Something to think about

[War Griffon]

Ok Don\'t take this the wrong way it is not meant as a bash at US polotics but something that was sent to me earlier this afternoon

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 deceptively 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



But Wait . there\'s more!



JOHN GLENN (ON THE SENATE FLOOR)
Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13



Some people still don\'t understand why military personnel
do what they do for a living. This exchange between
Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum
is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it\'s also a good example of one
man\'s explanation of why men and women in the armed
services do what they do for a living.



This IS a typical, though sad, example of what
some who have never served think of the military.



Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
\"How can you run for Senate
when you\'ve never held a real job?\"



Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
\"I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different
occasions. I was in the space program. It wasn\'t my
checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was
not a nine-to-five job, where I took my tie off to take the
daily cash receipts to the bank.\"



\"I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day...
to a veteran\'s hospital and look those men ...
with their mangled bodies . in the eye, and tell THEM
they didn\'t hold a job!



You go with me to the Space Program at NASA and go,

as I have gone, to the widows and Orphans
of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee...
and you look those kids in the eye and tell them
that their DADS didn\'t hold a job.



You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in
ArlingtonNationalCemetery, where I have more friends
buried than I\'d like to remember, and you watch
those waving flags



You stand there, and you think about this nation,
and you tell ME that those people didn\'t have a job?

What about you?\"


For those who don\'t remember ..
During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney
representing the Communist Party in the USA.

Now he\'s a Senator !



If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran.

 

[finn17]

Ah, the benefits of hindsight...

:innocent:

 

[War Griffon]

I thought you might like that one Finn, It is nearly as bad as people turning around to me and saying that their taxes pay my wages:flame:

When in reality I pay more in tax than they will ever do and that is not counting the cost of time and dedication to the job of protecting the country whilst they sleep safely in their beds uncaring.

 

[No Such Agency]

I\'ll bite. Things that make you think some more:

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.

There were also 25 civilians killed by US forces in Iraq that month. The previous November, during the second assault on Fallujah, US forces killed a whopping 775 civilians, or 25 PER DAY averaged across the month.

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.

Saddam Hussein was not a \"terrorist\" except by the most Orwellian definition (i.e. \"terrorist=military opponent of the USA\"). He was the absolute dictator of a state, responsible for genocide and misery of his own people. Not a \"terrorist\" in the commonly accepted use of the word. His state was not connected in any credible way with the actual terrorists who attacked the WTC. Arguably the Taliban were, I can\'t deny that. And Afghanistan is probably better off now than it was under their rule, can\'t deny that either.

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.

And this war has been going on for 32 months and counting after the announcement of \"Mission Accomplished\". Iraq is not \"taken\", except in the US administration\'s declaration that it is.

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

These things are related to the war IN ANY WAY... how? It just took me less time to bake an apple pie and post this than it took \"for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard\". Of course that comparison is meaningless too.

Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
\"How can you run for Senate
when you\'ve never held a real job?\"

Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
\"I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps...

(snip snip)

You stand there, and you think about this nation, and you tell ME that those people didn\'t have a job? What about you?\"

Metzenbaum was campaigning on the strength of his entrepreneurial experience, and said that Glenn had never \"met a payroll\", ie. did not have any financial or business skills. Which does not make his belittling of Glenn\'s military service right or clean politics by any stretch. (source: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/glenn.asp)

For those who don\'t remember... During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney representing the Communist Party in the USA.
Now he\'s a Senator !

A most reprehensible and pointless ad hominem attack. John Wayne Gacy had a lawyer too, as did the Rosenbergs, Al Capone, and Timothy McVeigh. At any rate, I\'m not sure what any of this Glenn/Metzenbaum stuff has to do with the Iraq war. It happened in 1974!

In summary, this e-mail is just more nonsense from the mindlessly pro-war faction, whoever they may be in this case.

