Let's Compare....

[Sapper6]

...saw this on a bulletin board at work. should be the focal point for great discussion, shall we...?

i didn't see this anywhere else on the boards so, why not...


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 18,333
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 Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and
captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost 600
soldiers. Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist
attack at home. Worst president in history? Come on!

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 Teddy 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!!!!

 

[bignick]

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

Took Iraq did we?

Since we "took" Iraq over a 1000 US soldiers and an unknown number of Iraqi civilians and soldiers have died...compare this to the little over a 100 casualties before the "Mission was Accomplished"...

 

[Sapper6]

Took Iraq did we?

Since we "took" Iraq over a 1000 US soldiers and an unknown number of Iraqi civilians and soldiers have died...compare this to the little over a 100 casualties before the "Mission was Accomplished"...

yeah, we "took" Iraq. in that phrasing, that would mean up until the point where the Iraqi military forces are no longer in control. so yes, we took Iraq.

and yes, your numbers are correct, and they signify something very important. during the invasion of Iraq, our enemy was the Iraqi military and republican guard. we have accrued more loss of life since the invasion because we are now fighting an unconventional enemy, terrorists.

terrorists are certainly more dangerous than our "average" enemy forces. they harbor no respect for civilian loss of life. they are a deadly enemy, which is why terrorists worldwide should be erradicated from the face of the earth.

 

[Zepp]

There's some serious fallacies here...

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.

Germany made no secret of the fact that they were intent on world domination. It was made fairly clear to all but the delusional that they intended on attacking the U.S. as soon as they were able. Besides, Japan was an ally of theirs. It wasn't really possible to fight one without fighting the other. (Contrary to what some science fiction writers may have written.)

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 18,333
per year.

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

Both North Korea and North Vietnam were totalitarian regimes attempting to conquer democratic nations. The governements of the nations under threat asked for U.S. help.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never attacked us.

Clinton sent troops into Bosnia with Bosnian consent. The fight was against Serbian forces and their policies of "ethnic cleansing."

He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times
by Sudan and did nothing.

I'd like to see some documentation which backs that up.

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

Bush never did didly squat about North Korea, except unneccessarily antagonize them. North Korea originally approached the U.S. admitting they had a clandestine nuclear program, and offering to scrap it in return for oil and food. At that point, the Bush administartion suddenly began making threats of invasion. Eventually, North Korea made the same offer a second time, and we finally accepted, calling it a "diplomatic victory."

Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist
attack at home. Worst president in history? Come on!

True, Warren G. Harding was probably worse.

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 Teddy 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!!!!

Yeah, go ahead and insult the Democrats. That's definitely the best way to justify the Bush administration's methods of fighting a war.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

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.

Not true. Germany declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941. We lost 291,557 Americans to hostile action. The casualty figure above is incorrect.

http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/casualty/castop.htm


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 18,333
per year.

Not true. Truman didn't start the war. The above casualty figure is incorrect. 33,941 Americans died due to hostile action.

http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/CASUALTY/KOREA.pdf

On June 25, 1950 North Korea invaded South Korea, a country with which we had a treaty and an obligation to defend. The United Nations Security Council met in emergency session and passed a resolution calling for the assistance of all UN members in halting the North Korean invasion. On June 27, U.S. president Harry S. Truman ordered United States forces to come to the assistance of South Korea as part of the UN "police action."

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

Not true. The Vietnam conflict dated back to the French occupation. It never ended but segued into a larger conflict. By "Vietnam," the author is unclear. North Vietnam never attacked us, true. But Kennedy never attacked North Vietnam. South Vietnam's regime was supported by the U.S. which gave Kennedy the impetus to send advisors. He never sent combat troops.

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

Misleading. A large proportion of those casualties were suffered under the Republican Nixon/Ford administrations (1969-1976). Nixon invaded Cambodia. Note that Cambodia never attacked us, either.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent, Bosnia never
attacked us.

Not true. NATO and the UN coordinated closeley in Bosnia. The French have an entire section of the area under their control in accordance with their UN/NATO commitment. Based in Sarajevo, the force includes three infantry battalions with three dozen tanks, 20 attack helicopters, 16 155mm artillery guns, an anti-tank company and an anti-air contingent.

http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~bosnia/natoun/natochro.html

He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times
by Sudan and did nothing.

Not true. This was based on the claims of one man, a Pakistani with an apparently shadey agenda. Numerous officials disputed the allegations.

http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story123493.html

Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

Two quotes for you on that topic:

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you...I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.

--George Bush, 13 March 2002.

The goal has never been to get Bin Laden.

--General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, April 6, 2002.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated
two countries,

And neither country attacked us. That seems to be important here to the author of this ridiculous piece.

put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot,

They were in Iran and North Korea on Clinton's watch. Yet both countries started developing nuclear weapons during Bush's first term, and North Korea now has them.

and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

Estimates run that 1/10 of that number of civilians have been killed since we invaded Iraq.

We lost 600 soldiers.

Double that. We lost 130 last month alone.

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 have yet to pacify Iraq.

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

We have yet to pacify Iraq.

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

We have yet to pacify Iraq.


Regards,


Steve

 

[rmcrobertson]

While it's true that President Eisenhower commited no US troops,

The Row of Dominoes
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Presidential Press Conference
April 7, 1954


(By early 1954, French efforts to defeat Ho Chi Minh’s forces in North Vietnam had soured. In mid-March, the French army found itself encircled by Vietminh forces at Dienbienphu. France pushed the United States to intervene, but Eisenhower eventually decided not to and the French army surrendered in early May. Despite not coming to France’s aid, Eisenhower worried that the French defeat would ultimately result in a communist triumph in Indochina--the term Indochina refers to the intermingling of Indian and Chinese influences in what is now known as Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam--as the following remarks indicate.)


