Our President, lets compare

[shrek]

I usually don't post things like this but this one just got to me so here it is!


Can you imagine this?
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following ...

FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
>From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...
finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us.
>From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.

John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.

Johnson...
turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
>From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton...
went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has ...
liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...
It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less
time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquid****.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military moral is high!

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.

PASS IT ON.

[Secret Squirrel]

already posted and ripped apart.

[Trigger]

already posted and ripped apart.
Still worth posting again though.
It's interesting that you still felt compelled to respond to it first. rofl

[Fintin]

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

have you been to detroit lately...



good post though...lots of great points

[cut]

already posted and ripped apart.

they know :P :D

[Sierra]

:hug: Shrek. Thanks so much for posting this. Someone who likes Bush and thinks what he is doing is good.

[shrek]

Thanks Sierra, Trig!


Hey Squirrel, define "ripped apart"? I didn't check the facts, too busy. Are they all false or inflated/deflated. Are half of them correct?

[shrek]

One of the reasons that I posted it is that I just don't understand where are the hatred is coming from. I mean Clinton was one thing; he was a turd and unfortunately our president, he I could understand people ripping on, but Bush? It just seems like all the issues that everyone loves to tear Bush down over are vague or miniscule.

Squirrel: If you don't like Bush (I'm not sure where you stand), tell me the single most important issue that you disagree with, the one thing that you feel is enough to make him out to be a bad person/leader. Make me understand!!

[Trigger]

Thanks Sierra, Trig!


Hey Squirrel, define "ripped apart"? I didn't check the facts, too busy. Are they all false or inflated/deflated. Are half of them correct?
Yes, please enlighten us simpletons Squirrel Bait...
But before you do, tell us a little about yourself.
For instance:
How old are you?
What is you level of education?
Ever served a day of military service?
If so, for which country?

You seem very fond of pointing out the supposed flaws of others and making grand assumptions about the age/maturity of many forum members, while proclaiming yourself to be omniscient, so why not clear things up so we don't start assuming things about you.

[hank]

Ever served a day of military service?

Hey now, I voted for 41 and W and I was not in the military. My opinion any less valid? Squirrel, right or wrong in my opinion, gets to have an opinion regardless of his military credentials.

Age and the rest of that stuff is fair game, but come on. Shrek certainly is logical, smart, whatever guy [as are you Trigger], but not because he's SF. He's SF becuase he chose to do it and he's smart. Let's not get the tail wagging the dog.

hank

[Trigger]

I never said he wasn't entitled to an opinion. I would just like to know his level of 'life experience'.
He can whine about the sky falling 'til he's blue in the face if he wants to. :D

[hank]

I never said he wasn't entitled to an opinion. I would just like to know his level of 'life experience'.
He can whine about the sky falling 'til he's blue in the face if he wants to. :D

word

hank

[Cactuar]

A point I'd to to rebut.


FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
>From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Actually, I think Germany declared war on the US before the US declared war on Germany.

[shrek]

That is correct, Germany declared war on us first, but they did not provoke us any further, no attacks (to speak of) just Japan!!

[Secret Squirrel]

Thanks Sierra, Trig!


Hey Squirrel, define "ripped apart"? I didn't check the facts, too busy. Are they all false or inflated/deflated. Are half of them correct?

It's not so much that the facts are wrong, some of them are, but they are all taken way out of context. I'll repost my original response (updated slightly) to this email when Cag posted it (Both Cag's and your post are more or less the same).




There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....

In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

Has the death count in Detroit reached over 1000 coalition troops killed, over 5, 800 troops (not including those wounded from non-combat related incidents) wounded, and God only knows how much "collateral" damage.


When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, remember...

FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us... Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an
average of 112,500 per year.

Japan attacked on Dec, 7 1941, and Germany declared war on the U.S on Dec 11th, and in turn the U.S declared war on Germany.
http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html


Truman finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.