\"If you are reading this in English, thank a veteran. Soldiers can\'t question their orders or mission objectives. That\'s YOUR job.\"

 

[Trevor]

I know there are lots of variables there, but I noted with interest the decrease in casulties per year, whilst my impression is that support for war in general has decreased with each one, ie there is more fuss about less casualties these days. Not sure I have a point but interesting.

The only thing there I really disagree with is the statement that Al quieda has been crippled, whilst this my be superficially true, I think recent actions have considerably worsened the risk of terrorist attacks in general.

But then I\'m more likely to die in a car crash than from a terrorist bomb, so I say we legislate against cars before we bother about legislation against terrorists...

No-one seems particularly interested in invading australia so I\'m off to do some uncaring sleeping

 

[Wolf_Fang]

detroit..... man that place drives me nutz.... worst part is when they come over here across the borders drink in our bars and start fights.... :flame:

 

[Dammekkos2]

I\'m not really sure what the point of this list is. Is it some sort of Republican propaganda? Seems like a list of random facts, mostly well known. What has the death toll in world war two got to do with the conflict in Iraq? Or the fact that America has invaded many countries in the past? Or the fact that Baghdad fell in a relatively short space of time compared to vote counting in Florida?

I\'m not saying I\'m especially against the war in Iraq, I\'m just a bit confused about the message this person is trying to send you. Like I say, it\'s just a random bunch of facts hastily cobbled together in, what I can only assume to be, some sort of propaganda aimed at the mentally impared. ???

 

[QuietiManes]

they come over here across the borders drink in our bars and start fights

Well...they know where to go for a good beer, eh. Cant blame them for that! lol

 

[Ogrebane]

I cant say Im against the war in Iraq, I just wish politicians would stop treating us as idiots. Saddam was a bad guy and needed a smack on the wrist. The unfortunate thing about the world is that there will always be wars. Its unavoidable. We keep pumping out children discriminate against minorities and wasting the worlds resources. Till we solve these problems (and many more) then we will always be trying to get more stuff. Just hope we get our $#!# together sooner than later. And I agree with Trevor. We may one day get hit by the terrorists but who would want to invade the ozzies.

 

[james9487]

Originally posted by Dammekkos2
I\'m not really sure what the point of this list is. Is it some sort of Republican propaganda? Seems like a list of random facts, mostly well known. What has the death toll in world war two got to do with the conflict in Iraq? Or the fact that America has invaded many countries in the past? Or the fact that Baghdad fell in a relatively short space of time compared to vote counting in Florida?

I\'m not saying I\'m especially against the war in Iraq, I\'m just a bit confused about the message this person is trying to send you. Like I say, it\'s just a random bunch of facts hastily cobbled together in, what I can only assume to be, some sort of propaganda aimed at the mentally impared. ???

I agree with you that this in a way is a compilation of unrelated facts. One point of it, though, is that the media is against the war and tries very hard to make it seem completely unnecessary and uncalled for. Soldiers do die in Iraq and it certainly isn\'t pretty, but this article just stresses that death happens no matter where you go or what you do. The media hurts the support of the war and everyone\'s attitude of our military. You don\'t like Bush? If you didn\'t vote for him, be proud of your vote. I think that the war happened, we can\'t back out now without it being a complete waste of life and money, so let\'s just support our troops and pray for the best in Iraq. Bush is not leaving yet and he\'s not coming back after this term; he\'s stayin\' put for now but if you must bash him, do it some other way.

 

[Nelson]

Originally posted by Dammekkos2
What has the death toll in world war two got to do with the conflict in Iraq? Or the fact that America has invaded many countries in the past? Or the fact that Baghdad fell in a relatively short space of time compared to vote counting in Florida?

lol
No kidding...

Errr, he\'s justifying the war in Iraq by comparing it to Vietnam and Korea? Nice....

Oh, well, jeez, a lotta people died in those other wars, so hell, we\'re doin\' pretty good in Iraq! Go freedom!

And disagreeing with a war is in no way belittling the soldiers who fight it. On the other hand, I think it\'s a major sign of respect when you don\'t want them to die for a glorious, pyrrhic victory.

