I don't think of support for and opposition to the war as matters of cost-benefit calculations in the very short term alone either. Reduced to such calculations, though, there is a reason that the anti-war side necessarily loses out in a cheap and short war:
(A) Support for the war: no material gain + emotional and symbolic payoffs + a few short-term material pains like higher gas costs, higher heating bills, etc. + no need to get off the couch
vs.
(B) Opposition to the war: no material gain + emotional and symbolic payoffs + many short-term material pains, not just higher gas costs, higher heating bills, etc. that everyone pays for, but also considerable pains in the ass spending time, energy, and sometimes even money organizing or participating in demos, vigils, sit-ins, calls to elective representatives, etc. (I spend a lot of time, energy, and money doing what I do, while catching flaks from not just supporters of the war but my fellow activists who call me out when I drop the ball, etc. -- and I don't think I'm among the most active anti-war activists.)
I'd have to admit that (A) beats (B) in a very short-term cost-benefit calculation.
A long and costly war -- costing both money and human bodies -- is another matter entirely. -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>