The communist victory in China, combined with the first Soviet nuclear tests in 1949, resulted in a new US policy of containment in Asia. The policy, called NSC 48/2, called for the containment to be primarily non-military, with economic and military aid given to non-communist regimes in Asia. Kim tried forcefully, with Soviet and Chinese backing, to unify Korea. Truman, who thought that if Hitler wasnt allowed to annex Czechoslovakia then WWII might not have happened, wasnt going to sit idly by and watch this occur. And he did put it through the U.N to secure the right act on behalf of the U.N. in Korea to prevent, as he saw it, a Soviet/Communist annexation.



John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.

Eisenhower first began steps to prevent a Communist govrenment in the North from consuming the South after the French were defeated. Kennedy sent, at first, American special forces to train South Vietnamese how to fight a counter insurgency war against Communist guerrillas in South Vietnam. And Johnson took the U.S into a "full" war in Vietnam. But above all presidents or administrations, was a policy of fighting global communism and avoiding a "communist domino" affect in Asia.


Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

Three times? I assume you're refering to the article by Mansoor Ijaz?


The Sudanese offered to arrest Bin Laden and extradite him to Saudi Arabia or, barring that, to "baby-sit" him--monitoring all his activities and associates.

But Saudi officials didn't want their home-grown terrorist back where he might plot to overthrow them.

Any word of where any of the documents supposedly used by Ijaz are held? Honestly, does his claims even make sense to anyone? If they could arrest him, and if he proved a potential threat, why didnt they deal with him themselves?


In the two years since terrorists attacked us president Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

Ghanny was justified. Is Al-Qaida crippled or just dispersed to the point where it can operate as small cells because the pressure was reduced for the Iraq invasion? There are weapons inspectors in North Korea (just asking, i dont know much about this)?


The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.

Ok, this paragraph is sheer stupidity. Yea 51 days of major combat but how long will the occupation last? Bosina took 10 years? How long before Iraq is able to stand on its own? No one even questioned that the invasion would end quickly. And no one questioned that the invasion would witness fairly light casualities by coalition troops. However, the devil is in the details and everyone knew, or at least should have know, that the death toll was going to rise during the long occupation.


We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records. It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquid****. It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Again, moot points which are just presented for their smoke and mirror affect.

[mobster]

Nice post Shrek, makes perfect sense.

[shrek]

Ok Squirrel, I give it to you that my facts were stated in such a “matter-of-fact” way that they sounded like they were engraved in stone somewhere, which they’re not.

But, you have to admit that although your supply of facts is accurate, they do not necessarily make the facts that I supplied untrue, they just basically explain them in greater detail. Vietnam never attacked us, Korea never attacked us, the president at the time just felt that whatever was going on in these countries was a large enough threat to the US and the world that something must be done before things got out of hand. Note carefully my last statement; “before things got out of hand”.

Sometimes presidents are forced to make decisions that they cannot expect the entire country to understand, and for reasons so far out of reach of our daily lives, cannot reveal to us.

Do you honestly believe in your heart that Bush wanted control of Iraqi oil; we’re giving everything back to the people of Iraq as quickly as we can. What if he did it for control of the oil? Iraq’s control of all those major oil fields did have a global impact that you and I have both felt, and one that could ultimately destabilize the world around us.

Do you believe that Bush had a personal vendetta against Sadaam? Enough to start a false war on false pretenses? Come on, I think we all know better than that.

If Iraq would have knocked down the WTC then the US and ultimately the world would have asked for its destruction and the removal from power of its dictator. If we could have had a crystal ball and seen into the twisted mind of UBL and known what was coming don’t you think we would have full scale attacked Afghanistan, preempting the WTC attacks? Of course we would have!


I have posted this scenario before and I will do it again here so that you will more clearly see where I stand.


Your neighbor threatens to kill your mother/father/wife etc. (pick one)

He says that at soon as he finishes the bomb he’s making, he’s gonna put it in their mailbox!

You watch him daily, working diligently on that bomb, glaring at you occasionally just to let you know his intentions!

Question: Do you let him build the motherf..king bomb? F..K NO! You walk over there and knock him on his ass and take away his ability to build a bomb, picturing your loved ones face the whole time, wondering what could have happened if you would have let him finish fixing that bomb.


We let the Al Q in Afghanistan finish that bomb!

