> Russel wrote:
> You still have nothing to say about the cost of the war, just making it
> more palatable.

You asked how it could be made cheaper.  I said by involving a global
alliance such as Mr. Bush's father did.  During that war the US
covered 10% of the cost and 0% of the reconstruction.

In this war the US is covering over 90% of the cost AND reconstruction.

> As for the 6 percent, that just says that US troops performed 94% better
> than expected.  That is like saying you nearly doubled your profits for
> the year over the expected.
> 

No, it's like saying that you lost 94% less than you expected.  But
you still lost while your competitors profitted, because you have a
stupid business model.

This is a case of bad idea, good execution for the invasion.  It's
still a bad idea!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:148681
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to