Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!nih-csl!lhc!ncifcrf!haven!uvaarpa!mcnc!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: phil@brahms.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: AA Missile costs?
Message-ID: <1990Oct24.114807.3979@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 24 Oct 90 11:48:07 GMT
References: <1990Oct19.032624.12839@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military-request@att.att.com
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc; Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 22
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: phil@brahms.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
In article <1990Oct19.032624.12839@cbnews.att.com> jkh@bambam.pcs.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes:
|Just
|what does a sidewinder cost, anyway? Would it be possible that Randy's
|missile ended up costing significantly more than the truck?

Actually, it doesn't matter at all. If both parties in a war had
equal resources, it might be of some interest, but the US generally
can out spend its opponents if that's all it takes to win the war.
(sometimes we out spend our opponents and still lose the war, but
that's not relevant here)

Also, Americans tend to place a higher value on the lives of their
soldiers, probably because we tend to have more money. If we can
win, at a price we can afford, then that's what counts and the
value of enemy assets destroyed doesn't matter.


--
The Bill of Rights isn't perfect, but it's better than what we have now.