a friend put this up on another bord.
thought i would share it 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 1965-19 75, 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 time 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 an d 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
Arlington National Cemetery, where I have more friends
buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch< waving>
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.
It might not be a bad idea to keep this circulating.
_________________
alot of this i never knew. maybee knowlige is power
thats a good one right thier
take that democrats
I will say that anyone who serves in any armed forces has a great job, my father was a marine in vietnam where he did 3 tours of duty! Any one on here from the armed forces, i envy you! I wish i could serve, but medical reasons keep me out. If i would have had my way i would be in the marines right now, serving in afganistan!
I will not however say that this war was justified! President bush took us to war on a b.s. principle. He said we were going after terrorists(in afganistan, specifically bin laden) and w.m.d.! We were led from one thing to another. When we couldn't find bin laden it moved to saddam has w.m.d.'s. After that it moved to we're bringing feedom and democracy to the middle east.
How can anyone say this war is a success? We removed an oppressive leader, but the 2 principles of this war have not happened. We have not gotten bin laden and there were no w.m.d! the 2 things that lead us to war, that got bush the votes in the senate he needed to get a declaration for war were b.s.!
Sorry for the rant, but i just can't see why people still stand behind bush! I think this war was really about one thing OIL! They have it and we need it! This is my opinion. No one really knows what runs through our presidents head.(i think the wind but. . . )
I was going along fine until, "Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military Morale is high! "
As far as Bush is concerned, I'm with Squirrel. But for me it isnt even so much about Iraq as is is the bigger issue of the GOP controlled country. Never before has our country given so much power to the president and never before have we been subject to the whims of corporations and lobbiests. Whats a check and ballance?
As far the other wars mentioned? At least all of them ended. Bush assumed that Sadam would fall - correct, but had no idea what an insurgency was. Also he assumed - incorrectly - that Iraq would be ripe for democracy, but did not take into account their thousand year history of a divided nation bent on killing the other faction. This is by far the worst situation our county has ever been in.
squirrel Wrote:I will say that anyone who serves in any armed forces has a great job, my father was a marine in vietnam where he did 3 tours of duty! Any one on here from the armed forces, i envy you! I wish i could serve, but medical reasons keep me out. If i would have had my way i would be in the marines right now, serving in afganistan!
I will not however say that this war was justified! President bush took us to war on a b.s. principle. He said we were going after terrorists(in afganistan, specifically bin laden) and w.m.d.! We were led from one thing to another. When we couldn't find bin laden it moved to saddam has w.m.d.'s. After that it moved to we're bringing feedom and democracy to the middle east.
How can anyone say this war is a success? We removed an oppressive leader, but the 2 principles of this war have not happened. We have not gotten bin laden and there were no w.m.d! the 2 things that lead us to war, that got bush the votes in the senate he needed to get a declaration for war were b.s.!
Sorry for the rant, but i just can't see why people still stand behind bush! I think this war was really about one thing OIL! They have it and we need it! This is my opinion. No one really knows what runs through our presidents head.(i think the wind but. . . )
HMMM on a B.S. Principle huh, could u imagine if gore or kerry got in or even if bush didnt decide to go to war, i can garentee that there would be more terroist attacks in the U.S. at least that we r showing the terrorists that we cant be pushed around and just sit there and say "oh its ok, we'll forgive you for killing thousands of citezens but just done do it again" i for one am glad that we are at war, because living in the chicago area some of us might not even be here, especially those of us living in the heart of the city.
just my opinion
Ok then explain to me why we have not gotten Bin laden. And bringing democracy to the middle east will not stop terrorist. they believe that we(the u.s.) are infadels(sp?) and must be destroyed because of their belief structure! We will never stop terrorism against us.
Quote:could u imagine if gore or kerry got in or even if bush didnt decide to go to war, i can garentee that there would be more terroist attacks in the U.S. at least that we r showing the terrorists that we cant be pushed around and just sit there and say "oh its ok, we'll forgive you for killing thousands of citezens but just done do it again"
You can not honestly be that naive to believe that there would be more attacks if john kerry got elected? It is truly Clintons fault because he knew about Bin Laden before all of this happened.
well im not saying that if he got in there would be more attacks but i think that he would have pulled the troops right out of iraq
Ok this is kind of a touchy issue so if i say something that pisses u off i only mean to add something to the convo.
i have so much respect for the people in the millitary, the fact that they go out and do what they do every day is amazing. But i think that the war in Iraq was a terrible idea. Traxxas i understand what your saying about how were not going to just sit there and do nothing and we have go after the people who were involved. So i understood why bush wanted to go to Afghanistan and try and find Osama, but i dont understand why bush went to Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. And i dont understand how you can say bush is doing a good job in Iraq. We shouldnt even be in Iraq If Bush had waited for the UN inspectors to finish their jobs then they could of told him that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction and that could of saved 1000 soldier that died in Iraq. If this trully was a "War on Terror" then why do we have more troops Iraq then in Afghanistan. We should be looking for Osama.
