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 (329306)	3/19/2007 7:02:46 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574678

I see.......you can make a comparison to defense spending during WW 2 and that's on point but if I make a comparison to the defense budgets of current countries that's off point. My comparison was during and since WWII. The primary point was the Vietnam, Korea, and to a lesser extent Reagan's build up. WWII was just another data point, and its on issue because the issue was the idea that the military industrial complex has become a smaller part of our country over time. It has become a smaller part of our country, and whatever other countries have or have not done, doesn't change that fact. If you think that a comparison to other countries is more important, there's no reason why the issue can't be raised. But its a different issue. I can't see what that's not clear to you. Perhaps your confusing relevance with importance. You think comparisons to other countries is a more important way to measure the size of our military, and since its important it somehow absolutely has to be relevant, but its doesn't work that way. If I said "I like Coke more than Pepsi", and you replied "People are dying in Iraq.", your point might be a lot more important but it would have no relevance.