zemalja dopunski finansiraju sa legalnim poslovima dobivenim na "malo" nelegalan način. Bude tender na kojem prođe firma koja je ćerka firma od neke  firme. I radi se posao.

Nikad nije objašnjeno otkud tone droge u trezoru Narodne banke Srbije prije nekih desetak godina. I to je bilo finansiranje jedne  službe.

A poznato je ko je bio Jovica Stanišić.   

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090323131010935

Odvratno je dijeliti broj ubijenih sa količinom para potrebnom da se ubije čovjek. Praviti statistike. Utrošak materijalnih sredstava. Ubiti nožem, besplatno. Ubiti metkom, jedan dolar. Ubiti raketom 10000 dolara. Odvratno.

Da su talibani iznijeli svoju računicu i rekli koliko im treba para da ubiju jednog američkog vojnika to bi bio terorizam. To što su amerikanci rekli koliko im treba da ubiju jednog talibana je statistika.

Ova se priča može gledati sa više strana. I pisati sa više strana. Slagati kockice na više načina. Ko se sada sjeća zašto je koalicija napala Irak. Zašto je bio rat u Koreji, Granadi...  Vjetnam, Laos, Kambodža.

A kad je Sadam zveckao oružjem prije napada na Kuvajt 02.08.1990 amerikanci nisu reagovali. Da su reagovali Sadam ne bi napao Kuvajt. Ne bi bilo Pustinjske oluje. Ne bi amerikanci kasnije imali kontrolu nad regijom. Nad naftom. Ne bi sada imali razloga da budu u Iraku. Zakuvali su na toj teriroriji. Saudijci su dali velike pare za oružje. Zna se ko je zaradio.

Ko hoće neka slaže kockice.

Pozdrav

Vlado
Logged
80sBoy
vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321



« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2010, 01:20:44 pm »

Odbrana zemlje ne moze opravdati ono sto talibani rade zarobljenicima,gde se najbolje iskazlo njihovo divljastvo i ponasanje na nivou divlje zveri.Zna se vrlo dobro sta su radili Rusima u Afganistanu,a nazalost i u Bosni,tako da ni najmanje simpatije nemam prema njima,naprotiv.
Amerikanci u svom robotskom stilu sve iskazuju kroz brojeve bilo da su u pitanju tenkovi,ljudi ili gajbe piva.Pitanje je samo koji je zavrsni racun u $,a sve ostalo nije bitno.


____________________

Logged
Vladimir Ivanović
Stručni saradnik - OMJ
poručnik fregate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4 896


Da sam nomalan, poludio bih.


« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2010, 01:49:01 pm »

Bacanje hiljade tona napalma na Vijetnam, Kambodžu i Laos. Ubijanje vijetnamske djece napalmom. Guantanamo. Nema zakona za Guantanamo. Ispitivanje zarobljenika. Davljenjem u vodi. A zakona nema. Držanjem u lancima godinama. Zatvor Abu Graib. Puštanje psa na zatvorenike.

Izvinjavam se.
Znam da je kriv za to onaj vojnik, bez čina. Sam je doveo psa u zatvor iz Amerike. Sam je donio napalm iz Amerike i stavio ga u granatu. Pilot je to slučajno izbacio u letu 100000 puta. Slučajno su spržili hiljade vjetnamske djece.
Zatvorenike je neko slučajno davio u vodi danima. Mučio u zatvoru.

Osudili su pakistansku naučnicu prije neki dan zato što je govorila protiv njih. Na 86 godina zatvora. A kad njihov pilot pobije djecu tamo negdje, to je kolateralna šteta. Pilot nije kriv.

Izlazak 21,12;
12 ''Ko drugoga udari, tako da umre, ima se kazniti smrću.''

Lev. Zakonik, glava 24-16-17:
17 Ako neko ubije čovjeka, ima se kazniti smrću.

Da li amerikanci postupaju kao

Samuelova 15,3;
Zato idi i pobij Amalika, i zatri kao prokleto sve što god ima; ne žali ga, nego pobij i ljude, i žene, i djecu, i šta je na sisi, i volove, i ovce, i kamile, i magarce.”

Ko je bacio atomsku bombu na ljude.

Avganistan nikog nije napao. To što je, možda, u njihovoj državi Bin Laden nije razlog napada na Avganistan. Razlog napada je 9/11 koji je veoma sunjiv. Zgrade padaju same, nema aviona koji je pogodio Pentagon i da ne nabrajam.

Nastavi slagati kockice.
Logged
švercer011
potporučnik
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2 749



« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2010, 02:12:52 pm »

Staljin je jednom rekao:Smrt jednog coveka je tragedija,smrt milion ljudi je samo statistika!!!
Logged
80sBoy
vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321



« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2010, 02:36:48 pm »

Moje misljenje odnosi si se iskljucivo na talibane,nadam se da se slazemo u tome da oni nisu deda mrazovi koji se zalecu u zgrade automobilom napunjenim poklonima.