Maybe Bush decided not to let Sadaam finish his! Maybe Bush knew that it may cost him the Presidency but he would rather see us safe than him president. Stop and give him that one ounce of credit for just a second. I have worked in the Intel business in one form or another for most of my adult life and I have no problem believing that that’s just what happened.

[MEGR]

If Bush was as bad as some think, he would've just planted wmds in Iraq to make up for the blunder.

[Secret Squirrel]

Ok Squirrel, I give it to you that my facts were stated in such a “matter-of-fact” way that they sounded like they were engraved in stone somewhere, which they’re not.

But, you have to admit that although your supply of facts is accurate, they do not necessarily make the facts that I supplied untrue, they just basically explain them in greater detail. Vietnam never attacked us, Korea never attacked us, the president at the time just felt that whatever was going on in these countries was a large enough threat to the US and the world that something must be done before things got out of hand. Note carefully my last statement; “before things got out of hand”.

They facts/opinions you supplied were true but taken out of context. The purpose of your post was to praise Bush's foreign policy against previous presidents on the basis of combat deaths. However, the examples are over simplified cases throughout history that have been taken out of context. They ignore the larger context and other historical arguments and reasonings regarding why the various conflicts occured, which is why i called it a "smoke and mirror" argument. If you knew nothing about the history surrounding each conflict mentioned, then the points look pretty convincing. However, if you know the larger historical contexts, you also know that the comparisons arent valid ones for the Iraq war.


Sometimes presidents are forced to make decisions that they cannot expect the entire country to understand, and for reasons so far out of reach of our daily lives, cannot reveal to us.

A president's first job regarding foreign policy should be to explain it to the populas. After all, isnt the president working for the majority of the populas who elected him?


Do you honestly believe in your heart that Bush wanted control of Iraqi oil; we’re giving everything back to the people of Iraq as quickly as we can. What if he did it for control of the oil? Iraq’s control of all those major oil fields did have a global impact that you and I have both felt, and one that could ultimately destabilize the world around us.

When did i say he went into Iraq for oil?


Do you believe that Bush had a personal vendetta against Sadaam? Enough to start a false war on false pretenses? Come on, I think we all know better than that.

The road to Baghdad began shortly after 9/11.


If Iraq would have knocked down the WTC then the US and ultimately the world would have asked for its destruction and the removal from power of its dictator. If we could have had a crystal ball and seen into the twisted mind of UBL and known what was coming don’t you think we would have full scale attacked Afghanistan, preempting the WTC attacks? Of course we would have!

What does this have to do with anything? Iraq didnt attack the U.S. Iraq didnt have anything to do with 9/11. Why did you mention this?



I have posted this scenario before and I will do it again here so that you will more clearly see where I stand.

Your neighbor threatens to kill your mother/father/wife etc. (pick one)

He says that at soon as he finishes the bomb he’s making, he’s gonna put it in their mailbox!

You watch him daily, working diligently on that bomb, glaring at you occasionally just to let you know his intentions!

Question: Do you let him build the motherf..king bomb? F..K NO! You walk over there and knock him on his ass and take away his ability to build a bomb, picturing your loved ones face the whole time, wondering what could have happened if you would have let him finish fixing that bomb.

I assume you want to apply this to Iraq? You sure you want to open that can again? If so, show me some evidence of current activity by Saddam regarding building WMDs.



We let the Al Q in Afghanistan finish that bomb!

Maybe Bush decided not to let Sadaam finish his! Maybe Bush knew that it may cost him the Presidency but he would rather see us safe than him president. Stop and give him that one ounce of credit for just a second. I have worked in the Intel business in one form or another for most of my adult life and I have no problem believing that that’s just what happened.

Finish what bomb? what evidence?

[Fintin]

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January.....

In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.
That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn country of Iraq.

