Politics isn't always reality

[K1VSK]

With all the posturing regarding who would make the best President, the following makes interesting reading. I didn't write it although I wish I had:


"I hate the ignorant Americans that drive around with “Impeach Bush!” bumper sticker on their car. In most other countries this would get you thrown in jail or maybe even death. Only in America, you’ll find journalists and media actually think its ok to make our countries leader look stupid.

Too bad only a small percent of the nation see things this way.


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, recognize 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 Wait

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!!!"

If you are inclined to argue any of the above or disagree with the perspective, it might behove you to find out to whom this quote is actually attributable

[ks4du]

Only in America, you’ll find journalists and media actually think its ok to make our countries leader look stupid.

I really don't think GW needs the media to make him look stupid. He does a fine job on his own.

[wa6ccw]

You realize, of course, that the Left doesn't take too kindly to facts like these. :D

[N2RJ]

So in other words, you just said in more words than was necessary that wars are stupid?

seems pretty obvious to me.

[W8EFA]

If you are inclined to argue any of the above or disagree with the perspective, it might behove you to find out to whom this quote is actually attributable

I don't know who wrote it but whoever it was is an idiot.

Go tell the 39 families of Servicemen killed that Month in Iraq that it is no big deal because almost that number were killed in Detroit. What a moron

And comparing Iraq to WW2 is particularly stupid.

And this one is brilliant too:
The Democrats are complaining
about how long the war is taking.

But Wait

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation..

Yes we took Iraq alright now we still have it 5 years later not 51 days and in worse shape than when we started. You really have to be a dumbass to support this idiocy. Sorry but there is really just no other word for it.

[wa6ccw]

As I said (see above). ;)

[k9kxq]

I really don't think GW needs the media to make him look stupid. He does a fine job on his own.
Ditto...

kxq

[k9kxq]

You realize, of course, that the Left doesn't take too kindly to facts like these. :D

Sorry to bust your bubble, but the majority of those so called facts are wrong...

kxq

[W3MIV]

Sorry to bust your bubble, but the majority of those so called facts are wrong...

This is another of those email spams that are picked up and distributed as "genuine" quotations of some famous soldier, politician or celebrity. They are all fallacious inventions sent out to gull weak minded and gullible individuals.

The device employed is just clever enough to capture people who think they know some history, because there is a kernel of truth in most of the historical "facts" cited. They are all simplistic distortions of a type that appeals to simplistic minds.

FDR did, indeed, lead us into WWII, and Germany did declare war on the US, but not exactly without provocation. We should be very happy that FDR was so determined; he saved the world from far more misery in all likelihood.

While it is also true that Truman went to war in Korea, it was the North Koreans who started it, not the US.

JFK did not "start" a war in Indochina, he merely continued a policy begun by Ike (and on Ike's recommendation); it is true, however, that LBJ turned it into a "quagmire," but it is not true that Vietnam never attacked the US.

Clinton did, indeed, go to war in Bosnia under circumstances that remain genuinely questionable, but there is no proof that "Osama's head" was ever "offered," on a platter or otherwise. That is speculation.

None of the assertions in paragraph G are true. The few that approach some sense of veracity are exaggerations, and the others are probably vain hopes.

Janet Reno did not attempt to "take the Branch Davidian compound." That feckless operation was carried out by an augmented FBI team. The FBI is not an agency subject to directly partisan operation, even though the Director is an appointee.

The slur about the Rose Law firm records is inaccurate.

Though I cordially detest Kennedy for his failure to swiftly report the drowning of Ms Kopechne and begin retrieval of her body, the assertion that he sat on the pier longer than it took our troops to conquer the Republican Guard is a lie.

Finally, we have not yet taken Iraq, so the final assertion, too, is nothing but a lie.

[wa6ccw]

Sorry to bust your bubble, but the majority of those so called facts are wrong...

kxq

Such as...?

[wa6ccw]

Let's pick one out of the crowd:


The slur about the Rose Law firm records is inaccurate.

In what way?

[KC9IUX]

It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation..


That resulted in the deaths of infants, the elderly and the unborn. All over dubious claims.

Also using chemical weapons banned for use in war. Saddam would have been proud.

See Waco: The Rules of Engagement.

[n2nh]

I hope that you weren't going to tell us John Glenn said this.

