Just got this via email & thought I'd toss it in here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Things that make you think a little:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in 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 that President Bush shouldn't
have started this war, state the following:
a. FDR led us into World War II.
b. Germany never attacked us; Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 112,500 per year.
c. 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.
d John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us .
e. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost .
an average of 5,800 per year.
f. 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.
g. In the 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 for 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 Chappaquiddick.
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 morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts
Things that make you think a little
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Things that make you think a little
Nomad wrote: Thank you spin doctor.
No spin involved - the Vietnam war started as a French colonial fight in the 50's.
When the French decided to pull out the US took over to prevent the spread of communism (considered to be quite important at the time).
No spin involved - the Vietnam war started as a French colonial fight in the 50's.
When the French decided to pull out the US took over to prevent the spread of communism (considered to be quite important at the time).
Things that make you think a little
SnoozeControl wrote: Didn't Kennedy inherit that problem? Yes. The rest of the post is bullsh*t too.
When I was a kid there was a very successful book called How to Lie with Statistics. A can't remember the author's name but the jist of the book was that one can 'prove' nearly anything by stating ones position in an evasive or 'artful' manner. The opening post is an excellent example of that.
Certainly not completely false but grossly misleading.
When I was a kid there was a very successful book called How to Lie with Statistics. A can't remember the author's name but the jist of the book was that one can 'prove' nearly anything by stating ones position in an evasive or 'artful' manner. The opening post is an excellent example of that.
Certainly not completely false but grossly misleading.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Things that make you think a little
Misleading how?
Things that make you think a little
Accountable wrote: Misleading how?Almost totally.
'Take Iraq'? Before our illegal invasion the Iraqis lived under a vicious dictator, no question, a dictator who, by the way, we supported whole-heartedly for many years, and also by the way, so do millions of people all over the world elsewhere. In that respect Iraq was hardly unique.
Now they have utter chaos, sham elections, no clean water, no electricity, daily terror bombings, atrocities by US soldiers that rival anything ever perpetrated by Saddam, not to mention hundreds of Western forces killed. How long a list would you like?
The historical items earlier in the list are equally nonsensical, and, as might be expected, Bush Sr.'s cowardly wimp-out during the first Gulf War, when we could have eliminated Saddam under much more favorable circumstances, is not listed.
'Take Iraq'? Before our illegal invasion the Iraqis lived under a vicious dictator, no question, a dictator who, by the way, we supported whole-heartedly for many years, and also by the way, so do millions of people all over the world elsewhere. In that respect Iraq was hardly unique.
Now they have utter chaos, sham elections, no clean water, no electricity, daily terror bombings, atrocities by US soldiers that rival anything ever perpetrated by Saddam, not to mention hundreds of Western forces killed. How long a list would you like?
The historical items earlier in the list are equally nonsensical, and, as might be expected, Bush Sr.'s cowardly wimp-out during the first Gulf War, when we could have eliminated Saddam under much more favorable circumstances, is not listed.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Things that make you think a little
Bronwen wrote: Almost totally.
1. 'Take Iraq'? Before our illegal invasion the Iraqis lived under a vicious dictator, no question, a dictator who, by the way, we supported whole-heartedly for many years, and also by the way, so do millions of people all over the world elsewhere. In that respect Iraq was hardly unique.
2. Now they have utter chaos, sham elections, no clean water, no electricity, daily terror bombings, atrocities by US soldiers that rival anything ever perpetrated by Saddam, not to mention hundreds of Western forces killed. How long a list would you like?
3. The historical items earlier in the list are equally nonsensical, and, as might be expected, Bush Sr.'s cowardly wimp-out during the first Gulf War, when we could have eliminated Saddam under much more favorable circumstances, is not listed.1. We took Iraq. Legally or illegally, we took it. Your opinions don't interest me.
2. More of your opinions irrelevant to the fact that we took Iraq.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.
1. 'Take Iraq'? Before our illegal invasion the Iraqis lived under a vicious dictator, no question, a dictator who, by the way, we supported whole-heartedly for many years, and also by the way, so do millions of people all over the world elsewhere. In that respect Iraq was hardly unique.
