"Our Children and Grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent" JFK

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

While Congress proposes cuts to Head Start and Food Stamps, the Air Force spends $4 mil per day on bomb gifts for Libya

Our elected "representatives" proposed
cutting $2.7 million per day
($1 billion annually) from Head Start Programs
while the Air Force spends $4 million per day
on bombs for Libya.

The Hill
By: John Bennett
March 30, 2011

The U.S. Air Force's portion of the Pentagon's $550 million tab for the opening days of the Libyan military campaign was $50 million, senior service officials said Wednesday, and Pentagon discussions about a special emergency spending measure "are unresolved."

"The first thing we did" at the onset of the Libyan operation "was start tracking those additional costs," Air Force Secretary Michael Donley told the Senate Appropriations Committee.

The air service has spent $4 million a day just on the munitions it has fired to pound Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's military, Donley said.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz told the panel the service's costs should grow to about $70 million through the second week of the campaign.

A Pentagon official on Tuesday told The Hill the U.S. military's tab for the opening days of the mission was $550 million. U.S. costs are expected to level out at about $40 million a month, the official added.

Lawmakers from both parties have raised concerns about the costs of the Libyan campaign as Washington wrestles with a fiscal crisis.

Schwartz said costs should come down for the Air Force and the entire U.S. military force should shrink as coalition aircraft take on more sorties, including "strike missions," meaning ones targeting Libyan military platforms and facilities.

In the meantime, after initially predicting the Air Force's prized F-22 fighter would be used "in the early days" of a Libyan operation, Schwartz told the panel the primary reason the Raptor fleet was not used is because there are no F-22s based in Europe or the Middle East.

The decision came because there was an emphasis on setting the operation in motion quickly, and moving F-22s would take longer than using other fighters already nearby, like the F-15, Schwartz said. Donley added that the F-15 is better suited to take out ground targets than the F-22, designed primarily for fighter-on-fighter dog fighting.

No comments:

Post a Comment