taking into account the medical care of wounded veterans and expensive repairs to a force depleted by more than a decade of fighting
Keep 'em coming.
I think if you look at military replacement cycles, that too sounds like bunk.
With the exception of fixed wing aircraft, life cycles are pretty short. Wether they scrap a Buffalo because its 8 years old, or it gets used up in Afghanistan it costs the same. Though if it went to Afghanistan, its charged directly to a war appropriation, not the general fund.
The idea that without the GWOT the army would be using the same tanks, humvees, weapons systems, etc over the next 40 years seems absurd on its face. If you have some data I'd welcome it.
Again, I'd refer you to what we've spent to date (which includes non-routine) replacement...