 

[No Such Agency]

Originally posted by Nelson
And disagreeing with a war is in no way belittling the soldiers who fight it. On the other hand, I think it\'s a major sign of respect when you don\'t want them to die for a glorious, pyrrhic victory.

BINGO! We have a winner! You win a macrame owl!

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by No Such Agency

Saddam Hussein was not a \"terrorist\" except by the most Orwellian definition (i.e. \"terrorist=military opponent of the USA\"). He was the absolute dictator of a state, responsible for genocide and misery of his own people. Not a \"terrorist\" in the commonly accepted use of the word.

Ah, but it has been proven that he paid the families of suicide bombers and encouraged suicide bombers. Sounds like terrorism to me.

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.

And this war has been going on for 32 months and counting after the announcement of \"Mission Accomplished\". Iraq is not \"taken\", except in the US administration\'s declaration that it is.
[/quote]
Sorry, the war with the Government of Iraq is over. We are now performing policing duties, as a nation cannot declare war on a unsanctioned non govermental group.
You can call it a war, such as the war on poverty, the war against drugs, but that does not make it a true war.

And here\'s the thing I don\'t understand, did our congressmen who voted for the war not understand we were going to be in this for the long haul? Why are they buckling now?

Now just the other day the Republicans put forth a vote for immediate withdrawal.
Now this vote was going to fail, but it gave those who where constantly talking the talk a chance to show what they believe in.
It failed 403-3.
So even those preaching an immediate withdrawal didn\'t have the integrity, or the balls, to vote where their mouths are.

 

[james9487]

Originally posted by Nelson

And disagreeing with a war is in no way belittling the soldiers who fight it.

Tell that to the Vietnam veterans. They all got back from a war they had no choice but to fight in and they returned home with no respect. Sure, those that understand respected them but most people just absorb the media and thought bad war=bad soldiers. I know the media and everyone doesn\'t want to make the soldiers look bad but a war with a bad rep gives the military a bad rep even though it\'s Congress\' vote to go.

 

[Green fairy]

Something to think about...

Saddam was a bad guy. I don\'t debate that he was an unjust ruler. What bothers me is that despite the fact that many other countries have cruel dictators getting fat off the money they steal from their people while their people starve in the streets, the U.S. and the U.N. don\'t appear to care.Is it a coincidence that we only appear interested in liberating the people of oil rich countries.The U.S. have always had their own agenda when it comes to helping repressed people, lets just be sure we know what it is. Take the current situation in Zimbabwe. I don\'t see Bush doing anything about a certain African dictator.....

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by Green fairy
Saddam was a bad guy. I don\'t debate that he was an unjust ruler. What bothers me is that despite the fact that many other countries have cruel dictators getting fat off the money they steal from their people while their people starve in the streets, the U.S. and the U.N. don\'t appear to care.Is it a coincidence that we only appear interested in liberating the people of oil rich countries.The U.S. have always had their own agenda when it comes to helping repressed people, lets just be sure we know what it is. Take the current situation in Zimbabwe. I don\'t see Bush doing anything about a certain African dictator.....

When you\'re paying for the dinner by yourself you get to choose the restaurant you dine in.

Let\'s face it, we could liberate almost every country under the rule of a tin pot dictatorship, but the harsh reality is that without a gain of some sort it would be national suiside to try and finance such a series of wars by oneself.

If we\'re the only ones who are going to do something about it, then damn straight we\'re going to pick and choose who we fight and where we fight.

Now if the UN wants to pick up the tab instead of being complacent or even happy about the situation (Oil for Food), then we might be a little more willing to fight more injustice in the world.

But no, the UN is happy to let the dictators run their countries, and ignore human rights issues.

