That Sinking Feeling

USF economics prof Bruce Wydicki had a cogent piece in USA Yesterday relating the concept of sunk costs to America's involvement in Iraq.  Although I do not dispute a word of his analysis I am delighted to pound the table in support of a related point not made by the prof.  Here he goes:

Our inability to think clearly about sunk costs is impeding our ability to make clear decisions about our involvement in Iraq. Failing to correctly identify sunk costs (those that are irretrievable), and deal with them properly, biases our decision-making in favor of prolonging the war.

Maybe.  Let's press on:

When I was a boy, my brother and I were captivated by a pseudo-gambling machine called Silver Falls at an arcade where we spent our summers in rural Missouri. The game works by directing a quarter along a chute so that it lands on a sliding shelf filled with other quarters. Aim correctly, and the falling quarter pushes a bunch of other quarters off the shelf and into the jackpot hole.

The game is exceptionally addictive, a fact that was obviously not lost on the arcade owners who installed the machine there. It seems that just plunking one more quarter in the machine will supply the necessary thrust to knock a huge pile of quarters off the shelf (some of which by now are your own quarters). Quitting means a loss of all the quarters that have been carefully invested in the game.

The inability to quit Silver Falls is related to a well-known idea in economics about sunk costs. As every student of economics knows, one should never take sunk costs into account when making a decision. They are sunk, and there is nothing you can do about them.

Identify what we've lost

It is clear that some of those who argue for extending the war in Iraq never learned about the importance of identifying sunk costs. Consider the following type of statement, the likes of which we have all heard many times: "A current withdrawal would dishonor the memory of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of liberty." Whether one is for or against the war, is this a good way to think about whether we should press on?

I will skip a bit out of a vague and uncharacteristic respect for copyright and cut to his conclusion:

In the rhetoric of the difficult decisions over whether to extend our involvement in the war, including X as a cost of withdrawing inappropriately inflates the cost of a withdrawal. Just as it is harder to quit Silver Falls after wasting $10 worth of quarters, it is harder to quit a war after incurring 3,600 dead and tens of thousands wounded, and spending the better part of a trillion dollars in a failed effort.

Although it may seem callous, we need to forget about X in our decision-making about the war. The correct way to think about whether or not to proceed is to weigh the costs and benefits from pressing on from this point forward. What value do we place on victory? What are the chances that we will prevail if we do press on? And what will be the costs of pressing on in terms of lives and resources? Our country may be divided on this issue, but we owe it to those who may yet be called to make the ultimate sacrifice to properly count our costs.

To which I say, yes, but - is it only the war supporters that are befuddled about sunk costs vis a vis the importance of looking forward?  Surely there are plenty of war opponents who argue, in effect, that Bush lied about WMDs, the war was launched without proper planning and international support, and therefore it is time to accept defeat and come home.

In the context of the Silver Falls metaphor, that would be akin to identifying the initial decision to commence dropping quarters into the game as a ghastly mistake that has now cost ten dollars, which will not be not coming back. 

But suppose the next quarter has a fifty percent chance of shaking loose two dollars in change?  That is an expected gross pay-off from the next quarter of one dollar, which implies that, however boneheaded the initial decision to commit ten dollars to the game, it really does behoove the player to continue a bit longer, even though the loss of ten dollars will not be fully redeemed.

That said, it would be well to carefully assess the objectivity and reliability of the person offering the evaluation of the next quarter drop - the fellow who has dropped the first forty might not be the most credible judge going forward.

Comments

[PeterUK]

Ralph L,
You don't need to go that far back,think of your own Indian wars,the Ghost Dance,now give them technical education,explosives and cellphones,add in co-religionists in wealthy countries...

[PeterUK]

A DEMOCRAT CHANGES HIS MIND ON RUNNING FROM IRAQ Give Petraeus more time."Leaving against national interest".

[PeterUK]

An honourable man.(from the link)
"U.S. Rep. Brian Baird said Thursday that his recent trip to Iraq convinced him the military needs more time in the region, and that a hasty pullout would cause chaos that helps Iran and harms U.S. security.

"I believe that the decision to invade Iraq and the post-invasion management of that country were among the largest foreign-policy mistakes in the history of our nation. I voted against them, and I still think they were the right votes," Baird said in a telephone interview from Washington, D.C.

"But we're on the ground now. We have a responsibility to the Iraqi people and a strategic interest in making this work."

Baird, a five-term Democrat, voted against President Bush ordering the Iraq invasion — at a time when he was in a minority in Congress and at risk of alienating voters. He returned late Tuesday from a trip that included stops in Israel, Jordan and Iraq, where he met troops, U.S. advisers and Iraqis, whose stories have convinced him that U.S. troops must stay longer."

[Holly Garza]

OT -- I just now heard Mark Levin say that he and a group of colleagues filed an amicus brief in the Libby case (or perhaps he said asked the court permission to file). He outlined the major points and it doesn't sound like there's anything new in the brief.

[Holly Garza]

OT -- I just now heard Mark Levin say that he and a group of colleagues filed an amicus brief in the Libby case (or perhaps he said asked the court permission to file). He outlined the major points and it doesn't sound like there's anything new in the brief.

[Holly Garza]

BTW, Levin says there's a link to text of the brief at his website (whatever that is).

[PeterUK]

Poll:Americans want to win
Now we know why Karl Rove resigned,why do the Republicans need him when the Democrats have Reid and Pelosi?

[BarbaraS]

What the good professor does not address is what would the "sunk costs" be in the future if we leave Iraq now? These people will have to be dealt with sooner or later. We cannot let them prvail. Ten years from now, after we have let them grow almost beyond defeat, the "sunk costs" will be astronomical. Look how the terror organizations have grown in the last two decades. This is what happened with Germany. We let them do their stuff until they were almost unbeatable. We certainly lost over 400,000 people to this war and a hell of a lot of money which we might not have done if we had acted sooner.

The monetary costs and lost lives in the inevitable future war will trump this little war that has not incapacitated the American people one iota. The only people affected by it are the military and their families. And there is no sense in arguing about the money spent. The money will be spent regardless and probably on more frililous things. One thing for sure the government does not give money back they don't have to and Americans have no say about where it goes.

[Ann]

Cerulean,

More fuel:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/08/edwards-calls-c.html ">Edwards Calls Ann Coulter "She-Devil"

[Ann]

OT (Coulter)

I, on the other hand, would call her column a must read:

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi ">IF AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED, LIE, LIE AGAIN

[SunnyDay]

Holly - it's here

http://www.marklevinshow.com/

[Barney Frank]

http://www.marklevinshow.com/libby.pdf>Levins Briefs (bad pun intended)in living color, as mentioned by Holly above.

BTW, hi Holly! Great to see you posting.

[SunnyDay]

http://members.cox.net/liinda/levin.htm

My usual

[Topsecretk9]

Gee thanks SunnyDay - you are such a peach - gave me something juicy to print out and read tonight.

[Ann]

Re: Mark Levin

Has anyone thought what would Hillary "Her Thighness" (God forbid "President") do with a precedent like Comey/Fitzgerald with all their power?

Can't you see her using that precedent as an excuse to go after her enemies without being politically connected?

Maybe, I have the early signs of "Hillary
Derangement syndrome" HDS, but I wish a lawyer here would tell me not to worry.

[Topsecretk9]

I am thinking this is a typo on Levin's radio-show website

--On Friday's Mark Levin Show, Mark spoke about his law firm's, Landmark Legal Foundation, Amicus Brief in support of Patrick Fitzgerald. The document can be read below. ---

or a hack.

[Topsecretk9]

--do with a precedent like Comey/Fitzgerald with all their power?--

what goes around comes around - remember the GOP had been against the independent council law BEFORE the Clinton's -- an all powerful, answer to no one Ken Starr? She - no likey, one bit

[Topsecretk9]

You know, in reading these arguments again - it's remarkable that stupid liberals in supporting Fitzgerald at all costs are really supporting McChimmpyhaliburton in a sense - basically if this unconstitutional appointment IS held up it's a twofold predicament...Say another republican is elected and as Ann says secretly appoints- a Comey/Fitzgerald with all their power? -- and likewise a secret all powerful Sp is told to go after the pres...Dem pres elected, sets up gestapo and likewise republicans pressure DOJ for the same --

Anyways typical liberals - they can't see the forest for the trees - they're all just pissed they might be caught when they chat to Al Queda.

[Topsecretk9]

Well, I just read this...and I suspect an honest, principled liberal would be willing to grapple with this reality - every other opportunistic (say Glenn Greenwald) liberal will salivate and ignore the true meaning until a republican is elected again - and then squeal like a pig at the shredding of the constitiution - exactly why you should never vote for unprincipled forked tongued liberals.

