Skip to comments.
War!
www.enterpriseeconomy.com ^
| 09-16-02
| brian wesbury
Posted on 09/17/2002 9:18:10 AM PDT by john bell hood
Exhibiting a great deal of that much-debated "gravitas," President Bush told the U.N. last week that, either they get to work stopping Saddam Hussein or the U.S. will go it alone. It is clear that the President views this next phase of the War Against Terror as essential to the safety of the world. And because of his leadership, somewhere between 65 and 80 percent of the American people support him. Over the weekend, Secretary of State Colin Powell reiterated the President's words from last week and said that we need answers from the U.N. in, "a matter of weeks, not months..." It clearly looks like war. And one big question is: What does war mean for the economy?
Excerpt. Rest of article.
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; recession; stockmarket
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Wesbury says the war won't have a negative impct on the economy, and it might have a positive impact.
But I think it depends on how well the war goes. If it's over as quickly and with as few American casualties as Afghanistan or the first Gulf War, it will be a big boost. But if Saddam unleashes chemical or biological weapons that result in a lot of American casualties, it could be another story
To: john bell hood
Cheers to President Bush for keeping the heat on.
2
posted on
09/17/2002 9:20:26 AM PDT
by
Ciexyz
To: john bell hood
Assumming we do go it alone and this happens: But if Saddam unleashes chemical or biological weapons that result in a lot of American casualties, it could be another storywhat could we expect from the international community?
3
posted on
09/17/2002 9:27:31 AM PDT
by
GVnana
Comment #4 Removed by Moderator
To: dollygirl
Not even close, dear...
5
posted on
09/17/2002 9:34:25 AM PDT
by
Doug Loss
To: john bell hood
it might have a positive impact War as it was waged in the past had the object of gain. To grab, to get. But it hasn't worked out that way lately. Beginning with WW I, even the winner lost; England won the war, but lost the Empire. WW II was a loser for both Germany and Japan, who had begun the war to expand themselves economically. Iraq warred on Kuwait and lost.
Don't count on a positive impact on the economy, even if the purpose of the war is nothing more than self-protection.
To: dollygirl
If Saddam in fact has non-conventional weapons and the UN inspectors wont find it (I think they wont) then Israel will probably bomb Saddams factories like Israel did in 1981.
7
posted on
09/17/2002 9:36:51 AM PDT
by
Kaafi
To: dollygirl
Read a transcript of the president's speech to the UN and tell me exactly when he mentioned "weapon's inspectors" as an avenue to avert a regime change.
8
posted on
09/17/2002 9:38:10 AM PDT
by
rudypoot
To: john bell hood
In the past, wartime was boom-time for manufacturing. This war will benefit Mexico, China, Taiwan, Japan, etc. much more than our economy. It's difficult to stockpile and transport the output from a service-based economy.
9
posted on
09/17/2002 9:41:53 AM PDT
by
meadsjn
To: dollygirl
War is over folks time to go back home.What on earth would lead you to that conclusion?
10
posted on
09/17/2002 10:39:13 AM PDT
by
GVnana
To: GVgirl
Dollygirl cannot see too far as she still is using kneepads.
11
posted on
09/17/2002 10:42:10 AM PDT
by
cynicom
To: john bell hood
"Wesbury says the war won't have a negative impct on the economy, and it might have a positive impact. Protracted war, that involves large parts of the populous is good for the economy (though not a pleasant prospect). Unemployment traditionally drops (obvious reasons) and manufacturing increases. Although we now make many weapons components overseas, a great deal will still be made domestically.
The stock market is a whole different bag of nuts and for the moment it's probably a good idea to rotate equity weighted portfolios into something more stable.
To: cynicom
now what does that mean? Kneepads? Give her a break, it's no way to talk to a lady or a girl.
I think she is optimistically assuming Iraq will be true to it's word. Maybe, just maybe, Bush scared Saddam and he decided it wasn't worth another butt kicking and losing power.
13
posted on
09/17/2002 11:33:00 AM PDT
by
CJ Wolf
To: GVgirl
The 'you brought in on yourself' crowd will come
crawling out of the woodwork.
Mad Vlad
14
posted on
09/17/2002 11:46:08 AM PDT
by
madvlad
To: Ciexyz
if any here watched Dubya today, there were two
messages, education ,the pledge of allegiance
and history. WE THE PEOPLE was announced as a document drop of America's history and launched in feb/mar 03'.
IN
the flow,Bush added why we fight war. Books,history,
and being truth tellers, means defending those choices.
Now mind you,this was kids belt high tall.
GOD
religion was mentioned twice and Dubya was
most pround to the face of religious trust
WE
"We The People" was mentioned as a govt initiatibe
that 'splains SOUVERGNITY to our youth with
documents and teachers telling America's history.
TRUST
We don't trust the U.N.....no not a little
every poll shows the free world (& Rio Linda)
trust Dubya and do not trust Saddam.
the setting today told me WAR was NOW,and
for a while, but it ain't gettin' our hearts,
our minds,our children,and our God.
To: john bell hood
If there is no US, then the concern of the US economy becomes a mute point donut?
To: john bell hood
The question is not what effect the war would have on the economy. The question is what would effect a nuclear of biological weapon being detonated on our soil have on the economy. "Pluck the weed before it ruins the garden."...Churchill.
To: dollygirl
To: GVgirl
what could we expect from the international community? Condolences.
19
posted on
09/17/2002 1:03:34 PM PDT
by
El Gato
To: meadsjn
This war will benefit Mexico, China, Taiwan, Japan, etc. much more than our economy. It's difficult to stockpile and transport the output from a service-based economy. Those of us in the Militiary-Industrial Complex, formly known as the Arsenal of Democracy, would beg to differ. There are lots of factories sitting idle after the defense tear down of the Clinton years. Plus there are still lots of folk out of work, or working as Peter the Greeter at WalMart, who would just love to get back to making bombs, bullets and beans.
Long lead time parts are a problem. Although I'll bet there are lots of electronics parts out there that never got put into cell phones or other telecom type stuff that could be adpated to smart bombs and such.
20
posted on
09/17/2002 1:08:37 PM PDT
by
El Gato
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson