Afghan massacre

Ernest I just got my son out. I hope the best for you and your son. Be praying for y'all. My son went in a fucked up little shit and came out a Man. Thank God everything seems to be OK.

The Sargent better get a fair trial. Dudes head was fucked. Seeing your bud blown in half day before. 5th fucking tour and a head injury. This country better not do our best wrong... Fuckem......I'm telling y'all...............

Shut the fuck up COG.

I'd really rather not shut the fuck up. I have no animosity to that soldier that went nuts, I'm surprised more of them don't go crazy. We treat our servicemen horribly, and these guys are volunteering to take bullets for us, for me! And our government sends them off on these ridiculous missions in the bowels of hell, and we expect them to act rationally.

And then we expect the citizens of the occupied country to roll over and do whatever we tell them. Most don't even know why we're there. So we're in their country, killing their friends and family, and then they take some shots against us, and they are the bad guys? It depends on your perspective.

I love and respect our soldiers, I love and respect them enough to be upset when they are sent out on a useless and unwinnable mission. Our soldiers are brave young men and women, they are NOT cannon fodder expendable so defense contractors can improve their bottom line.

Does anyone know why we are STILL in Afghanistan? What is our mission? What is the definition of victory? Let's get out of there, now. Bring our soldiers home before any more tragedies occur. For God's sake, bring them home!

Ernest I just got my son out. I hope the best for you and your son. Be praying for y'all. My son went in a fucked up little shit and came out a Man. Thank God everything seems to be OK.

The Sargent better get a fair trial. Dudes head was fucked. Seeing your bud blown in half day before. 5th fucking tour and a head injury. This country better not do our best wrong... Fuckem......I'm telling y'all............... Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

First off, congrats on having your son not only home, but doing well.

Unforunately the stats show that many returning young men, from our various military activities oversea do not fare as well as your son...so first off good for both your son and you.

But this "We support our Troops" rallying call falls so short....once they return home. In many parts of the country the VA system is totally lacking in infrastructure to help when our boys come home...it is embarrasing.

I wish the attention and the emotions that are devoted to things like gay marriage, birth control in insurance plan...or even better yet, how did my fantasy football player do in the free agency. That type of attention could be also devoted to providing the type of quality help to our boys after we have sent them into battle.

And I have found, when questioning folks about "Supporting Our Troops" in sending them into the "fight for freedom", that when I ask them point blank...is that fight worth sending your son, your brother, your father into harms way, they get amazingly quiet.

And some of the comments in this thread about nuking countries, potentially engaging in military activities that could kill innocent women and children, blindly classifying a religion of hundreds of millions individuals as our enemey ...I am sorry, but remind me what the difference in that type of thinking and a "terrorist" type of thinking.

Without question, show no mercy to those that attempt terrorist activities against us. But when I see some of the thoughts expressed in this thread...I sadly can see where others would confuse us as the terrorist

Oh, and one final thought....not that this would ever happen

But if we really want to decrease the amount of military spending...start the draft up again.

All the sudden, when everyone could be potentially be sent out to "fight for freedom"...both directly or indirectly...we as a country would be far more diligent in deciding when to send our boys into harms way.

But this "We support our Troops" rallying call falls so short....once they return home. In many parts of the country the VA system is totally lacking in infrastructure to help when our boys come home...it is embarrasing.
Originally Posted by vkmaster

Support our troops to the right means to send our troops to war while cutting taxes at the same time and then bitch about the deficit.

Some support.

Oh, and one final thought....not that this would ever happen

But if we really want to decrease the amount of military spending...start the draft up again.

All the sudden, when everyone could be potentially be sent out to "fight for freedom"...both directly or indirectly...we as a country would be far more diligent in deciding when to send our boys into harms way. Originally Posted by vkmaster

+1

+2 too.

Support our troops to the right means to send our troops to war while cutting taxes at the same time and then bitch about the deficit.

Some support. Originally Posted by WTF

get ready, those rightwingteanuts r gunna say cutting taxes miraculously raises tax revenue. LOL! its majic! LOL!

get ready, those rightwingteanuts r gunna say cutting taxes miraculously raises tax revenue. LOL! its majic! LOL! Originally Posted by Af-Freakin

They only know of the Laffer Curve. They do not actually understand it.

They only know of the Laffer Curve. They do not actually understand it. Originally Posted by WTF

Explain the Laffer Curve to us. I'm assuming you "actually understand it". We're waiting. This ought to be good.

"start the draft again"

Gee, that worked out so well in Vietnam.

My service number had "US" in front of it. Many of you older guys know what that designates.

Explain the Laffer Curve to us. I'm assuming you "actually understand it". We're waiting. This ought to be good. Originally Posted by joe bloe

It does not state that always cutting taxes always raises tax revenue.

Do you understand that?

I doubt it because you always spout off about lowering taxes will walways increase tax revenue.

The more you spout off on this subject, the more you will get your ass handed to you.

Most of you wing nuts will point to Reagan's tax cuts without ever looking at the tax revenue stream he increased by way of regressive taxes. Such as the gas tax ans increasing the SS tax.

It does not state that always cutting taxes always raises tax revenue.

Do you understand that?

I doubt it because you always spout off about lowering taxes will walways increase tax revenue. Originally Posted by WTF

I absolutely understand it. Art Laffer said that the income tax can be too low or too high. If you tax at a one percent rate you won't get sufficient revenue. If you tax at ninety percent rate you won't either. The goal is to find the optimal rate.

The whole point of the Laffer Curve (supply side economics) is to not tax at a rate that is so high that its negative effect on economic growth produces a net loss.

I do think a lot of conservatives just robotically respond that a lower income tax rate will always produce an increase in revenue. Art Laffer never said. Even John Maynard Keynes (FDR's favorite economist) ackowledged that the income tax can be so high that it results in a decrease in revenue.

John Maynard Keynes was once in a conference with a room full of fellow economists. He said that he believed he was the only non-Keynesian in the room. The point being that his actual theories had been so completely misunderstood and bastardized that they no longer reflected his core beliefs. To some extent, I think that Art Laffer must feel the same way. It might interest you to know that Art Laffer thought that Bill Clinton did a great job with the economy. That one has me a little puzzled.

The Laffer Curve simply states that at some level of taxation, revenue will begin to decrease. If you think we are on that side of the curve, then reducing taxes will increase revenue. If we are on the other side of the curve, raising taxes will increase revenue. I think most people think we are on the side of the curve that indicates that revenue will increase if we lower taxes.