NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21105586/

The American Infantryman at $17,500 (in addition to their base salaries of 20 to 30,000 depending on rank) = the most expensive infantry in the world????

That's just equipment costs. It has not said anything about training costs or transportation costs.

Nothing new to me, we have the most expensive military overall regardless of branch or service, Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines.

Edit: WOOT! Time Warp, This thread is MINE!!!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21105586/

The American Infantryman at $17,500 (in addition to their base salaries of 20 to 30,000 depending on rank) = the most expensive infantry in the world????

That's just equipment costs. It has not said anything about training costs or transportation costs.

Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but soon...there'll be a point to this thread.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21105586/

The American Infantryman at $17,500 (in addition to their base salaries of 20 to 30,000 depending on rank) = the most expensive infantry in the world????

That's just equipment costs. It has not said anything about training costs or transportation costs.

That's why you have to buy wholesale.

Hmm, oh, I know, let's cut costs and get rid of our body armour. Or, we could scrutinize that $14,000 a month that goes to four stars for base pay.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find that training costs per infantryman are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Given that the modern soldier is a multi-disciplinary specialist with a personal high-tech arsenal (as opposed to the WWII dogface - hand him a rifle and load him on a ship, just about), it makes sense for the Army to protect their investment.

We put extra armor on a Humvee in hopes that it would survive an attack and still be able to operate as a fighting vehicle. Would you do less for a man?

(Hint - check the WIA vs. KIA chart in the article for proof that this works.)

I suspect he's boasting rather than outraged or surprised.

EDIT: I timewarp a Mod - ah ha ha ha - the gods of Jolt must favour me....ME!!!

That's just equipment costs. It has not said anything about training costs or transportation costs.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find that training costs per infantryman are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Given that the modern soldier is a multi-disciplinary specialist with a personal high-tech arsenal (as opposed to the WWII dogface - hand him a rifle and load him on a ship, just about), it makes sense for the Army to protect their investment.

We put extra armor on a Humvee in hopes that it would survive an attack and still be able to operate as a fighting vehicle. Would you do less for a man?

(Hint - check the WIA vs. KIA chart in the article for proof that this works.)

Hell, just take a look at any U.S. military website about what goes on in their boot camps. Now, admittedly the websites are partially advertisements--since the military is, after all, voluntary and they are trying to get as many people to join as possible--but there is more than enough information to make clear that Frisbee's assessment is most probably correct. We really ought to be spending more to protect our men and women than we are because each one is so valuable in how they are trained.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21105586/

The American Infantryman at $17,500 (in addition to their base salaries of 20 to 30,000 depending on rank) = the most expensive infantry in the world????

That's just equipment costs. It has not said anything about training costs or transportation costs.
That's equipment that is bought from the lowest bidder, I might add...Just imagine how much it would cost if we bought the "good" stuff.

Hmm, oh, I know, let's cut costs and get rid of our body armour. Or, we could scrutinize that $14,000 a month that goes to four stars for base pay.

Why exactly do we need to scrutinize it? They have more than earned it... and at that price, the general has more responsibility per dollar of their paycheck than any civilian.

That's equipment that is bought from the lowest bidder, I might add...Just imagine how much it would cost if we bought the "good" stuff.

Or how much less it would be screwed up on delivery.

We spend that little? Well, you get what you pay for...

It's better to have trained warriors than untrained badly armed cannon fodder.

I suspect he's boasting rather than outraged or surprised.

EDIT: I timewarp a Mod - ah ha ha ha - the gods of Jolt must favour me....ME!!!

Actually I wanted to know if any other country spends more.

Israel might...just a guess since they're surrounded by enemies and all..

I highly doubt it - I can't see any country outspending the US.

Actually I wanted to know if any other country spends more.

Israel might...just a guess since they're surrounded by enemies and all..

Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow but soon...there'll be a point to this thread.
I think I found it:

http://www.kcrw.com/podcast/images/tp.jpg

I highly doubt it - I can't see any country outspending the US.

?Why not?

?Why not?

North Korea maybe, they don't spend a lot of money on their people.

?Why not?

I don't know, I'm sure someone with more of an eye for military matters can answer better than I but, honestly, the US spends way more on its military than any other country and the results are seen in the array of weaponry available to the US fighting forces.

I'm not overly interested in citing anything or doing much research but I'd say it's fairly clear from common knowledge.

I'm neither for nor against it, I'm not taking a position on spending on soldiers, which, as has been pointed out, is pretty good spending given their job.

I'm simply expressing my lack of surprise that this amount is spent or that America spends more on its individual soldiers than any other country.

I am surprised that you're surprised.

I personally will not be satisfied until we have functional Power Armor as described in Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

Who needs tanks? :p