Q. Robert Richards, Copley Press: Mr. President, would you mind commenting on the strategic importance of Indochina for the free world? I think there has been, across the country, some lack of understanding on just what it means to us.

The President. You have, of course, both the specific and the general when you talk about such things. First of all, you have the specific value of a locality in its production of materials that the world needs.

Then you have the possibility that many human beings pass under a dictatorship that is inimical to the free world.

Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences.

Now, with respect to the first one, two of the items from this particular area that the world uses are tin and tungsten. They are very important. There are others, of course, the rubber plantations and so on.

Then with respect to more people passing under this domination, Asia, after all, has already lost some 450 million of its peoples to the Communist dictatorship, and we simply can’t afford greater losses.

But when we come to the possible sequence of events, the loss of Indochina, of Burma, of Thailand, of the Peninsula, and Indonesia following, now you begin to talk about areas that no only multiply the disadvantages that you would suffer through the loss of materials, sources of materials, but now you are talking about millions and millions of people.

Finally, the geographical position achieved thereby does many things. It turns the so-called island defensive chain of Japan, Formosa, of the Philippines and to the southward; it moves in to threaten Australia and New Zealand.

It takes away, in its economic aspects, that region that Japan must have as a trading area or Japan, in turn, will have only one place in the world to go--that is, toward the Communist areas in order to live.

So, the possible consequences of the loss are just incalculable to the free world.

And as for Nixon and Vietnam:

namvets.com Welcome home Brothers and Sisters!
Happy Holidays Veterans'


Vietnamese remember Christmas from hell

25 years ago, President Nixon ordered the biggest aerial blitz of the Vietnam War - a hailstorm of death that devastated Hanoi.

By Ian Stewart

Associated Press Writer

HANOI, Vietnam - Fixed in time, her eyes stare out from a grainy black and white portrait hanging in a memorial in central Hanoi. Her name is unknown, but her memory is linked with the bombing raid on the North Vietnamese capital 25 years ago.

She's one of 1,600 civilian dead remembered this week in Hanoi and throughout this country to mark the anniversary of the 1972 Christmas bombings - President Nixon's last kick at communist North Vietnam.

On Dec. 18, 1972, an armada of American B-52s flew in formation seven miles overhead and unleashed their payloads on Hanoi. The bombings continued for 11 more days.

Stooped low inside a one-person bomb shelter, Nguyen Van Tung listened nightly as explosion after explosion broke his world into a clutter of rubble. Today, he is a volunteer who maintains a small memorial for the victims.

"The United States and Vietnam and our children should look to the future, but let's not forget the past," Tung said.

It was "Operation Linebacker II" - an attack aimed at winning concessions from the communists at peace talks in Paris. The campaign, coming shortly after Nixon had won a landslide election to a second term, was the biggest aerial blitz of the war.

With the fighting long over, Washington and Hanoi have now moved into a new era of friendship. But their troubled past continues to haunt.

"For those who want to forget or who do not want to recall, the candles and incense still lit on thousands of graves and altars will remind us of those 12 days and nights," said Doan Khue, a Communist Party Politburo member and former defense minister.

In Hanoi and the northern port city of Haiphong, the bombing was staggering. More than 1,600 civilians died, 70 U.S. airmen were killed or captured and many Americans were left to wonder what price Nixon was willing to pay for "peace with honor".

For the Vietnamese, it was a hailstorm of death.

"If I could have talked to President Nixon, I would have said 'What were you thinking? How could you do this? You dropped bombs on our heads,'" said 76-year-old Phuong Thi Tiem, who recalls spending days trying to dig trapped survivors out of the rubble.

"All through it we could hear people screaming under collapsed walls and bricks,' she said. "We tried everything to get to them, but by the time we pulled them out they were dead."

Of course, it's no doubt justified by the fact that Vietnam never was taken over by the Communists. Why, if that had happened, the whole of Southeast Asia would have gone Red...

 

[Phoenix44]

Firstly, Sapper6, I'd suggest you do a little research. You offer no citations for your statistics, which are mostly wrong.

We liberated no one. Al Qaeda is alive and well and thriving. We did not "take" Iraq--the fighting is worse than ever and the casualty count is mounting. Where you got the "we lost 600 soldiers" figure is beyond me. I'd suggest you check icasualty.org for up to date statistics--it's around 1500 Americans killed and nearly 10,000 wounded. And increasing every day. And never mind the 15,000 dead Iraqi civilians (those are the people we're supposedly liberating).

In the 40's, Japan and Germany were allies, and we fought both countries.

Furthermore, FDR, Clinton, Kennedy, Janet Reno et al are not in office. GW Bush is. That's probably why most of us tend to discuss GW Bush, appropriately.

I'd say taking us from peace to protracted war, surplus to deficit, employment to unemployment; exposing our own agents; lying to Congress, the UN and the American people; dividing our citizens; alienating minorities; threatening to dismantle Social Security; presiding over the most corrupt administration and fraudulent elections in our history; and completely destroying our esteem in the world community in only 4 years puts him well in the running for "Worst President Ever."

 

[Sapper6]

Firstly, Sapper6, I'd suggest you do a little research. You offer no citations for your statistics, which are mostly wrong.

hey phoenix, i'd suggest you look at the first couple sentences that preface the rest of my post. please note, saw this on a bulletin board.

i didn't come up with stuff, saw it elsewhere, found it interesting and decided to post. again, not my statistics. i neither support or disagree with the above statistics. posted here for discussion...

 

[Phoenix44]

My apology then. We can ignore my first sentence. The rest stands.