Has the death count in Detroit reached over 1000 coalition troops killed, over 5, 800 troops (not including those wounded from non-combat related incidents) wounded, and God only knows how much "collateral" damage.


whens the last time you visited detroit...just saying...i dont know how many times i have been trying to get some place and wound up at a tire road block in the middle of the street...its a fecking warzone down there...you learn to drive real smart when you have to go down side streets at 50 mph and weave around burned out cars all while still dodging kids...and if you think the words assault weapons ban mean any thing down there...you sir a mistaken...on any given night you hear quite a few full autos going off...so is it a fair compairison..YEP

[100_Percent_HOOAH]

Shrek,

Great posts! I totally agree with you that Bush doesn't care about getting reelected as much as he does seeing the safety of this nation. People rip Bush up to no extent and what does it even solve? I personally believe that president Bush has our safety in mind and that is why he acted in the manner that he did. I'm going to add another similar scenario to Shreks that I heard recently:

Police respond to a barricaded suspect call. They also get word that the suspect is potentially armed and very dangerous. They finally arrive on scene and request the man comes out with his hands up. The man comes outside, but with only one hand up and the other behind his back. The police repeat the order several times for the suspect to put his hands up to prove he has nothing. Still the suspect keeps one hand behind his back. The police make the call to shoot the man. The police were right in this action, they asked several times for the man to prove he was unarmed; and until he showed he was unarmed, the police were correct in their assumption that he WAS armed. The man, however, refused to do so, so action was taken.

If you compare this to the Iraq situation, Saddam had one hand behind his back for a long time. There was no telling what type of threat he could have hidden, but since we only saw one hand, and he refused to show the other we took action and in a post 911 world, inaction is a more deadly decision. Just my thoughts..

[Tane Angle]

I don't think President Bush is necessarily dumb in terms of IQ level, or even when it comes to his areas of expertise, just ignorant, arrogant, and naive about certain things outside of his area. That's natural-the Middle East is not his area of expertise. It's just a shame that he didn't surround himself better with good Middle East hats, starting with an NSA and SECDEF (and subordinate appointees of both offices). Anyone who can relatively successfully raise two daughters can't be that dumb though.

I also don't really buy a lot of the conspiracy theories about President Bush. I don't really think that he's after Iraqi oil or any of that. I do think that he probably has the best intentions and that he thinks he is doing the right thing almost all of the time; problem is, being President isn't about good intentions, and it's not about doing the right thing. Most Republicans and Democracts can agree that President Carter had great intentions who just wanted to do the right thing, but was still a pretty darn poor President.

The "Double Bind"-http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20216&sid=e6481d756428950595d9c496debf0902-doesn't really work against all of President Bush's critics.

That's all I'll say for now. Anyone have the URL to the old thread? Thanks. Have a good one all, and just some thoughts...

[shrek]

try again

[shrek]

A president's first job regarding foreign policy should be to explain it to the populas. After all, isnt the president working for the majority of the populas who elected him?

Please! Please tell me that you don’t really believe that this is the way governments work. You’ve impressed me with your debating skills up until now, don’t let me down by making statements like this! Ignorance doesn’t become you!




When did i say he went into Iraq for oil?


I don’t know you Squirrel, I just figured that like most Lemmings you were with the crowd!



What does this have to do with anything? Iraq didnt attack the U.S. Iraq didnt have anything to do with 9/11. Why did you mention this?

If you really can’t figure out why I mentioned this and the point that I was trying to make then continuing on will be pointless. Of course Iraq didn’t attack the WTC, but, as I have said before, other than Africa, Iraq had more terrorist training camps than any other country after the fall of Afgh. The threat was there, ol' Al just struck before Sadaam could leave a trail to them. If you didn’t know this than perhaps you read the wrong papers or are not nearly as old as you like for people here to think you are.





Finish what bomb? what evidence?

The bomb that they finished (man/boy, from your writing I thought that you were much more intelligent than this) was a group of determined terrorist that learned to fly planes and then flew them into the WTC. For some reason I thought you would catch that.
The A’s that you are getting in 9th grade English composition versus your 9th grade intelligence level are starting to show through. I thought I was debating an intelligent man that may have had some stake in what’s going on in the world, but apparently I am instead writing to someone that was obviously untouched by 9/11 and doesn’t live in a world where Mommy or someone doesn’t take care of him. You had me going there for a while hotshot.

[Howie Kaluha]

Amen, Shrek, Amen.........

