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 : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (18422)	3/18/2008 3:31:55 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25737

But it is valid to look at the economic costs of any foreign war and determine if there has been value received. Putting money in that direction instead of any other is a political and economic choice. One doesn't have to be a "bush hater" (such a tired over-worked answer to even legitimate criticism of Administration policy)to delve into the issue of the road taken and the road not taken...economically, politically, etc. I remember well the republican challenge to the potential costs of Clinton's adventure in Bosnia. Same thing...money could be better spent elsewhere, cost would harm us economically, etc. Is economic impact less a valid measure than any other? Just from an academic exercise - if we weaken ourselves over time by spending money here and now , is this the right place and right time to spend the money? Would we win only a phyric (sp)victory?