PM Imran Khan to visit Saudi Arab again on May 30

[RIP Pak LAW]

Looks like more $$$$ needed. Though official word so far is OIC meeting.

 

[Titanium100]

The Pakistani politicians are a bit slow in the head. The Saudis invited them to Yemen they didn't understand why. Grab some land for yourself mann and release the pressure from your over-growing populations.

Seize some land and try to hold onto via whatever reasons and excuses you can come up with. Your soldiers need training, experience, and trial of weapons. There is minerals in Yemen

 

[nahtanbob]

The Pakistani politicians are a bit slow in the head. The Saudis invited them to Yemen they didn't understand why. Grab some land for yourself mann and release the pressure from your over-growing populations.

Seize some land and try to hold onto via whatever reasons and excuses you can come up with. Your soldiers need training, experience, and trial of weapons

you need $$$ to maintain a standing army

 

[HAIDER]

The Pakistani politicians are a bit slow in the head. The Saudis invited them to Yemen they didn't understand why. Grab some land for yourself mann and release the pressure from your over-growing populations.

Seize some land and try to hold onto via whatever reasons and excuses you can come up with. Your soldiers need training, experience, and trial of weapons. There is minerals in Yemen

That is the cost of keeping single soldier or private at KSA...Saudis are sucked by these defence billings .... they have no way to go.


05:50 PM ET

One soldier, one year: $850,000 and rising
By Larry Shaughnessy

Keeping one American service member in Afghanistan costs between $850,000 and $1.4 million a year, depending on who you ask. But one matter is clear, that cost is going up.

During a budget hearing today on Capitol Hill, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, asked Department of Defense leaders, "What is the cost per soldier, to maintain a soldier for a year in Afghanistan?" Under Secretary Robert Hale, the Pentagon comptroller, responded "Right now about $850,000 per soldier."

Conrad seemed shocked at the number.

"That kind of takes my breath away, when you tell me it's $850,000," Conrad said

A Pentagon spokesman later said a more accurate figure is $815,000 a year.

Regardless of which number is used Sen. Conrad would be really shocked by the estimate that the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments reached about the same issue.

"The cost per troop in Afghanistan has averaged $1.2 million per troop per year," the center's Todd Harrison wrote in an analysis of last year's Department of Defense budget.

Why the difference? Harrison said the center arrives at its figure by taking "the amount of money spent in Afghanistan for a year and dividing it up by the number of soldiers."

He believes Hale's estimate is lower because the Pentagon removes some costs, like construction, from the Afghanistan spending and divides that lower number by the number of troops.

But one thing is clear, the cost is rising. Hale said the Department of Defense figure was until recently $600,000 a year. And Harrison said the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments' estimate for 2012 is up to $1.4 million.

Harrison said there are two important factors contributing to the increase. There are fewer troops in Afghanistan than in 2011, and the latest Defense budget puts millions into war spending that in previous years were part of the department's base budget.

Hale sees another reason why it's climbing. The major component of the extra costs in Afghanistan are higher operating costs for weapons. When you're in a war you are operating a much higher tempo. "That's a good part that's probably 50% of the budget," he testified.

One thing is clear, the soldier impacts only a small percentage of that cost. A typical army sergeant with four years service makes a base pay of less than $30,000 a year.



Post by: CNN's Larry Shaughnessy
Filed under: Afghanistan • Defense Spending • Military • Security Brief

 

[monitor]

Looks like more $$$$ needed. Though official word so far is OIC meeting.

Though officially a visit for OIC meeting but I wouldn't surprised if Imran looks for more economic bailout.

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Though officially a visit for OIC meeting but I wouldn't surprised if Imran looks for more economic bailout.

Yes unfortunately that's the prime reason. Opposition here are planning major protests against the govt after ramzan and more taxes and spike in electric and gas bills are expected after the annual budget. Perfect recipe for anti pti forces to topple the govt.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

you need $$$ to maintain a standing army

Saudi's have it. Americans were compensated to the tune of $150 billion in today's money during first Gulf war for kicking Iraqi's out of Kuwait. Lesson for Pakistan. Professional contract services is a form of export and lucrative to boot that even superpowers lap up.