And even more importantly, it is impossible to draw a rea-soned distinction between the appointment here and a variety of potentially abusive appointments that might follow in its wake. For example, the Attorney General could follow the same procedure used here in appointing a special counsel to in-vestigate a political opponent in Congress or within the Administration, cutting the special counsel loose from any “supervision or control” and then disclaiming any responsibility for the consequences of the special counsel’s actions.

Indeed, under the Government’s reading of the Appointments Clause, nothing would stop the At-torney General from unilaterally appointing hundreds of special counsel across the nation to investigate and prosecute (for example) individual tax crimes, housing crimes, voter fraud, or public corruption—all without political accountability.

The potential for abuse is great, therefore, and the need for political account-ability is no less present when the Executive Branch is investigating itself than when it is performing other executive functions. By ensuring that Congress is involved in appointing every officer, whether principal or inferior, the Appointments Clause guarantees that both the Executive and Legislative Branches are accountable for the results of an intra- or inter-branch investigation. See Freytag v. Com-missioner, 501 U.S. 868, 884 (1991).

[RichatUF]

This should go a few threads down, but this one is the most active.

FISA judge

I wonder if this is the judge that created the emergency that got the law changed.

[SunnyDay]

--On Friday's Mark Levin Show, Mark spoke about his law firm's, Landmark Legal Foundation, Amicus Brief in support of Patrick Fitzgerald. The document can be read below. ---

or a hack.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 | August 17, 2007 at 11:33 PM

********************

Ugh. probably an error.

[SunnyDay]

If Justice officials want to seal parts of their response, the government must explain why to the court, which will have the final say.
***************

have the final say?? Does that court have that kind of authority? What if justice says "make me." ???

I'm a legal dummy, but logically, it just seems a little off the wall.

[Holly Garza]

Thanks, Sunny and Barney.

I have never listened to Talk Radio before, but I happened to be travelling from Houston to Dallas today with a friend who is an avid fan.

Two hours of Limbaugh. Three hours of Hannity. One hour of Levin.

Truly a revelation. *grin*

[cboldt]

-- This should go a few threads down, but this one is the most active. ... FISA Judge [FISC Judge orders briefing on the release of FISC Orders relating to surveillance that had theretofore been performed under the TSP or similar authorizing EO] --

The August 16 FISC order by Judge Kollar-Kotelly is a stunt. text of Order with my commentary

[kim]

Well, I wondered. Does this make it more likely she was the one who issued the adverse ruling setting off this mess?

There is an analogy to Star Chambers here. How does one investigate oneself? How does one keep secrets from oneself?
==============================

[boris]

OT Here is a video interview with Kim Taipale (Tay-pal) and Clive Thompson on "Digital Age".

Kim Taipale has written about FISA and contributed to Senate hearings on that subject. Some of his writings appear to settle (IMO) most of the disputes between cboldt, Cecil and myself from the older thread (links and quotes are there).

This interview is not on FISA, it's more generally about blogs and intel analysis. It is quite interesting and Taipale certainly seems to know his stuff.

[Cecil Turner]

Interesting link. First impression: Clive Thompson is clueless. His discussion about "stovepiping" was completely wrong and fundamentally misstates the rationale behind compartmentalization (and the ramifications for computer systems: my primary responsibility for one particularly obnoxious three-year tour, and something I actually know a little about). Taipale does appear to be knowledgeable, but the conversation was mostly about things we were doing ten years ago, and the difficulties implementing them (one of the most obdurate was the "iron majors" . . . which has apparently become a term of art outside the military in the last decade).

Interestingly, when looking for a "covert" definition from CIA, I stumbled on vigorous discussions of open source information (versus spying), and it was apparent that CIA had spent some significant effort in that area, and were well aware that the distinction wasn't necessarily a clear one:

Overt and covert streams of intelligence are by no means completely parallel and distinct; they often mingle and meander over one another’s territory. Covert reports at times are amalgams of press clippings. And newspaper editors, for their part, frequently publish stories based on accurate leaks of classified material. . .

Adding in the various reports of CIA's interest in things like WikiPedia (or "IntelliPedia" as they discussed here), and I suspect there's not much they haven't thought of in this area.

[boris]

Clive apparently is into bots.

His blog quote from this article made me laugh.