2. Now they have utter chaos, sham elections, no clean water, no electricity, daily terror bombings, atrocities by US soldiers that rival anything ever perpetrated by Saddam, not to mention hundreds of Western forces killed. How long a list would you like?
3. The historical items earlier in the list are equally nonsensical, and, as might be expected, Bush Sr.'s cowardly wimp-out during the first Gulf War, when we could have eliminated Saddam under much more favorable circumstances, is not listed.1. We took Iraq. Legally or illegally, we took it. Your opinions don't interest me.
2. More of your opinions irrelevant to the fact that we took Iraq.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.
-
Erinna1112
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Things that make you think a little
Accountable wrote: 1. We took Iraq. Legally or illegally, we took it. Your opinions don't interest me.
Took it? You've got a funny definition of "took" it...we're barely hanging on by our fingernails there. Daily insurgent attacks, government so shaky it can barely stand on its own, military that can't operate without us...I wouldn't say it's been "taken."
As for opinions...you aired yours, now everyone else gets their turn too.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.
How do you figure? The only reason you think it would be is that it shows up a flaw in someone you admire. I quite agree with Bronwen; it's accurate and relevant.
Took it? You've got a funny definition of "took" it...we're barely hanging on by our fingernails there. Daily insurgent attacks, government so shaky it can barely stand on its own, military that can't operate without us...I wouldn't say it's been "taken."
As for opinions...you aired yours, now everyone else gets their turn too.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.
How do you figure? The only reason you think it would be is that it shows up a flaw in someone you admire. I quite agree with Bronwen; it's accurate and relevant.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
I swear by my life - and my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine. ~Ayn Rand
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
A*M*E*N!
I swear by my life - and my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine. ~Ayn Rand
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
A*M*E*N!
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Things that make you think a little
Erinna1112 wrote: The only reason you think it would be is that it shows up a flaw in someone you admire. :yh_giggle *snort* When did I ever say I admire him? I got that opening post in an email and thought it worth tossing in here for the conversation. I haven't indicated my opinion on the message.
.....
:yh_silent And now I don't think I will *spins in a huff*
.....
:yh_silent And now I don't think I will *spins in a huff*
Things that make you think a little
Accountable wrote: 1. We took Iraq. Legally or illegally, we took it. Your opinions don't interest me.
2. More of your opinions irrelevant to the fact that we took Iraq.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.1. Then why did you ask the question that prompted the response?
2. It's not irrelevant at all. The US also 'took' a couple of little Carribean islands, whose names I can't recall, under President, you know, Nincompoop, the one before Bush Sr., that's no big achievement, it only enhances the US's rep as a global bully.
3. Oh, I get it, Ted Kennedy taking several hours to notify the police of his accident is 'right on the mark' with regard to IRAQ, but Bush Sr's failure to take Saddam out when he had a GOLDEN opportunity under much more favorable circumstances, and which would have prevented EVERY SINGLE LIFE LOST in the current quagmire, is 'out of context'.
The mind reels at the stupidity of the US wingnut right. And while they bloviate, the mire gets quaggier and quaggier, day by day and week by week.
2. More of your opinions irrelevant to the fact that we took Iraq.
3. The Gulf War reference would have been out of context in this list.1. Then why did you ask the question that prompted the response?
2. It's not irrelevant at all. The US also 'took' a couple of little Carribean islands, whose names I can't recall, under President, you know, Nincompoop, the one before Bush Sr., that's no big achievement, it only enhances the US's rep as a global bully.
3. Oh, I get it, Ted Kennedy taking several hours to notify the police of his accident is 'right on the mark' with regard to IRAQ, but Bush Sr's failure to take Saddam out when he had a GOLDEN opportunity under much more favorable circumstances, and which would have prevented EVERY SINGLE LIFE LOST in the current quagmire, is 'out of context'.
The mind reels at the stupidity of the US wingnut right. And while they bloviate, the mire gets quaggier and quaggier, day by day and week by week.