Pakistan needs to be in Yemen to kick a*ss for the right price though.

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Saudi Arabia is our brother country. Imran khan will continue visiting K.S A, There are holy places too. This Visit had more to do with OIC.
I wish we don't raise palestinian issue there, there are many lots things to do there.

 

[war&peace]

Saudi's have it. Americans were compensated to the tune of $150 billion in today's money during first Gulf war for kicking Iraqi's out of Kuwait. Lesson for Pakistan. Professional contract services is a form of export and lucrative to boot that even superpowers lap up.

Pakistan needs to be in Yemen to kick a*ss for the right price though.

Naah, no need. We're the worst negotiator. At max will get some oil on deferred payments in return.

Saudi's have it. Americans were compensated to the tune of $150 billion in today's money during first Gulf war for kicking Iraqi's out of Kuwait. Lesson for Pakistan. Professional contract services is a form of export and lucrative to boot that even superpowers lap up.

Pakistan needs to be in Yemen to kick a*ss for the right price though.

We joined War of Terror for peanuts and lost around $250b and 80,000 people.

 

[Arsalan 345]

government need more dollars so that ministers can do whatever they want.there is no progress in any sector.people around imran khan are not sincere.saudia will not continue giving money forever.i think this time,they will not give anything.

 

[nahtanbob]

That is the cost of keeping single soldier or private at KSA...Saudis are sucked by these defence billings .... they have no way to go.


05:50 PM ET

One soldier, one year: $850,000 and rising
By Larry Shaughnessy

Keeping one American service member in Afghanistan costs between $850,000 and $1.4 million a year, depending on who you ask. But one matter is clear, that cost is going up.

During a budget hearing today on Capitol Hill, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, asked Department of Defense leaders, "What is the cost per soldier, to maintain a soldier for a year in Afghanistan?" Under Secretary Robert Hale, the Pentagon comptroller, responded "Right now about $850,000 per soldier."

Conrad seemed shocked at the number.

"That kind of takes my breath away, when you tell me it's $850,000," Conrad said

A Pentagon spokesman later said a more accurate figure is $815,000 a year.

Regardless of which number is used Sen. Conrad would be really shocked by the estimate that the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments reached about the same issue.

"The cost per troop in Afghanistan has averaged $1.2 million per troop per year," the center's Todd Harrison wrote in an analysis of last year's Department of Defense budget.

Why the difference? Harrison said the center arrives at its figure by taking "the amount of money spent in Afghanistan for a year and dividing it up by the number of soldiers."

He believes Hale's estimate is lower because the Pentagon removes some costs, like construction, from the Afghanistan spending and divides that lower number by the number of troops.

But one thing is clear, the cost is rising. Hale said the Department of Defense figure was until recently $600,000 a year. And Harrison said the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments' estimate for 2012 is up to $1.4 million.

Harrison said there are two important factors contributing to the increase. There are fewer troops in Afghanistan than in 2011, and the latest Defense budget puts millions into war spending that in previous years were part of the department's base budget.

Hale sees another reason why it's climbing. The major component of the extra costs in Afghanistan are higher operating costs for weapons. When you're in a war you are operating a much higher tempo. "That's a good part that's probably 50% of the budget," he testified.

One thing is clear, the soldier impacts only a small percentage of that cost. A typical army sergeant with four years service makes a base pay of less than $30,000 a year.



Post by: CNN's Larry Shaughnessy
Filed under: Afghanistan • Defense Spending • Military • Security Brief

Kent Conrad has not been a Senator in a while

 

[PDF]

There is an OIC summit to be held in Makkah. Many head of states are coming. Let's leave it at that.

 

[HAIDER]

Kent Conrad has not been a Senator in a while

But facts and figures can't be denied.

 

[nahtanbob]

But facts and figures can't be denied.

no disagreement from me

Saudi's have it. Americans were compensated to the tune of $150 billion in today's money during first Gulf war for kicking Iraqi's out of Kuwait. Lesson for Pakistan. Professional contract services is a form of export and lucrative to boot that even superpowers lap up.

Pakistan needs to be in Yemen to kick a*ss for the right price though.

Having one customer puts you at the mercy of the one customer

 

[WarKa DaNG]

Begging