The most effective way to find and destroy a land mine is to step on it. This has bad results, of course, if you're a human. But not so much if you're a robot and have as many legs as a centipede sticking out from your body. That's why Mark Tilden, a robotics physicist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, built something like that. At the Yuma Test Grounds in Arizona, the autonomous robot, 5 feet long and modeled on a stick-insect, strutted out for a live-fire test and worked beautifully, he says. Every time it found a mine, blew it up and lost a limb, it picked itself up and readjusted to move forward on its remaining legs, continuing to clear a path through the minefield.

Finally it was down to one leg. Still, it pulled itself forward. Tilden was ecstatic. The machine was working splendidly.

The human in command of the exercise, however -- an Army colonel -- blew a fuse.

The colonel ordered the test stopped.

Why? asked Tilden. What's wrong?

The colonel just could not stand the pathos of watching the burned, scarred and crippled machine drag itself forward on its last leg.

This test, he charged, was inhumane.

Now that's hilarious.

[cathyf]

Interestingly, when looking for a "covert" definition from CIA, I stumbled on vigorous discussions of open source information (versus spying), and it was apparent that CIA had spent some significant effort in that area, and were well aware that the distinction wasn't necessarily a clear one

When I interviewed there 22 years ago they told me that a significant part of the intel that they collected was from published information, and they were looking at AI methods to mine it.

[Ranger]

The August 16 FISC order by Judge Kollar-Kotelly is a stunt.

Yep. Looks like the FISA judges are up to their old tricks. They have recovered from their institutional slap down at the hands of the FISA Court of Review, and are upping the stakes.

[Cecil Turner]

. . . 22 years ago . . .

I suspected as much. There's a tendency amongst outsiders to assume those "in the know" (whether military, generic classified stuff, or whatever) have missed something obvious . . . and in my experience that's rarely the case. The military was actively using web tools on SIPRNET a decade ago, and experimenting with all sorts of sites. A weblog per se might not have been one of them, but there were lots of collaborative efforts of a similar nature. And if the DOD types are doing it . . .

The problem with classification schemes and computers is the one Taipale highlighted: access. For generic classified info, it's easy: folks with TS clearance get a computer station linked to the TS network, folks with Secret get linked to the Secret one, etc. For compartmented information, it's really hard. Either you have to have a network for each compartment, or you have to ensure the information doesn't get shared across the network. And considering the realities of espionage and disgruntled employees, you have to ensure it remains secure even from those with access to the classified system. It's not a problem with hierarchies, it's the basic premise behind the system. Clive obviously didn't get it.

[RichatUF]

Thanks cboldt-curious as to why the judge would start entertaining a motion like this now aside from the political stunt aspects.

cathyf-

I've read a few article that touch on that. I was curious if the "basket warrant" was not a group of individuals or numbers but all communications with a particular phrase [or a set of call patterns]. Then a judge said, "hell, no way", bring me the analysts and the math then we can talk. Lots of speculation on my part, but there are lots of black box sort of things.

[ajacksonian]

There are so many directions to go here... so lets start with the leaving after sunk cost area, first, as that is the direction the professor hints at. Looking at the long term consequences of defeat in Vietnam, or running from 'sunk cost', proves interesting in that the millions who died after the US left are directly due to *not* countering Communist funding via North Viet Nam to Cambodia and Laos. Thus there cost trade off, in that alone, was a few thousand saved US lives and somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 million or so dead in Cambodia, Laos and South Viet Nam when it was over-run. This does not count the untold tens of thousands fleeing from that situation to become 'The Boat People'. Apparently the low-cost US solution was genocide and 'ethnic cleansing', plus others being put into re-education camps or just 'disappearing'.

From that the USSR, with a far smaller economy, was able to shift its attention to more targets to fuel more proxy wars as a successful paradigm against the US had been found: sap its will via incessant proxy war. Thus the heat got turned up in the Ogaden War and then the USSR turned to El Salvador, Nicaragua, Angola, Mozambique... The pertinent economic analysis that I have heard was from Jerry Pournelle citing Ronald Reagan who pointed out that this shifting of resources was strapped to a very weak 3rd world economy. Turning the US economy around after the oil shocks and the 'stagflation' era was paramount, because the US economic growth rate even during Viet Nam, was higher than that by a large margin than the USSR. The USSR concentrated on wooing the 'non-aligned' movement into its corner, but ignored actually patching up their economy for such things as housing and consumer goods.