Personally tho this war has been bad for Middle Eastern and other "brown" people. I'm Indian and im glad im indian, but after 9/11 things changed I would be walking down the street people looked at us. today i was driving home with my mom from the grocery store and a police officer followed us home and im not like one of those people that thinks that every one is rascist. like the police following us home for like more then a couple of miles has happened probable more then 6-7 times. also one of our family friends. was driving during the night and the police stopped him and they took him to jail and they kept him their for a day and just let him go. In world History last year we learned about the 3 main religions ( christianity, Judaism, and Islam) and before we started the Unit on Islam my teacher said ok guys when i say the word Terrorist what do u think of. people started raising their hands and saying what they thought of and atleast half of the kids said Muslim, or Middle eastern.
im done
~noto
sorry to hear that noto, im not racist but if someone pisses me off, they r going to know, i dont understand y we went to iraq either, when it should have been afganastan, but we did and we made yet another enemy against the us, even though i highly doubt that iraq liked us anyway, but now they really r pissed at us, so just pulling out will undoubtly (sp?) just bring more attacks and death to the us, and another thing with the UN if bush would have let them finish we would have found that there werent any but... what if there were, some of us on this conversation might not be here, and where our houses are could be infested with radiation from nuclear bombs or if chemical or biological weapons had been used it would look like the terminator movies when the tanks are running over peoples skulls.
Bumper sticker I saw last week:
BU**SH**
That's all it said.....
if they did have Nuclear weapons whats wrong with that. Why can we have hundreds of Nuclear weapons while other countries cant have any at all???
well what i meant by that was if they had them, and were planning to use them sorry for the confusion
it's amazing to me the responce people have about this subject, based on what knolage thay have obtained by the news or hearsay.both sides each have vallid points.
are you in the military phoenix?
Quote:Ok then explain to me why we have not gotten Bin laden. And bringing democracy to the middle east will not stop terrorist. they believe that we(the u.s.) are infadels(sp?) and must be destroyed because of their belief structure! We will never stop terrorism against us.
On an average, BEFORE our troops went into the middle east, America had at least one major terrorist strike per year. (Passenger planes shot down over Florida, Navy ships being sunk in open waters, Oklahoma City, etc....)
Since 9-11 and our troops deployment, there have been NO major terrorist strikes against the US, on our soil.
England pulled their troops out of Iraq, and shortly afterward were hit by 2 major bombings.
In that alone, I would say that the fight on terrorism is showing good results so far.
To say that the attack on Iraq is to sieze their oil, is pure ignorrance. Why would we attack a country that is a Main supplier and controls the prices of our oil? Why in these attacks, would our fighter jets bomb the oil refineries?
Hussein has, on many occasions, refered to their "Dirty Bombs" and Chemical warfare. These are both "Weapons of Mass Destruction". If you honestly think that just because we didn't find them, they don't exist, you are truly brainwashed with what the Democratic Convention wants you to believe.
Also, after the World Trade Center attacks, all I watched for quite some time, was various News channels. Our troops went into Afganistan in search of Bin Laden. During the entire time our troops were in Afganistan, Hussein kept threatening to declare war with the United States if we didn't leave Afganistan. When Hussein did make the declaration of war, Bush did what ANY respectable President would have done. Take the war to them, rather than fight it on American Soil. In doing so, how many Civilian lives are safer than if the war was fought on American soil?
In addition, during the presidential debates, Kerry Kept saying we had No reason to go after Hussein, but later said that if elected, he would hunt down terrorists wherever they are and destroy them before they could attack us. Wouldn't that then make America a terrorist country?
thenewguy821 Wrote:On an average, BEFORE our troops went into the middle east, America had at least one major terrorist strike per year. (Passenger planes shot down over Florida, Navy ships being sunk in open waters, Oklahoma City, etc....)
Since 9-11 and our troops deployment, there have been NO major terrorist strikes against the US, on our soil.