If by some miracle the UN does get involved however, they pass their little sanctions, that they then ignore(once again Oil for Food), or the send in their child raping Peace Keepers.
UN \"Peacekeepers\" Rape Women, Children
The UN Sex Scandal

 

[Sand Rat]

Ok, as the only member of the forums to the best of my knowledge who has spent a great deal of time in Iraq during the current Fracas, I\'ll go ahead and weigh in on this one.

The United States has been in Germany and Japan since 1945 - 60 or so years in which both nations were allowed to stabilize and grow and prosper, often at the expense of the US.

We\'ve had troops on the ground in Korea since 1951 or so, here again allowing the Koreans in the south to stabilize their government, and prosper and grow again at US expense.

If you dont belive the above statements, then why is the German government protesting the withdrawl of US troops and money from Germany at this time after 60 years of requests that we leave?

We spent depending on your source between 20 and 30 years in Viet Nam before we dropped contact with them only to re-establish it under Bill C.

We\'ve been in Kuwait for the last 12 years - and yes, the Kuwaiti government wants us out, but the Kuwati\'s I\'ve spoken with dont -

So now, regaurdless of the reasons for the war, we\'ve broken Iraq, and we\'re just supposed to go away, cause 2000 + military lives, (and at least 80 contractors - oddly enough I guess cause we make the big bucks we dont count to anyone but our families - the press sure don\'t seem to care) have been lost?

Not to me - to me the Iraqi\'s should be given the same opportunities we gave the Germans, Japanese, and Koreans.

Rant off.

 

[paintingploddy]

My turn.

Firstly @Evil Dave, while you are able to topple every tin pot dictator I don\'t believe you can rebuild them as you would like. You are stretched with just Iraq and Afghanistan hobbling along.

@ Steelcult, yes you do have the best knowledge of conditions on the ground, but you missed South Vietnam, the one that got away. I also note the countires mentioned have been strategic in protecting the intrests of the US against the one serious rival. A strong Germany, Japan, and South Korea are better allies than states reduced to thrid world status. They also had different situations. The Germans had the incentive of warding off the Soviets. The Japanese were successfully reconstructed because Macarthur had the Emperor on side. There is no equivealent figure in Iraq. South Korea were on your side to begin with. South Vietnam failed despite massive amounts of assistance. Iraq is closer to Iran, that was a US ally too, at least until the Islamic Revolution. When the US leaves (whether in 2 years or 20) Iraq will depend on the security forces you are now training and equipping. Already there are signs that some practices suited to old regime are taking hold, and you would be very optimistic to suppose the Army and police haven\'t been infiltrated by insurgents.

The original post was a lot of unrelated statistics. I note it doesn\'t mention a Republican president who started and oversaw a war where 650,000 Americans lost their lives and several major US cities were pillaged and looted, and many thousands of US citizens were imprisoned without charge or trial.

 

[Sand Rat]

Originally posted by paintingploddy
My turn.
Snip
The original post was a lot of unrelated statistics. I note it doesn\'t mention a Republican president who started and oversaw a war where 650,000 Americans lost their lives and several major US cities were pillaged and looted, and many thousands of US citizens were imprisoned without charge or trial.

True - we did miss in Viet Nam - and I did mention them just not the fact that we gave up on them.

And while Lincoln was a Republican who oversaw the war you mention, you also leave out the fact that the first shots were fired by state militias in Democratic controlled areas, and that Lincoln himself never used the term \"war\" or \"civil war\" to describe what was going on in the US - even in the Emancipation Proclimation, he refers to \"within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States\".

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by paintingploddy
My turn.

Firstly @Evil Dave, while you are able to topple every tin pot dictator I don\'t believe you can rebuild them as you would like. You are stretched with just Iraq and Afghanistan hobbling along.

According to who?
If you add up the numbers of reservists and full enlisted military personel over in those two countries, and you subtract that from our total military personel, you\'ll see we only have 1/4 of our forces actually participating in this.
Not to mention, no where did I say rebuild them as we did Germany, Japan, or Korea.
Nor did I ever say we had to do this all at once, nor did I say it was our responsibility to do so.