[California Joe]

Bush is woefully ignorant on anything that doesn't involve putting more sauce on the rotating swine in the pit Texas style. In the Executive Branch you live and die by the quality of information you recieve. That and the fact that you used to be a drunk but now talk to God. He didn't go to Iraq for oil, he went because God told him it was a good idea. That's reckless. Kerry would have gone because his harridan wife told him he should. I need to get up into the woods now.....

[Tane Angle]

A president's first job regarding foreign policy should be to explain it to the populas. After all, isnt the president working for the majority of the populas who elected him?

I gotta disagree with this one, sorry bud. A Presidents first job regarding foreign policy is to defend and uphold the US Constitution and protect American lives.

I have two questions, if you all don't mind. The first is why weren't the AI and other camps hit by air and/or ground forces in the year+ between 9/11 and the start of OIF?

The second is why weren't the camps in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere hit prior to 9/11? Everything President Clinton knew/should have known, so did/should have President Bush. As soon as he decided to run for President of the United States, he should have started conferring in preparation for military strikes. He also, again, should have surrounded himself with better people.

And yes, I was this critical of President Clinton and I will almost certainly be this critical of the President in the next term, be it President Bush or Senator Kerry.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

PS: Hey CJ, how's it going bud? Hope things are well by you. :)

[Maniac]

Can you imagine this?
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of January......


last time i checked 1 dead soldier was too many...are you saying that it is okay that "only" 39 soldiers died?

[Secret Squirrel]

[quote]A president's first job regarding foreign policy should be to explain it to the populas. After all, isnt the president working for the majority of the populas who elected him?

Please! Please tell me that you don’t really believe that this is the way governments work. You’ve impressed me with your debating skills up until now, don’t let me down by making statements like this! Ignorance doesn’t become you!

I'll refrain from these kinds of comments if you stop using exclamation points. ;)





When did i say he went into Iraq for oil?


I don’t know you Squirrel, I just figured that like most Lemmings you were with the crowd!

Then i guess you "figured wrong". I've never said Bush went into Iraq for oil. If was asked about the timing of the invasion, I would say that an election (at the time) within another year and 1/2 played a factor (perhaps not a dominate factor, but a factor nonetheless). And if I was asked why Iraq I would say Iraq's location was a factor. Having a puppet state or a base in the Middle East with five boarders would certainly be an enticing acquisition.




What does this have to do with anything? Iraq didnt attack the U.S. Iraq didnt have anything to do with 9/11. Why did you mention this?

If you really can’t figure out why I mentioned this and the point that I was trying to make then continuing on will be pointless. Of course Iraq didn’t attack the WTC, but, as I have said before, other than Africa, Iraq had more terrorist training camps than any other country after the fall of Afgh. The threat was there, ol' Al just struck before Sadaam could leave a trail to them. If you didn’t know this than perhaps you read the wrong papers or are not nearly as old as you like for people here to think you are.

Got any links or info i could read regarding this mulitude of terrorists training camps you're refering to that were in Iraq (preferably links without confusion over a name..etc)? So think AQ attacked before Saddam could leave a trail to them? If you think this perhaps you're reading the wrong papers or you're not nearly as old as you like for people here to think you are (irony ;) )



Finish what bomb? what evidence?

The bomb that they finished (man/boy, from your writing I thought that you were much more intelligent than this) was a group of determined terrorist that learned to fly planes and then flew them into the WTC. For some reason I thought you would catch that.
The A’s that you are getting in 9th grade English composition versus your 9th grade intelligence level are starting to show through. I thought I was debating an intelligent man that may have had some stake in what’s going on in the world, but apparently I am instead writing to someone that was obviously untouched by 9/11 and doesn’t live in a world where Mommy or someone doesn’t take care of him. You had me going there for a while hotshot.

Ok, let's see if you have any ability to read or any logic...you said AQ made "their bomb". Then you said that Bush decided not to let Saddam finish his . So was i questioning AQ's attack or was i questioning which "Saddam bomb" you were refering to being [b] finished ? Logic is a dangerous thing. ;)

edit: I didnt get As in grade 9, but I did during my graduate course work.

[Secret Squirrel]

A president's first job regarding foreign policy should be to explain it to the populas. After all, isnt the president working for the majority of the populas who elected him?

