PDA

View Full Version : Counter Point



SnakebyteXX
09-23-2005, 08:02 PM
Remember These Facts

Comparing the number of U.S. wounded and dead with the size of the force deployed, in Vietnam the casualty rate was 6.2%; in World War I and World War II, just above 6.5%. On D-day, June 6, 1944, more than three times as many servicemen were lost as died in Iraq in the past year.

The Iraq war rate seems high only because our unstated benchmark is the 1991 Gulf War (total casualty rate: 0.14%). This is not meant to deprecate the sacrifices of our soldiers; for friends and family members, no statistics can assuage their grief. But, from a historical vantage point, what's remarkable is how few casualties we've suffered, not how many.

When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, state the following ...

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 18,334 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 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 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 Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing A--O.K

web page (http://www.punditreview.com/remember_these_facts.htm)

MacGyver
09-24-2005, 04:07 PM
Rofl...

This is funny because your whole argument can be dismissed due to you being an idiot than any of us having to actually dismiss your supposed "idea's".

When you can't make an argument without resorting to these sad illogical comparisons, then it shows that you HAVE no argument...


You are comparing the time it took a private citizen to phone someone about a car with how long it took a military operation to finish!??!?!?!

There is NO comparison with some of the things you mentioned, you included them only to stir up some sort of anti-democrat sentiment, which again makes no sense....

Regardless of the past or the future, RIGHT NOW bush is a terrible president, and past wars will not change that.

dbankjr
09-24-2005, 11:15 PM
Good thing you were not the real one or there wouldn't have been a series .- ... ...

dbankjr
09-24-2005, 11:55 PM
Yea he's a terrible President..having to deal with so many national disasters in his term and possibly not being perfect at every turn. Taking the weight even if it wasn't his fault at times. You'd have thought we had elected a human..what were we thinking....could it be possible that all to be known is not privy to you and me.. I hope so!

Sid_Vicious
09-25-2005, 12:08 AM
"RIGHT NOW bush is a terrible president, and past wars will not change that."

DITTO! sid

MacGyver
09-25-2005, 12:40 AM
"Taking the weight even if it wasn't his fault at times."

WOW that one really got me... Bush and his entire family and party all say the same thing everytime they are found at fault(which is a lot)..."Well I don't want to play the blame game" or "We aren't going to play some blame game"....

God I still remember the confirmation hearings of that (@*%(@ bolton....

Who was the republican that said something to the effect of "We aren't going to worry about things that people have done wrong in the past"ect

This whitehouse has NO accountability in their actions as far as I've seen, everytime something is mentioned about their mistakes they talk about a blame game or that it is in the past...

I wish that worked for the rest of our lives... "Hey you owe us money, but we aren't going to play the blame game so lets just forget it".... Or "Well we know you just killed 10 people but that is in the past so lets just forget about it"...


I find it appalling that out of all possible attributes you say that Bush has "Taken the weight"....

Gayle in MD
09-25-2005, 02:59 PM
"Not Being Perfect" ?????? That's a good one. There is a vast difference between not being perfect, and being totally incompetant!

It's not bad enough that he is incompetent, he has a nack for finding a slew of other incompetent jerks just like himself to appoint to critical positions.

Arrrogance and incompetence are a disgusting combination. Bush defanders are losers who can't accept the fact that their chosen candidate has made one collosal mess after another, and the state of our affairs proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Just keep picking and choosing your right wing mythological facts, the day is fast arriving when you won't want to admit that you were one of the dummies who couldn't see through the biggest and most destructive liars this country has ever seen. But, don't worry about it, atleast gays can't marry, and abortion is on the way out, LMAO!

How many Bush Defenders does it take to screw in a light bulb? Forty million!

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
09-26-2005, 05:43 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing A--O.K <hr /></blockquote> He is doing just fine, especially on the international front.

eg8r