[hughlomas]

Can anyone please explain why it is necessary to identify the precise remains of the dead, especially those that died so long ago? It seems like a waste of time and resources, driven by a compulsive over-expression of sentiment. In the case of the article, the man died over fifty years ago, and they even have the luxury of knowing where and how he died, shouldn't that be closure enough? Should taxpayers really be funding a staff of 500 for this? I can think of many better allocations for $100,000,000.

[hartror]

It is part of the promise your country makes to you and your family as part of you going to war. You know if you are deployed and subsequently killed you know that your country will make every reasonable effort to return your remains to your loved ones.

Seems a minor cost compared to a life, or thousands of lives.

[aaron695]

Actually I would imagine anyone who is not dumb or suicidally depressed would prefer their country spent that money on themselves not dying.

So to me, letting soldiers/people die because resources are instead being spent on people who passed away 50 years ago is not a minor cost.

[kiiski]

US military budget is, what, ~$700 billion? I don't think a $100 million is going to improve anyones odds of survival if spent on equipment/research/something else, but it can have a big effect on morale if the soldiers know they wont be just abandoned and forgotten if things go badly.

[chongli]

Proper burial is one of the oldest elements of our culture. We have evidence that it may even predate our species. That said, you are right that $100,000,000 is an absurd amount of resources for this.

[moogleii]

Wow, really just throwing those words around, huh? Luxury, closure enough, compulsive over-expression. But if this isn't a troll comment, a simple first pass analysis would lead you to something similar to 001sky's conclusion.

[nn3]

Agreed. Sounds like a big waste of tax dollars.

[001sky]

Like prosecuting murderers? That CSI don't come for free. There is a reason society makes un-economic promises to victims of crime and casualties of War. They are not too dis-dimilar when you think about it.

[robryk]

I don't see how these compare: prosecuting murderers is supposed to prevent them from murdering again and, more importantly, discourage other people from murder. What is the parallel effect of proper burial of war casualties?

[001sky]

The families of the victims in both cases. The notion that justice (& dignity) outweigh the bean-counting. It is sort of parallel to insurance in that regards. The victims of crime and war are a small minority, and the rest of society makes small sacrafices on their behalf. If you look at the average cost of a gallon of gas delivered into Afghanistan, it is 100x markup, two orders of magnitude beyond "reasonable".

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405297020490380...