True or False - Democrats Care About Troops??

[Dinner]

BTW the purpose of the extra money is to force the Department of Defense to do the right thing and cease stop losing soldiers and to stop sending them on endless tours of duty into war zones. In the past the only time these people listen to the desires of men in uniform is when Congress has hit them in the pocket book when they make poor choices. I seriously doubt many people would get this money if it became law because the Pentigon would simply change the way they use troops so that they could avoid paying.

The money just forces them to do what they already should be doing.

[GePap]

So, in an ironic twist, it is when the Gov. does have to treat soldiers as dollar amounts that soldiers will get a fair shake and either serve the terms they volunteered for, OR be p[aid for their troubles.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Stop losses are part of being in the military, I've been on the receiving end of two so far. Wasn't necessarily happy about it but didn't complain as it was part of being in the military. If it passes I'm sure Congress will leave enough loopholes to be able to disqualify lots of soldiers.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Wiglaf




The tax breaks STIMULATED THE ECONOMY!

roflroflrofl

the tax cuts haven't done jack****... there's no evidence that supports your claim. The first round of tax cuts were in 2001... and the economy lost 3 million jobs. In late 2003 and now in 2004 we've had modest job growth, but it is barely enough to keep up with population growth.

There's not even any direct evidence that the Reagan tax cuts contributed to growth in the 80's. The economy was so bad before that it had nowhere to go but up.

BTW, Bill Clinton raised the top tax bracket taxes in 1993, then we saw the greatest economic expansion in world history.

I know this is somewhat of a threadjack, but I had to put "Supply Side Wiglaf" in his place.

BTW, Gepap has already mentioned how much Bush "supports the troops" by cutting Veteran's benefits and such.

John Kerry was a soldier. He fought in a war. I think he cares more about the troops because he was in their position at one time in his life.

0.1/10 for your stupid troll wifgal

[Last Conformist]

We've 'stablished that Wiglaf is a liberal nutjob. Could we have this thread closed now?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
Stop losses are part of being in the military, I've been on the receiving end of two so far. Wasn't necessarily happy about it but didn't complain as it was part of being in the military. If it passes I'm sure Congress will leave enough loopholes to be able to disqualify lots of soldiers.

The problem as I mentioned before there are two ways to end stop lose and Bush has no interest in either one. Stop lose wasn't used that often and even during Vietnam the policy was that when a man's enlistment was up he went home. The exception was if there was current on going enemy offensives which would make it imprudent to release soldiers. The Tet offensive was one case were a stop lose occured but it lasted less then a month and it only covered people in Vietnam. Can you really claim Bush's army wide stop lose policy is for a temperary military need like occured during the Tet offensive? To compare Bush has stopped lose some people for over three years now.

[MichaeltheGreat]

@ Genghis Farb

Don't stop-loss, and don't extend deployments for more than a year, and you won't have to pay it.

I think the implied issue is that the Army needs to go back up to 12 or 14 divisions, not 10, and extended deployments and stop-loss is a (typical) way of ****ing over troops when overall troop strength has been cut back too much in light of current world conditions.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Sava
BTW, Bill Clinton raised the top tax bracket taxes in 1993, then we saw the greatest economic expansion in world history.

Uh... you mean the one fueled by the dotcom bubble, Enron, WorldCom, GE, Disney, and a whole bunch of other Andersen Consulting/Accenture style funny money accounting games?

[chequita guevara]

Wiglaf the DL!!!

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Uh... you mean the [greatest economic expansion] fueled by the dotcom bubble, Enron, WorldCom, GE, Disney, and a whole bunch of other Andersen Consulting/Accenture style funny money accounting games?

No, the one that resulted in the first increase in the standard of living for average Americans since the Nixon administration.

[MrFun]

Thank god not everyone is as stupid as Wiggie in insinuating that if you're a liberal you are anti-American or unpatriotic.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


No, the one that resulted in the first increase in the standard of living for average Americans since the Nixon administration.

Yeah, that's right, the one I was talking about. Pop goes the bubble.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MrFun
Thank god not everyone is as stupid as Wiggie in insinuating that if you're a liberal you are anti-American or unpatriotic.

Wiggie is one of our old pet trolls. You're acting like you take anything he says even slightly seriously. Wake up, man!

[Kuciwalker]

This is MrFun you're talking to.

[Last Conformist]

Should I add "Consies against the wile liberal Wiglaf" to my sig?