Two key points happened that would also indicate to the USSR that the US was unable and unwilling to respond to any attacks: the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to support the faltering regime there, and the overthrow of the Shah by Islamic fundamentalists. The non-response to those seemed to indicate to the USSR that the US was finished. The economic turnaround under Reagan changed the economic side, but consequences of not opposing radical Islam now appeared. Iran, emboldened after disgracing Carter, then started up its Hezbollah Foreign Legion in Lebanon with Syrian help, using the help of Imad Mugniyah who coordinated the three Beirut attacks on the US: the Embassy bombing in 1983, the Marine Barracks bombing the same year, and the 1984 Embassy bombing as a sort of 'and stay out' message to the US. He would also start the kidnapping rings to take Americans hostage in Lebanon, like the CIA station chief William Buckley. Reagan would look towards the short-term for denying the Soviet Union a clear-cut victory in Afghanistan by continuing and then bolstering funding the Mujahadeen. This served as an incubation point for the Muslim Brotherhood that had also expanded its operations in the Sudan. With Saudi and US funding one of the prime operators, Hektamayr, would start incubating terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India's Kashmir.

Sudan's democratic government fell to Muslim Brotherhood backed extremists who then started their own work in Afghanistan. By the time of the pull-out of the Soviet Union, individuals like Osama bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri and, later, Zarqawi (a follower of Zawahiri's group that splintered off from MB) would have their basis of operations in Afghanistan. By the end of Reagan's term the US had suffered multiple attacks by Hezbollah, had helped to fund and train al Qaeda (although Saudi Arabian funding, by all accounts, were on a 40:1 basis to US funding which was miniscule beyond Stingers and some basic tactical training), and was seen as the *next* target of radical Islam of both the Shia and Wahabbi side of things.

And it was all going so badly in Vietnam, wasn't it? Without the USSR being able to redirect its economy after a US pull-out, they would either have to continue funding there, which was eating up supplies no end *or* stop supplying the North. The latter, by most accounts, was on the agenda before Tet, which was a major loss for the North, and they were about ready to throw it in when the MSM touted it as a US *defeat*. Even just sitting and repelling attacks for a continued, relatively low death toll, would have caused the USSR to change its stance as it was not winning. The US had an easily expended 'sunk cost' as witness a growing economy, while the USSR was struggling badly, needing to divert 2:1 to 3:1 the amount of its *economy* vice the US. So that 8% global Cold War expenditure by the US was only matched by a 15-25% expenditure by the USSR that was not allowing their economy to expand at all.

That is the case of the US abandoning 'sunk cost'. Didn't work out too well, given the current state of things.

Now there is also the analysis of when the US would *not* sink a cost in to defeat a Nation! Yes an actual enemy that went unconfronted, unattacked and it was decided that NO cost was worth confronting them. That took place in a ten year span that changed the fundamentals of democracy in America and the power of its government. The President was Woodrow Wilson and the Nation not to be attacked was... the Ottoman Empire. Wilson had been warned from Congress and by Teddy Roosevelt, that if he did not take on the full gamut of allies to Germany, that the US would not be seen as a major power nor have any seat at the table to help guide the outcome of the Peace. While Wilson did have high language and ideals, he was unwilling to go after a Nation that he well knew was staging a genocide as his own Ambassador had reported that to him in 1915. Instead the protection of US businesses and trade were seen as 'civilizing influences' and the US just couldn't have the power to attack the Ottomans. This from a Nation that would have an extremely well supplied Army with over a million soldiers wandering around after bringing Germany to the surrender table. By not going after the entire set of Nations allied with Germany, the UK and France did not set a place at the table for Wilson and his lofty ideals crashed on his inability to back them during wartime. If all of the blather on 'free trade freeing people' was *right* the Middle East would have been a bastion of freedom and liberty due to the loveliness of US trade there.... you know, that doesn't look to work out too well. But we saved a boodle of cash! Don't mind not responding to a few million dead Armenians and the carving up of Africa and the Middle East between the 'Adult' Nations, and a Treaty so horrible it would cause a second world war, along with a toothless international body that could do nothing. The UN has proven that even with US participation, such bodies don't actually get much done in the way of even getting peace, not to speak of spreading liberty and freedom. Apparently there is a higher price than *cash* to help others find a way to liberty and freedom.

There is a short-sightedness involved with economic analysis, as the concept of liberty and freedom are empowering to economics, but are bought at a very high price of which *cash* is a minor constituent. In most Counter-Insurgency concepts we run across DIME: Diplomatic, Information, Military, Economic. Which part of those involves the terms 'liberty' and 'freedom'? The 20th century concentrated on these material and Nation State level things, but that blinds us to the underpinnings of them. That DIME does not pay the toll of liberty and freedom. As a conceptual paradigm, DIME works not only for counter-insurgency, but for those also attacking Nations, and concentrating on those aspects alone, with no other goals involved, does not guarantee a good end. Especially if that end is not stated up front. If you don't know what you are working 'towards' then there is no concrete way to actually see if you are heading towards it.