From SNOPES.COM:

In 2005, someone prefaced the John Glenn/Howard Metzenbaum article with the following item about Iraq. This addendum has nothing to do with John Glenn — it's an anonymous piece that has been floating around the Internet since 2004, but because it has been tacked onto an article about Glenn, readers have been misled into thinking that it is a transcription of something he said:
THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE:

WHAT SENATOR JOHN GLENN SAID, Scroll down.

Things that make you think a little........

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during 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 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 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 Chapaquiddick.

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.

PT Barnum was right. There is a foolish neocon born every minute. And if it's on The Internets, then it MUST be right. Snopes sez this is just more NeoKon Krack. (http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/glenn.asp)
:D

Right off the bat there were 42 deaths in Iraq in Jan. 2008, not 39. I know, I know! NeoKons can't count. :D

[W3MIV]

Good post, Johnny. TU.

I hope that you weren't going to tell us John Glenn said this.



PT Barnum was right. There is a foolish neocon born every minute. And if it's on The Internets, then it MUST be right. Snopes sez this is just more NeoKon Krack. (http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/glenn.asp)
:D

Right off the bat there were 42 deaths in Iraq in Jan. 2008, not 39. I know, I know! NeoKons can't count. :D

[K1VSK]

Good post, Johnny. TU.

Wrong!

John Glenn may have used the quote but it isn't direclty attributable to him.

For various reasons, not all of which are probably objective, some of you may dislike some of these facts but simply saying they are innacurate doesn't make it so.

I'll let this play out a while longer

[W8EFA]

It just amazes me that people are this incredibly stupid. Actually you couldn't really be stupid enough to believe stuff like this and even graduate from High School, or pass a ham technician test. So it really comes down to being incredibly close minded I guess, which is really worse.

[kc2orw]

From Snopes: (So maybe true maybe not honestly who cares it is pure garbage either way)

In 2005, someone prefaced the John Glenn/Howard Metzenbaum article with the following item about Iraq. This addendum has nothing to do with John Glenn it's an anonymous piece that has been floating around the Internet since 2004, but because it has been tacked onto an article about Glenn, readers have been misled into thinking that it is a transcription of something he said:

Korea: was considered a debacle

Vietnam: was a profiteers war

Gulf War I: Well that is still undecided so far.

World War II: Germany had invaded France, Poland, etc already and had started going after England.

Do you actually believe you have some valid point regardless of whom you might think you can attribute this quote to?

Oh and Turkey is escalating it's efforts with the Kurds again by crossing the Iraq border. Yes it is going very well in Iraq isn't it, I wonder how much money they had to give Al Sadr to keep him from causing more problems...

[wa6ccw]

Right off the bat there were 42 deaths in Iraq in Jan. 2008, not 39. I know, I know! NeoKons can't count. :D

Where does it say Jan. "2008"?

[N9XR]

Where does it say Jan. "2008"?

There were 554 combat related deaths in Iraq in January '08. I believe that there were zero combat related deaths in Detroit in January, '08.

But when you are a neocon, who needs to know how to count?

[wa6ccw]

There were 554 combat related deaths in Iraq in January '08. I believe that there were zero combat related deaths in Detroit in January, '08.

But when you are a neocon, who needs to know how to count?

You seemed to have missed the question... here it is again:

Where does it say Jan. "2008"?

[W3MIV]

You seemed to have missed the question... here it is again:

Where does it say Jan. "2008"?

I think it was Emerson who pointed out that "a foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." I shall have to remember to check that attribution, for it so well fits your insistent cry in the face of having posted reactionary spam as fact.

[N9XR]

My point exactly.

I was talking about January, 1908.

Where you got the idea I meant 2008, I will never know. You are always jumping to conclusions and delusions.

Carry on, oh ye with no argument.

[wa6ccw]

My point exactly.

I was talking about January, 1908.

Where you got the idea I meant 2008, I will never know. You are always jumping to conclusions and delusions.

Carry on, oh ye with no argument.

Really? So, when you said:

There were 554 combat related deaths in Iraq in January '08. I believe that there were zero combat related deaths in Detroit in January, '08.

You actually meant January of 1908?

[wa6ccw]

I think it was Emerson who pointed out that "a foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." I shall have to remember to check that attribution, for it so well fits your insistent cry in the face of having posted reactionary spam as fact.

Speaking of "foolish", you must really enjoy slipping headfirst on your own banana peel...

Please show all of us out here where I posted "reactionary spam".

