There's also the TSA scanner, an opportunity for perverts and pedophiles to peek at normal people. Don't leave out Big Sis's big contribution to Obama's legacy:
“It’s hard to argue with the economics”
No it isn’t, unless your brain is locked into a Bin Laden=9/11=10 years of defense spending. It’s a wee bit more comlicated than that.
How would this compare to WW2 adjusted for inflation?
he doesn't seem crazy to me, honest to a fault maybe but not crazy.
” $3 trillion over the past 15 years”
Big deal. Obama did that in less than a year.
I wonder how we would equate Bin Laden with Gavrilo Princip? If not now, in another 10 years?
Cost of Osama = 3 trilion over 10 years.
Cost of Obama = $8.5 trillion over 10 years.
Have a nice day.
There's also the TSA scanner, an opportunity for perverts and pedophiles to peek at normal people. Don't leave out Big Sis's big contribution to Obama's legacy:
Two bullets for bin Laden: Less than a cup of Starbucks.
The training needed to put those bullets where they needed to go, the technology to deliver the men with that training to the right location without the Pakistani government noticing their unscheduled visit to the neighborhood of their military academy, and the intelligence assets to figure out where the right location was: priceless (but VERY expensive).
Wondering the costs of Leftism on the US taxpayer since say Woodrow Wilson.
Wondering the costs of Leftism to the Constitution, and the US citizen since say Woodrow Wilson.
BLOAT.
Bin Laden was just the poster boy of the bigger problem... radical Islam. Much of that money was spent/invested in dealing with radicals the world over. The fight isn’t over just because this one figure is out of the picture... much remains to be done.
Trillions for offense, no, no, not a sixpence for jizya.
Cloward,Pivin, Obama and Osama... the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
Wrong. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan cost us that much, not Bin laden
Charge it to Bill Clinton, for not taking Bin Laden when the Sudanese government offered to hand him over.
nuclear weapons are cost effective.
There is so many loopholes in this post, I will wait till Monday to start adding them all up.
Suffice it to say, terrorism is always cheap, if you are the terrorists, and, many times over, extremely damaging and expensive if you are it’s victims. But, doing nothing is not a choice for the victims. That’s just the way it is. Putting a” price tag” on it does not change the dynamics and the disparity in the costs, when terrorism is a global outreach enterprise and not simply domestic wackos.
I would have no problem with this statement if most of the terrorist issue was settled, but it has not been, at least from the information we have on our side of the line, outside of the intelligence community. While we killed bin Laden, we did take 10 years post-9/11 to find him. There is a whole lot more terrorism than just him. If we put a good stopping point to terrorism, then yes, the money and resources were worth it, but seeing as how we haven’t scratched the hotbeds in Yemen, or the growing disorder in Europe, our victory is not so certain, and not neccessarily going to last all that long.
if I was Bill Clinton and forced us to spend $3 billion by letting Osama get away in the 90’s, I’d want all the evidence in Sandy Berger’s pants too
Bin Laden just may get his last laugh if we don’t do anything about our incoming debt crisis. Remember he helped to bankrupt the Soviets.