The pathways of mankind are not set in stone, our history is not inevitable and, in fact, our way of life actually succeeding has more to do with contingent factors than with actual superiority factors. In the span of Nations, democracy has had a relatively short life-span and many at the Founding knew that even Republics were no guarantee of success, and often had just the opposite consequences. The two combined were not seen as a guaranteed success, over time, unless the lessons of keeping democracy safe were learned and passed on. Their warnings of what democracy can deteriorate into are stark and clear, and those sign posts are around us today. It is not Iraq or money that should be worrying us... not by a long shot. Strange to think that as we teach the lessons of liberty in Iraq, and the awful payment that goes with it, that we are forgetting it at home.

[boris]

good post

[Art]

It's amazing how concerned liberals become about spending when it's purpose is to promote national defence.

Just how does one value the ending of one genocidal regime, hostile to America and her allies, and the prevention of another?

The costs assumed by the critics, both human and economic, are inflated and misleading. They aggregate the inherent costs (salaries, equipment repair and replacement) of maintaining our military and discount the deaths of those who will certainly perish in attacks by an emboldened enemy.

Let's see them apply "sunken cost" logic to the "war on poverty". Estimates are that almost 11 trillion dollars has been spent (or redistributed) with little or nothing to show for it, other than an entrenched and bloated government bureaucracy. After that we'll listen to their arguments about military spending.

[hit and run]

Oh boy, dying thread, but I just have to note, mrs hit and run and kids went to Chuck E Cheese with a bunch of neighbors for lunch. She just described a game there that all the moms are addicted to.

She described the game as follows:

The game works by directing a quarter along a chute so that it lands on a sliding shelf filled with other quarters. Aim correctly, and the falling quarter pushes a bunch of other quarters off the shelf and into the jackpot hole.

Well, ok, fine, that's Professor Wydick quoted above.

But it couldn't have been more than a couple words off.

[adult toys]

Sex Machines Sex Machines
Online Pharmacy Online Pharmacy
Adult Toys Adult Toys
Sex Shop Sex Shop
Adult Toys Adult Toys
love dolls love dolls
Adult Sex Toys Adult Sex Toys
BDSM Toys BDSM Toys
naughty christmas naughty christmas day gift idea

[wow power leveling]

wow gold
wow gold
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
wow power level
wow power level
wow power level
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow powerleveling
cheap wow powerleveling
codeheart article
Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
cheap wow gold

[wow power leveling]

wow gold
wow gold
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
World Of Warcraft powerleveling
wow power level
wow power level
wow power level
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow power leveling
cheap wow powerleveling
cheap wow powerleveling
codeheart article
Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
cheap wow gold

[medications]

A Name-Brand drug is marketed under a specific trade name by a pharmaceutical manufacturer. In most cases, Name-Brand drugs are still under patent protection, meaning the manufacturer is the sole source for the product but in many countries around the world this is not the case and a generic drug alternative is readily available. A generic drug is made with the same active ingredients and in the same dosage form as a brand name drug. The generic drug is therapeutically equivalent to the brand name drug but is sold under its chemical or "generic" name.

[Dave]

Xenical a gastrointestinal lipase inhibitor used in the management of obesity in adult and adolescent patients age 12 and older. This medicine may be used during the weight loss phase or following weight loss to assist in weight management. - xenical weight loss online

Acomplia (Rimonabant, Zimulti) is an anorectic anti obesity drug. It is a CB1 cannabinoid receptor antagonist. Rimonabant has been found to stop food craving enough to help people lose weight, and could also help curb other unhealthy urges, such as smoking. - acomplia weight loss online

Meridia (Reductil) -SIBUTRAMINE HCI is a prescription medication thats used to help people lose weight by acting on the appetite control centers in the brain. Studies have shown that using Meridia helps patients lose weight and maintain weight loss for up to 2 years. - meridia weight loss online

Phentermine is used, in combination with diet and exercise,to help you lose weight. It works by decreasing your appetite. - phentermine weight loss online

[battery]

Phentermine is used, in combination with diet and exercise,to help you lose weight. It works by decreasing your appetite.

[sophy]

Please do not hesitate to have habbo credits . It is funny.