GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN

I don't even recall commenting on Tiger Force, as I was not a member of it and don't know much about it. My Lai, that is common knowledge. Nicaragua, Chile, Iraq, Afghanistan, that covers alot, I have never claimed to be an expert on Chile or Nicaragua, but I can tell you I am no fan of the thug Hugo Chavez, obviously a communist and right now solidifying his power, and don't look for good things to happen there as long as he is there in power. You may admire him? I do not. Iraq and Afghanistan, everyone has an opinion, and I have mine, last I heard its a free country and we are free to express our opinion about them, after all we have troops there and are spending money there.

Precisely. You dance around all the US war crimes like Fred Astaire. You have to admire anyone who stands up to a bully.

No dance here, you are the one making unsubstantiated claims. I have simply posted the facts of what we do know at this point. Actually I don't know why I even answer your posts, your opinions are so bizarre as to not even warrant bothering with.

That's your version of the two-step, I guess.

Go research the Tiger Force, Okie. Provide your recommendations as to what should be done.

Then check out the war crimes perpetrated against the people and country of Nicaragua during Reagan's time in office. Provide your recommendations for what should be done about that.

How about crimes committed by Hugo Chavez? And how about crimes committed by the communists in Vietnam? And Cambodia?

What do you call this dance, Okie?

Can you offer any proof that John Kerry lied, and that Obama discussed redistribution of wealth? I think you are, as usual, just making this up.

Oh, is this supposed to justify war crimes by American leaders. This is a nonsequitur.

I met a 19 year old Marine on leave from Afghanistan this weekend. He felt that morale was plummeting as the body count soared. He also said he didn't think there were enough soldiers to control the situation.
His biggest fear was that they would be sent out to destroy the poppy crops. He felt that was tantamount to a death sentence.

Just a kid with an old mans eyes.

This is proof enough for me, which includes official investitations into many of the guy's claims at winter soldier. It is shown that commonly they could not back up their stories with facts, they backtracked, and so forth, all manner of reasons why the stories were not true, accurate, or supported by facts. Since you were not in Vietnam, you will likely choose not to believe this, you will instead want to believe your preconceived popular notions and biases. I have the benefit of actually knowing what went on in the areas that I was in, so therefore I have a better feel for the liklihood of what is perhaps true or false, but you do not. As I have repeatedly said, there is no doubt that there were a few incidents as there are in every war, but there is absolutely no way that Kerry told the truth when he characterized the war as having atrocities on a daily basis as very very common, there is no doubt that has been totally proven as total and absolute baloney. Actually, Winter Soldier was an event that was preplanned to produce a certain outcome, promoted and funded by anti-war people, not interested in the truth, but instead interested in obtaining the stuff they got, which was alot made up, exaggerated, or totally and absolutely bogus. This has been amply demonstrated I believe by later checking of the cases involved. Read the details of later investigations of many of the cases in the following.

http://www.wintersoldier.com/staticpages/index.php?page=Swett_CID

Now to the Obama statement of redistribution. He made the statement in the Joe the Plumber incident when he said we need to "spread the wealth around," which is pretty much saying exactly the same as wealth redistribution. I have provided the quote in the following, but first I would like to say I am under no illusions that we have not had some wealth redistribution for a very long time, in the way of a graduated tax structure and tax funded welfare programs. I would also like to say I am in favor of some of that, but I am also under no illusions that Obama harbors an anti-capitalistic attitude and pro-ultra left or ultra socialist attitude. If you would study Obama, you would realize the religion he belonged to is a pseudo-political organization based upon Black Liberation Theology, which is a Marxist leaning philosophy, promoting taking from those that have wealth and giving it to those that do not. Obama's entire political career flirts with ultra left socialist and communist / Marxist sympathies. These facts about Obama give an additional meaning and context to Obama's words when he said it is desireable to spread the wealth around, I believe he is very very serious about it, much more than a casual comment. I do not believe that Obama understands economics and how wealth is actually produced, he actually thinks that the government can be and is the primary producer of wealth, which runs counter to America's entire history and belief system, and constitution for that matter.

“My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s going be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody, and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/37539

It has indeed been reported that morale is down among troops. I think because they know Washington is disengaged and uninterested in making any decisions in their interests. Personally, I think Obama needs to send more troops to get the job done, or call them home, one or the other, but continuing to waffle and waver is showing a complete lack of leadership ability along with incompetence. I think his incompetence was amply demonstrated when it was reported accurately that he had not even communicated with his commanders much at all for months. There is no excuse for that in my opinion. That is just utter nonsense, and as CIC, he bears the responsibility for the results of that, which may include more death and destruction because of inaction. He cannot continue to claim forever that he "needs more time to get it right."

Personally I think Kerry is every bit as much a liar as Okie is.

The Okie Dog and Pony Show.

Go research the Tiger Force, Okie. Provide your recommendations as to what should be done.

Then check out the war crimes perpetrated against the people and country of Nicaragua during Reagan's time in office. Provide your recommendations for what should be done about that.

Go research it yourself. Frankly I am not interested in all of your little missions in life, to try to manufacture something out of history that is no longer pertinent anyway. Since you want an answer to fit your template, I am sure you can manufacture something.

Scares the livin' bejesus out of you, Okie. Completely understandable when the mind of an adult remains so naively childlike.

"Spread the wealth around" doesn't mean redistribution from the wealthy to the poor. It does mean that action will be taken to increase the incomes of those who previously had very little.

Seems to describe you to a tee.

Income is not wealth. "Spreading the wealth around" as quoted from Obama obviously defines removing wealth from some owners and transferring it to others, without the process of free market trades whereby the buyer exchanges some of his wealth for a different kind of wealth, but the perceived value of the wealth held by both parties in the exchange is still the same.

Wealth has to be produced or created, it does not happen out of thin air, and some people produce more wealth than others. For example, oil discovered, pumped out of the ground, refined, transported, and made available to consumers is a form of wealth. Consumers must also produce some wealth probably in another form which they can then trade in the form of dollars to buy the fuel produced from the oil that they want and need. In other words, they are trading some of the wealth that they have for the wealth held by others, but the value of the wealth is still the same.

I would suggest you read a basic book on free market economics, a good one being Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.

I haven't read your suggestion , but I found some of the reviews dampened my enthusiasm...

Sowell has the ability to explain fairly complex economic principles in plain english and simplify the factors involved, and so I think the book does a good job of explaining common sense facts and principles about the economy. You don't have to be an economist to understand it, all you have to have is some common sense reasoning and some experience as a consumer or producer of something, or just anyone that has balanced your checkbook and run personal finances for a few years or more. If you have ever run a business, it would also help you understand it. Sowell is a very brilliant man, but he is a conservative black economist and political commentator, so liberal sources will always find fault with his political views and any books that he has written.