Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (139503)	10/2/2001 12:04:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580442

Tim, that's not true. The Soviet Union went down because the cost of controlling its empire was shortchanging the home front too severely. Its industry was crumbing. If we had done nada, it still would have gone down. And responding to our military buildup increased the strain on the Soviet Union and reduced the resources that could have been spent trying to keep the home front from falling apart. When you are about to win it is often better to finish it and make sure rather then letting up and possibly being surprised. Edit - Also all the defense spending helped us get out of the Gulf War with almost no combat deaths. Without the modernization we still would have won if we made the effort but more Americans would have died and quite possibly more Iraqis would have died as well. We spent billions and got nothing. If Russia went nuclear at the end, Star Wars could have done nothing to stop it because there was no Star Wars in place. I was talking about the defense build up in general not just SDI. I support the idea of SDI but I agree that SDI would not have helped protect the US in the 80s, and still can't in 2001 but I think in 2010 or 2015 it might be different. Tim