The old adage is that war is good for the economy. I'd like to add to it: unless you are fighting it. Robert Gates sent a letter to Congress saying he'll need more money to keep up the war, and that doesn't even take into account an increase in troops in Afghanistan. Soon I'm going to be writing about how much I dislike the idea of the 17.4 billion dollar auto bailout. That's, unfortunately, chump change compared to the 136 billion dollars... that Gates wants this year. Don't even get started on the near trillion we've spent in the last five years in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm fairly confident that when a country's economy goes down the drain they pull out of all active military conflicts. That's what the British and French would do. They fought a near-constant war for centuries, taking breaks only when they couldn't afford to pay their armies. Maybe if we stopped shipping 200,000 of our workforce overseas and allowed them to stay home to buy cars we wouldn't have to bail out Detroit. Also, we would need more support workers for the extra workers. Tertiary in nature, if we let the Iraqis fight it out amongst themselves, then they will want to buy guns and ammo and food and vehicles from us, which is good for the economy.
-
Posts
You had my up until that very last sentence. They have enough weapons. Just let em figt it out amongst themselves. Anything we are doing hasn't stopped them before.
ReplyDelete