Helpful hint:

My discussion of another person's OP doesn't fit into said category.

We'll be waiting.:D

[W3MIV]

You realize, of course, that the Left doesn't take too kindly to facts like these. :D

Here you support the original post as factual.

As I said (see above). ;)

A repetition of the support of the original post as factual.

Such as...?

Continued denial of any doubt about the accuracy being defended.

Let's pick one out of the crowd:



In what way?

Speaking of "foolish", you must really enjoy slipping headfirst on your own banana peel...

Please show all of us out here where I posted "reactionary spam".

Helpful hint:

My discussion of another person's OP doesn't fit into said category.

We'll be waiting.:D

Need any more help?

[kc2orw]

Iraq is not morally equivalent to WW II
Vietnam was a joke on the American people
Korea was a debacle
Gulf I is undecided.

Where or how does drawing an equivalency between fatalities in an American City and Deaths in Iraq give justification to an war based on error or possibly lies.
Oh I get it, it means killing people frivolously isn't important to you, yes that must be it :mad:

[K1VSK]

It's too bad a bunch of hams can't have a discussion/debate about anything without resorting to sarcasm and insults which apprently some believe takes the place of legitimate discussion or somehow helps them make their point.

Please try to remember that denial, particularly in combination with childish insults, only serves to deminish the credibility of your argument.


Calling someone you don't know "stupid", for example, in the absence of any argument to the contrary and without knowing anything about the person to whom you refer, is quite obviously a behavioral trait for which most intelligent people would be embarrassed.

[n2nh]

Where does it say Jan. "2008"?

Ah, so we have nobody that this has been attributed to yet. We have no year. We have no facts. And we have neocons showing they have no brains.

We do have an old lie being recycled into... yet another posting of an old lie. <snicker> I can't imagine why nobody takes neocons seriously anymore.

Consistent AND predictable.

TKS Albert. I found you refutation well done too.

[kc2orw]

It's too bad a bunch of hams can't have a discussion/debate about anything without resorting to sarcasm and insults which apprently some believe takes the place of legitimate discussion or somehow helps them make their point.

Sorry if posting bad information makes people laugh it is just something one has to learn to deal with. Mistakes are made by most live with it...


Please try to remember that denial, particularly in combination with childish insults, only serves to deminish the credibility of your argument.

Denial you think posting a non sequitur and being taken to task for doing such is a sign of denial, phew. Good attempt at distraction I guess... well not that good.


Calling someone you don't know "stupid", for example, in the absence of any argument to the contrary and without knowing anything about the person to whom you refer, is quite obviously a behavioral trait for which most intelligent people would be embarrassed.

Well if some actually called you stupid directly I must have missed. Perhaps you are taking the criticism of your posting too seriously the posting may have been referred to as stupid.

Iraq is not morally equivalent to WWII the Germans had already attacked other allied countries. We were actually slow to become involved in that conflict and we, the USA, were similarly slow to become involved in WWI.

Drawing an equivalence of deaths in Iraq and traffic fatalities, murders in a particular city, etc in the USA does not make the Iraq War morally acceptable as it is based on errors and/or lies. If anything it would more likely reveal a very callous nature something that many have mentioned before.

[KU0DM]

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.


a. GWB led us into Iraq

b. Iraq never attacked us, the attacks came from Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other middle eastern countries EXCEPT Iraq

c. See b

d. See b

e. See b

f. See b, You know, someone's head on a platter wouldn't have solved our problems anyways. Osama never attacked us, members of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban have though, and just because he leads Al-Qaeda doesn't mean taking him out would solve our problems with them.

g. He hasn't crushed the Taliban and Al-Qaeda is still going strong, if that isn't true then how come the conservatives are always saying we need to get rid of them because they are a big threat. I wouldn't think a crippled organization would be much of threat if I was the one that crippled them. Wait, I thought this was the war on terror? Is it not? Bush a wide view on terror then, I wonder if he is scared of the boogey-man too!

