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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (218143)	2/13/2007 12:56:50 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Then if we really need to win, and if you sacrifice" - the cost benefit analysis, - more soldiers - put up an unstoppable force- for surely we could. - overwhelming all out military attempt - war taxes and war bonds? " Why not? Because rational people do not define the results of that sort of effort as a win. "I mean either one means that it's imperative to win the war, or one doesn't. And if one means it, then actions should follow rhetoric." Military conquering in this case does not equate to success. "I don't happen to think it's imperative to "win" in Iraq- whatever that means... I see no point in arguing with each other about what to do to win or lose if we don't have clarity and agreement on what those terms mean.