Letters to the Editor
-
The old "sunk cost" argument.
Fleischer and Anonymous would both like us to stay in Iraq because if we leave now, we will have "wasted" the lives and sacrifices of the men who died and were maimed there. True enough, we will. But if we can't win anyway, and most people with the slightest awareness of the situation in Iraq know that we can't, what's the point of wasting more?
The notion that "I can't afford to waste what I've already invested, I'll keep on till I win" is the mentality that keeps people at the tables in Vegas till they're broke, and caused Enron employees to go on putting their entire retirement funds into Enron stock. ("This downturn has to pass, and then I'll really clean up.") Any economist can tell you why the "sunk cost" argument is bad thinking, although it does have powerful emotional appeal.
I give "Anonymous" this much credit: he does know what that sunk cost really entails, something that armchair hero Fleischer will never, never understand.