I gotta disagree with this one, sorry bud. A Presidents first job regarding foreign policy is to defend and uphold the US Constitution and protect American lives.

Yes you're obviously correct. I guess included the implentation of said foreign policy in my initial statement and proceeded to the dissemination phrase.

[memphiz]

Good post Shrek

I dont even think there has even been 35 murders in Canada

[Vance]

Good post Shrek

I dont even think there has even been 35 murders in Canada
Whaaaa?

[memphiz]

Good post Shrek

I dont even think there has even been 35 murders in Canada
Whaaaa?
for 2004

[Sayeret]

already posted and ripped apart.

Your angry because the last part about Clinton or the fact that theres less casualties in the current gulf war then any other US war?

[Sayeret]

Secret Squirrel,

Is there anything you can admit good happened as a result of this war?


Has the death count in Detroit reached over 1000 coalition troops killed, over 5, 800 troops (not including those wounded from non-combat related incidents) wounded, and God only knows how much "collateral" damage.

It is always sad when coalition troops are killed but in the grand scale of things 1,000 troops isn't very many. I think that the British and US have done a very well job mimimizing casualties overall.

[Secret Squirrel]

already posted and ripped apart.

Your angry because the last part about Clinton or the fact that theres less casualties in the current gulf war then any other US war?

Oh yea that's it because I've certainly never said anything bad about Clinton. :roll: You're starting to sound like S.Marshal (and no that's not a compliment).

[Trigger]

Are you going to keep dodging Squirrel or are you going to answer my questions? :roll:

[Merik]

All I know is that we fighting men and women in uniform are very proud to serve under our commander-in-chief and hope that we can continue to do so for another 4 year term of office.

[Sayeret]

Oh yea that's it because I've certainly never said anything bad about Clinton. You're starting to sound like S.Marshal (and no that's not a compliment).

What about my other question?

[pinkeye]

in keeping with shrek's farcical post, here's more nonsense. now let's all share a laugh:

PROCLAMATION MANDATING IMMEDIATE DIPLOMATIC RECLASSIFICATION OF COWARDLY, MAGELLAN-MUNCHING FILOPENNESIANS AS TERRORIST-FELLATING PYGMY SCUM
Presidential Proclamation to Amend Membership Rolls for the Coalition of the Willing
By the authority vested in me as President by the Supreme Court of the United States of America, and for the purpose of maintaining the purity of blind aggression required of all American allies in the wake of 9/11TM, it is hereby ordered as follows:

WHEREAS America has assembled a "Coalition of the Willing" – a vast invasion force consisting of 200,000+ Christian Soldiers determined to bring FREEDOM® to the oil fields of Iraq;

WHEREAS the Philippines has dispatched fifty (50) dishwashers throughout Iraq to staff the mess halls which dispense mission-critical sustenance to America's Godly forces;

WHEREAS, members of Saddam Al-ZarBinladen's squad of killers took hostage one Angelo dela Cruz, a worthlessly poor truck driver of Filopennesian descent, and demanded the complete withdrawal of said 50 Filopennesianoids in exchange for his life;

WHEREAS the government of the Philippines has actually complied with said demands of evildoers, pulling its pittance of puny pygmies from Iraq, thereby giving America a big fat political black eye;

WHEREAS, the United States singlehandedly liberated the Philippines from an invading army of sneaky Japs during World War II, asking nothing in return but eternal submissiveness;

WHEREAS Filopennesians have failed to express sufficient gratitude to Ronald Reagan for punishing their vicious dictator Ferdinand Marcos by exiling him to the frigid, barren wasteland of Hawaii;

WHEREAS many Filopennesians are, in fact, Muslamoid;

WHEREAS Filopennesians have twice elected women to defile their country's sacred office of the Presidency;

WHEREAS it was bone-through-the-nose Filopennesian savages who killed and cannibalized Ferdinand Magellan – the great white explorer who discovered them;

WHEREAS, most importantly, President and Mrs. Bush were dissatisfied with the services rendered by Filopennesian chambermaids during their 10th wedding anniversary Carnival Cruise;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that in light of these myriad deficiencies, the Philippines is henceforth no longer an active member of America's Coalition of the Willing. Furthermore, in keeping with the dictum that all nations are "either with us, or with the terrorists," the Philippines is hereby formally reclassified as an Al Qaeda haven, and is no longer eligible for US military or financial assistance of any kind. Finally, in the event that the Filopennesian government should subsequently find itself imperilled by an exponential increase in terrorism, it stands cordially invited to take Vice President Cheney's sage advice, and kindly go **** itself.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of July, in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ two thousand four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

July 20, 2004.