Doing all of those things has caused more trouble for us, as well as many people world wide. We are meddling in the middle east, ticking off lots and lots of people, creating a feeling of resentment for the United States. Bush has also killed mass numbers of civilians, in his chase after a few terrorists, I don't call that a great thing. Yes, Sadam Hussein was a horrible person, but since he was captured the level of violence in Iraq sky-rocketed! MORE people were killed after he was captured, that wasn't the intent was it? Bush has been careless, he is shoot first ask questions later. He is still shooting. The number of American soldiers killed, as well as civilians in the middle east, are far greater than they should be, and WOULD BE if our president had actually done some more planning and strategizing. Ya know, maybe if we actually utilized our allies, and special units, we could take out a few terrorists, but wait, they are all tied up in Iraq. Iraq has been the biggest diversion of all time, and the terrorists like it that way. It's easier for them to attack us if all our troops are in Iraq, ever think about that? By fighting a pointless war, we are making OURSELVES vulnerable.

[n2nh]

Wrong!

John Glenn may have used the quote but it isn't direclty attributable to him.

Wrong!

Some people just don't get it. John Glenn DIDN'T use the quote, no maybe, and/or ifs about it. That much has been refuted. OTOH, posting this and not attributing it is a joke. Especially when your 'facts' are unproven. You posted these 'facts' stop getting everybody else to prove them.

Make your point Sparky.

[n2nh]

Really? So, when you said:

You actually meant January of 1908?

At least he's got the nads to tell us when he's talking about. More than I can say for the mystery of the original neokon troll with mystery year, author and "facts".
:p

[wa6ccw]

Need any more help?

Yes, I do...

You originally said that I "posted reactionary spam as fact".

Now, you saying that I "support the original post as factual".

Have another one ===> http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/party/party0006.gif

[W3MIV]

Yes, I do...

You originally said that I "posted reactionary spam as fact".

Now, you saying that I "support the original post as factual".

Have another one ===> http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/party/party0006.gif

Please point out the difference for us. Take your time.

[wa6ccw]

Please point out the difference for us. Take your time.

You already know the difference...

Quit trying to buy more time.:D

[wa6ccw]

At least he's got the nads to tell us when he's talking about. More than I can say for the mystery of the original neokon troll with mystery year, author and "facts".
:p

Ha, ha, ha, well, I think he's a big boy and speak for himself on that one...

I suspect that he doesn't need you to defend him against
mean-'ol CCW. :D

[n2nh]

A paper tiger with teeth made of used car ads.
:D

[n2nh]

Apparently K1VSK doesn't know who said this and when. So I guess we'll never know.:rolleyes:

[K1VSK]

Wrong!

Some people just don't get it. John Glenn DIDN'T use the quote, no maybe, and/or ifs about it. That much has been refuted. OTOH, posting this and not attributing it is a joke. Especially when your 'facts' are unproven. You posted these 'facts' stop getting everybody else to prove them.

Make your point Sparky.


You just did, unwittingly, make my point - that being, as I said, some folks can't seem to participate in any debate (here and possibly anywhere) without acting childish.

The quote, regardless of whether you disagree or deny any of it, is secondary to how indicative some of your responses are.

[kc2orw]

You just did, unwittingly, make my point - that being, as I said, some folks can't seem to participate in any debate (here and possibly anywhere) without acting childish.

The quote, regardless of whether you disagree or deny any of it, is secondary to how indicative some of your responses are.

My take is that your posting is based on faulty logic it seems to be trying to draw a moral equivalence between the Iraq war and WWII based on the notion that it is not a big deal that people die in an unnecessary war because the same amount of people die for reasons other then this war. So how that justifies a war based on bad intelligence versus a war fought against enemies that attacked allies I don't see.
One might try to introduce the now failing efforts in Afghanistan, failing because of this Iraq debacle, but alas that might point out even more faulty logic. The USA alas has gone to war for the wrong reasons before and by Vietnam people protested it in Korea people were afraid to protest the government. At least since Vietnam people feel safe enough to protest incorrect wars.
So Obama protests a bad war by not wearing a made in China flag pin all power to him for doing so. Fortunate we are to be able to do so but if people stopped protesting where would we be the old Soviet Union?

[n2nh]

You just did, unwittingly, make my point - that being, as I said, some folks can't seem to participate in any debate (here and possibly anywhere) without acting childish.

The quote, regardless of whether you disagree or deny any of it, is secondary to how indicative some of your responses are.

VSK, the childish thing is to troll so cluelessly. You said, oh, I'll tell you later. So you won't now is what you're saying. Sure, because as I stated earlier this is supposed to be something Glenn said and now we all know that isn't the case. Typical.

Keep projecting*. Also a typical childish neocon ploy when the going gets rough.:rolleyes:

*11. Psychology.
a. the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way