England pulled their troops out of Iraq, and shortly afterward were hit by 2 major bombings.
In that alone, I would say that the fight on terrorism is showing good results so far.
To say that the attack on Iraq is to sieze their oil, is pure ignorrance. Why would we attack a country that is a Main supplier and controls the prices of our oil? Why in these attacks, would our fighter jets bomb the oil refineries?
Hussein has, on many occasions, refered to their "Dirty Bombs" and Chemical warfare. These are both "Weapons of Mass Destruction". If you honestly think that just because we didn't find them, they don't exist, you are truly brainwashed with what the Democratic Convention wants you to believe.
Also, after the World Trade Center attacks, all I watched for quite some time, was various News channels. Our troops went into Afganistan in search of Bin Laden. During the entire time our troops were in Afganistan, Hussein kept threatening to declare war with the United States if we didn't leave Afganistan. When Hussein did make the declaration of war, Bush did what ANY respectable President would have done. Take the war to them, rather than fight it on American Soil. In doing so, how many Civilian lives are safer than if the war was fought on American soil?
In addition, during the presidential debates, Kerry Kept saying we had No reason to go after Hussein, but later said that if elected, he would hunt down terrorists wherever they are and destroy them before they could attack us. Wouldn't that then make America a terrorist country?
agree 100% Kerry was so wishy washy on his opinions this week he was totally against the war, and the next week he was going to hunt down there terrorist and stuff
hey im afraid to say,
1. troops in iraq is not an insurance policy on terrorist attacks, increased security is.
2. on the first post it say that troops morale is high, how the hell do you know you not over there, i was and i can say that probably 90 % of troops dont agree about the reasons we are there, and if morale is high its not becuase of bush, its probably of packages from friends and famiily and people that care.
3. and if the reason we are there was to get rid of sadam , umm let me think oh i think we could do that with cruise missles and satelites, but if we did that then we wouldnt have a reason to send in troops.
4. Like i said before i really appreciate all the support from the poeple back home and the troops need that support to make it through the deployment, but dont put words in soldiers mouth like the politicians do, its cool that everyone is expressing thier opinions thats what soldiers defend freedoms, but dont express other peoples opinions.
ohh and my knowledge isnt hearsay, and thats how you spell knowledge
how u said the moral is high, i didnt really think that it would be, but he said he got the post thing from another forum.
OVERYEOJ asked.
are you in the military phoenix?
no i am not,my father was when i was 2. i don't remember any of it.
also someone said clinton and bush sr had osama many times. this is true,
but sometimes it is better to leave the devil you know in power than the one behind
him you don't know.
and yes our gov. let this go for to long,and we lost many lives.
Quote:On an average, BEFORE our troops went into the middle east, America had at least one major terrorist strike per year. (Passenger planes shot down over Florida, Navy ships being sunk in open waters, Oklahoma City, etc....) Since 9-11 and our troops deployment, there have been NO major terrorist strikes against the US, on our soil.
Quote:1. troops in iraq is not an insurance policy on terrorist attacks, increased security is.
nuff said!!!! and the oklahoma city bombing was american!!! hence not a reason to go over to iraq!
Quote:Hussein has, on many occasions, refered to their "Dirty Bombs" and Chemical warfare. These are both "Weapons of Mass Destruction". If you honestly think that just because we didn't find them, they don't exist, you are truly brainwashed with what the Democratic Convention wants you to believe.
i could say i have dirty bombs too!!!! doesn't make it true though! and i'm definately not a democrat! i think for myself i don't care what other peoples views on something are, i base what i believe on my own intelligence!
Quote:In addition, during the presidential debates, Kerry Kept saying we had No reason to go after Hussein, but later said that if elected, he would hunt down terrorists wherever they are and destroy them before they could attack us. Wouldn't that then make America a terrorist country?
talk about me being brainwashed!! Kerry said he would hunt down TERRORISTS like Bin Laden, not saddam! and yes kerry did ''flip flop'' but if you actually paid attention and didn't get your info from fox news you would realize what he flip flopped on!!!! he was against the war! i agree with him there! but he was for getting the troops in iraq the necessary equipment!!! he was never actually for the war, but to keep the troops over there happy!
Most of the info everyone recieved during that time is only half the truth really! No news is truly bi-partisian, they are either for the democrats or the republicans! unless you actually watched the senate meetings and everything like that you will not know the WHOLE truth!(and yes i do watch them, i have no life)