ForumGarden

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

Thank you spin doctor.

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).

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.

Misleading how?

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.

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.

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.

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*

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.