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: Road Walker who wrote (382969)	5/7/2008 11:09:39 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575627

>>> And you know the cost doesn't stop the day the "war" stops. Well, that's true -- and you know the "true" cost of the war isn't determined in the matter than this half trillion overstatement is, either. The reality is that most of these costs would have been incurred anyway, since you still have to have the equipment, you still have to have the people. Only the incremental cost, primarily, consumables (fuel, ammunition, food, etc.) and destroyed property are properly counted. So, when we talk about a "$500 billion" cost, even that is likely to be a substantial overstatement of the REAL cost of the war. It certainly will never reach $3 Trillion as you have claimed. Consider further that as a percent of GDP, the real cost of the war is less than any war in our recent past (figures as of mid'07) -- War............%GDP Iraq...........1.06% Vietnam........1.77 Korea..........2.15 WWII..........15.52 WWI............3.33 Further, as a percent of total federal expenditures -- War...........%Exp Iraq..........18.3% Vietnam.......36.7% Korea.........60.6% WWII.........238.6% WWI..........123.0% Your remarks as to 3 trillion started out as typical liberal overstatements. But you have continued to make them, in spite of being corrected by me and others, and at some point, they move from the category of being overstatements or mistakes to one of outright lying. I believe they are now more properly classified as lies than mistakes or overstatements. What is certain is that your $3 Trillion number is not only wrong, it is vastly wrong. While we grieve every life lost, it can also be said that America has been more cautious than ever with both American and civilian lives in this war. This is quite obvious from the contrast in the number of fatalities versus other wars that required less time to fight. The simple truth is that as war goes, this one has not been that costly. Obviously, anyone who has lost a loved one feels immeasurable pain and the remark in no way diminishes that. But in terms of actual money spent as well lives lost, America has performed fairly well in the Iraq war. The liberal lies and misstatements are all part of the war protest effort; I realize this. But if you want to be taken seriously, you ought to try to be more realistic in your assessment.