Sinoc je bio na FTV BBCjev dokumentarac o 9/11 prva epizoda.Iako mi to nije prvi dokumentarac o tom dogadjaju (s akcentom na  teoriju zavere),detalji koji su otkriveni nedvosmisleno pokazuje koliko je to bio smisljen i organizovan napad od strane US obavestajnih sluzbi ,vojske itd.Za one koji su imali tu nesrecu da ne svojoj kozi osete koliko daleko seze njihova podmuklost,rekli bi na zapadu nista novo.
Ista je prica i za pticiji grip,svinjski grip ,i ko zna koji ce biti sledeci grip,s tom razlikom da su izmenjene glavne uloge,ali je ostao isti reziser.
Najzalosnije u svemu tome je sto glavonje koje bi trebalo da vidi malo dalje od onog obicnog naroda guraju glavu u pesak i rade neke "vaznije " poslove.
Logged
vathra
potporučnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2 369



« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2010, 02:41:32 pm »

Staljin je jednom rekao:Smrt jednog coveka je tragedija,smrt milion ljudi je samo statistika!!!
Није, нити на спрском нити на руском, а понајмање на енглеском где се тај цитат прво појавио.
Logged
jadran2
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13 150



« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2010, 03:08:57 pm »

[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Bio sam bas napisao omanji prilog, ali nije prosao, valjda mojom greskom. Da vidimo hoce li sada proci


* US_$2.jpg (103.74 KB, 800x342 - viewed 156 times.)
Logged
Vladimir Ivanović
Stručni saradnik - OMJ
poručnik fregate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4 896


Da sam nomalan, poludio bih.


« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2010, 03:12:38 pm »

80sBoy

Drago mi je da si počeo da slažeš kockice. Da bi slagao kockice treba da ih imaš puno. Različitih. Sa različitih strana svijeta. I onda odabereš one koje se uklapaju jedne sa drugim. Da bi ih imao puno ponekad je potrebno puno vremena. I sjeda glava.
I da ne vjeruješ političarima. A ni televiziji. Naročito državnoj. Ona je tu zbog provođenja nečije politike.

Pozdrav

Vlado

PS

Da li ovo misliš na Federalnu televiziju iz BiH. Kad je sljedeća emisija.
Logged
jadran2
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13 150



« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2010, 03:22:25 pm »

Da sada krenem od ovog priloga (2 dolara) koji su bili na kraju teksta.
Napisao sam da su ustvari tih 50 milijuna dolara nestvarni i mnogostruko nizi i da postotno nesrazmjerno manje terete drzavnu blagajnu preko bare.
Pa sam sa ironijom dodao da je to svota za zamajavanje raje, vise kao neki dim, dim iz one stvari; i da mi tih USD 50 mio lici na ona dva dolara za placanje usluga juznovijetnamskih posrnulih djevojaka.

Pa sam jos dodao da mnogi pripomazu koliko mogu "opcoj stvari", teku niger rijeke crnog zlata iz off shore izvora bez ICD-a i papira direkt tamo gdje treba, (za to je sinko oca vladara dobio pozamasnu apanazicu, nek mu se nadje), pa tamo njihov Topcider radi danju, radi nocu, pa pomazu vece nacije i mali narodi kako ko moze, neko novcem, neko rukom, neko nogom, neko spaljenim licem.

Zato tih impresivnih 50 milijuna i nije njihov direktni trosak, on je puno manji, skoro kao ona dva dolara.
Logged
80sBoy
vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321



« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2010, 03:33:14 pm »

Da federalna TV je u pitanju ,mislim da jos nisu poceli prikazivati takve stvari ne fashion TV Grin

Drzavna TV hmm,nema gore TV na ovim prostorima od RTRS,a u stopu ih prate pojedini listovi dnevne stampe.Sta reci osim da mi se vratio onaj stari osecaj doba komunizma,narod se izgleda uzeleo.

Nedavno sam gledau u jednoj emisij na ATV bila je prica oko zapošljavanja,i javi se jedan gledalac momak koji je zavrsio žurnalistiku.Naveo je svoj primer kako je konkurisao na RTRS i kako su mu oni s osmehom na licu vratili dokumente uz komentar "momak nisi u odgovarajucoj partiji".
Logged
dexy
kapetan korvete
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6 662



« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2010, 04:24:31 pm »

Jednom mi je jedan obaveštajni oficir rekao apropo informativnih emisija: "Treba znati gledati televiziju!".
Logged
kumbor
Stručni saradnik - opšti
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17 480


« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2010, 04:48:48 pm »

Jednom mi je jedan obaveštajni oficir rekao apropo informativnih emisija: "Treba znati gledati televiziju!".

Ovo je dobro.
Logged
Vladimir Ivanović
Stručni saradnik - OMJ
poručnik fregate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4 896


Da sam nomalan, poludio bih.


« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2010, 04:16:10 pm »

[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]


* osama-soldier.jpg (53.88 KB, 504x346 - viewed 114 times.)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.031 seconds with 22 queries.