[shrek]

Hey Pinkeye:

Please tell me that you didn't take the time to write this.

If so, wow do you need a life, if not, you still took the time to post it which says a lot.......

[Secret Squirrel]

Secret Squirrel,

Is there anything you can admit good happened as a result of this war?


Has the death count in Detroit reached over 1000 coalition troops killed, over 5, 800 troops (not including those wounded from non-combat related incidents) wounded, and God only knows how much "collateral" damage.

It is always sad when coalition troops are killed but in the grand scale of things 1,000 troops isn't very many. I think that the British and US have done a very well job mimimizing casualties overall.

Dont get me wrong, I certainly dont want to put Saddam back in power. And dont lump me in with some of the extremists (aka blood for oil...etc). But I believe the timing of this war was wrong (you should know by now that there are many facets to those who opposed the Iraq war). And I believe that there could have been a much better plan for the occupation. And I dont think a lot of people fully understand what an invasion of Iraq would mean in the long run . We'll see with time what kind of damage was done in the arena of international politics but it did set a dangerous precedent. How can Bush condemn any country who takes this kind of action or begins to go down this road whether its Israel or China or whoever.

The original post to this thread compared Bush's foreign policy against previous presidents on two points; supposedly "pre-emptive" wars and body count. The facts/opinions supplied were taken out of context. They ignore the larger context and other historical arguments and reasonings regarding why the various conflicts occured. Do you honestly think WWII is valid comparison for the Iraq war? Perhaps you believe FDR should have left Germany alone? I dont know my economic history very well, but I dont think it would have boded well for the U.S economy if Germany over ran Europe. But ask me these questions again when the occupation ends and Iraq is able to stand on its own two feet without it's future being dependent upon being propped up by whoever the current U.S president is at the time.

[pinkeye]

Hey Pinkeye:

Please tell me that you didn't take the time to write this.

If so, wow do you need a life, if not, you still took the time to post it which says a lot.......

hey shrek, why don't you go blow sh%t up...
respectfully,
pinkeye

[HooyahCQB]

Quote:
The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.


Ok, this paragraph is sheer stupidity. Yea 51 days of major combat but how long will the occupation last?


HAHAHA. 51 days of major combat at the BD compound? HAHAHA. The FBI never fired a shot! I don't know what you mean by this bud.

[Merik]

Hey Pinkeye:

Please tell me that you didn't take the time to write this.

If so, wow do you need a life, if not, you still took the time to post it which says a lot.......

hey shrek, why don't you go blow sh%t up...
respectfully,
pinkeye


With you being a pile of ****, be careful what you wish for....

[Tane Angle]

Ok, I haven't been able to find the old thread, so I'll try a new post. I'll probably forget a lot, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.


FDR...
led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.
>From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

We had been at war with Germany for over a year by the time Pearl Harbor was attacked.


John F. Kennedy...
started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.

Actually US troops were on the ground at least as early as 1954, sent by President Eisenhower. But the early war went amazingly well.


Clinton...
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Granted. So because he screwed up, everyone gets a freebie?

Is the point of some of these that there is a history of going to war in/with countries that didn't attack us? So because someone else did it, today's President should too? Then why not mention Lebanon or Grenada, both idiotic moves that were not needed but succeeded in getting a lot of people we couldn't really spare killed?

I'll say it before and I'll probably say it again-invading Iraq was the right (morally) thing to do, but not the correct one. We can't spare certain people. And if we were determined to go in, we should have taken a year or more to prepare.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Secret Squirrel]

Here's the link to the original thread.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19565&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0