Consider the monetary cost of the Chinook shoot down:
30 U.S. dead = at least 60 man years of costly training, to the tune of ~ $100 million. This will also cost another 60 man years of training to replace these men, not including the cost of the Chinook and its replacement, nor the cost of post-action airstrikes and clean-up.
The Service Government Life Insurance (SGLI) death payouts are ~$400,000 each, plus the costs of survivor's benefits. The wives will get retirement and dependent benefits; children (until age 23) and wives get G.I. Bill educational benefits and health care benefits.
Simply, this one action had a cost in excess of a quarter of a billion dollars (probably a light estimate). Army Times (27 Aug 11) brags that after the shoot down, the U.S. bombed and killed 10 of the fighters that took part in this fiasco we call a combat action.
If the U.S. killed 10 and lost 37 friendlies at such a dollar cost, we cannot afford to fight this war. This is a favorable kill ratio for a primitive, non-technological adversary facing the most sophisticated, specialized troops in the world (or so we are told). That is 3.7:1 -- respectable in any soldier's handbook.
The cost of each dead insurgent was at least $25 million. Ranger reckons the ISAF force has not heard about the budget cuts and cash shortfalls here in The Homeland .
It is too much lost for too little of a return on our investment. Thirty U.S. dead is not worth the heads of middling Taliban leaders at any cost.
I may no longer be a soldier, but these are things even a civilian should understand.
