Desperately need help responding to this email.

[lovedems]

This was sent from my brother to my mom who sent it to me in disbelief. I would like to "respond to all" with this garbage and am interested in any good points from the smart people of DU.

Here is the email

Good stuff.


Subject: A clear perspective. Share this with someone who's a Michael Moore
fan.


There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
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 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.

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.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

1. How about this?

I guess 1000 soldier deaths is no big deal to whomever wrote this email. And I guess the fact that they died for NO weapons of mass destruction, NO threat from Iraq is no big deal, right?

I also guess around 30,000 Iraqi deaths doesn't bother the email writer, either. Must be nice to be so blase about human life that you can simply compare it to other wars and say "HEY! No big deal!"

It's not the sheer number of lives. It's the fact that they never had to go there, fight and die in the FIRST PLACE. THAT'S the wastefulness of this war. THAT'S the immorality of this war. THAT'S the complete injustice of this LIE.

By the way, writer of said email, I'd like to see you tell this to the faces of families who have lost their soldier son or daughter. I'd like to see you go over to Baghdad and tell the couple whose five month old son was killed in a bombing that it's no big deal.

That's what I thought.

[lovedems]

4. My first thought was you can't simply cite the combat deaths in one month

you have to cite the injured and the innocent as well. I would like to find a link that has the killed, injured and citizen deaths for the month. I am sure that number will be staggering and then I can say, "No big deal, ay?"

Thanks for your thoughts. I will certainly incorporate them. They seem to forget this is a war of choice, not necessity.

[Sandpiper]

28. Here's a database of civilian deaths

http://iraqbodycount.net/

It puts civilian deaths at 11336 minimum and 13306 maximum.

And for perspective, considering that Iraq has less than one tenth the population of the US, that would have been like the US losing 133000 people on 9/11.

[lovedems]

29. Thank you for the link! I intend to use all of them in my response.

People who write these emails don't like the facts to get in their way!

[Beaverhausen]

2. where to begin

The population of Detroit is 951,000. There are 140,000 soldiers in Iraq. That blows that stat right there.

[lovedems]

6. Thank you. That is definately a point worth noting.

Thank you! Thank you! :loveya:

[Katherine2]

10. Also, they're inconveniently

forgetting about the Iraqis who are killed, and whom our government can't find the time or inclination to bother counting.

[NYCGirl]

12. McLaughlin Group updates the stats from the DOD weekly,

and the last time I saw, Iraqi deaths were listed as 17,000+.

[immoderate]

52. Detroit does not have an invading army

Apples, oranges. Detroit had ZERO combat deaths! No mention of the number of murders in Iraq.

Also Kennedy did not start Viet Nam. It started during Eisenhower.

Roosevelt did not "get us into" WWII. Germany declared war on the US.

--IMM

[annxburns]

3. This is such bullcrap, I'll start with the first sentence ...

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
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.

Okay, Detroit has a MILLION people, not 140,000 - so by that measure Detroit would have to have about 10 times the number of deaths for it to be comparable to Iraq. Second, this doesn't count Iraqis killed, like those killed in suicide bombings and Iraqi security forces. Iraq is a hell of a lot more (10-20 times) more violent than the worst neighborhood in the most dangerous US city.

And why? Where are the WMD? Where was the imminent threat?

[lovedems]

8. Thank you!

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

5. This has been discussed multiple times in the past few weeks.

And a few DU'ers put forth some really good replies. Search the archives.

[lovedems]

11. Thanks. I will. I am here almost everyday and haven't seen

anything posted but I will sure take a look. Thanks!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

7. This email blames WWII on FDR

and you think it's worth responding to?

:wtf:

[lovedems]

9. I have gotten garbage emails in the past and I have ignored them

but I am tired of it. It is time for me to respond.

[democrat_patriot]

17. I think we should respond

to all of these.

Some disagree, saying it is a waste of time. I think it's worth it, and it takes little time.

As for this email, I've seen it 'debunked' here 5-10 times.

Always hit 'reply all' to this junk.

We need a debunked email section here at DU....

[lovedems]

24. Agreed!

That would be a great idea! I normally ignore them but not anymore. I can't let people like this think they are smart! :D

[nini]

13. two words...

SHOVE IT!


that may get your point across.

[rkc3]

25. Two more words - Whisper Chipper.

Lovedems: It's a lot easier to tell your brother to go screw than one of your co-workers. My brother and I completely disagree on Bush/Kerry. It gives me pleasure to remind him what an idiot he is.

Also, remind him that if all those other wars were so terrible, cost so many lives, and never should have been started - why the hell did we need to start this one. That's the irony here. Somehow it's OK for Bush to start a war, because he's not a Republican.

It's like the argument Teresa Heinz Kerry won't float with housewives in Peoria because she's got millions in the bank. Somehow Laura Bush is more palatable even though she's got money in the bank. And Bush is a man for the people - even though his daddy gave him $50MM to start his oil company. It's ridiculous.

I'm done ranting.

[lovedems]

32. My bro is a fundie republican, big time.

If he is pro-life, he should be pro-life and be outraged by the needless deaths in Iraq.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. I'll take a crack at it

There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
January.....

So the military killed in accidents that would not have happened were they not there don't count? There have been over 1000 troops killed since the start of the war..troops don't grow on trees. How is minimizing the deaths of our troops supporting them?

In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January.

And more likely than not, at least 35 people are responsible for those murders. George W Bush is responsible for all 35 deaths last January and he lied to get them to go over there.

That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war torn
country of Iraq.

Only if we don't count all the civilian deaths in that war torn city..this is nothing more than an attempt to devalue human life if it happens to be of Iraqi descent. How many Iraqi's were killed? How many were children? How many of your children would be a just number to be killed over an unjust war?

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.

Just more proof of how Repubs like to have it both ways. Before the war they were claiming Bush's mission was much like that in Germany and in Japan...are we now saying those were unjust missions? If so, you just conceded that this war is unjust.

BTW..only an idiot who has never read a history book wouldn't know that Eisenhower got us into Viet Nam.

Oh and on Viet Nam...8 of those years were under Republican rule.

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

b-b-b-b-ut he gassed his own people?

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.

This has already been debunked numerous times and BTW..didn't Georgie say Clinton lobbed a two million dolar bomb into a ten dollar tent? That in and of itself was an omission that Clinton DID pursue Bin Laden...BTW..where is he? In Iraq?



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.

Afghanistan is a mess because he was busy making his oil buddies no bid contracts in Iraq. Why didn't we attack North Korea? Where are those WMD's? How is it we bomb the nation that doesn't have them (when we claim they do) and don't bomb the nations that do?

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.

Yes and we have lost MORE combat related deaths since we "took" Iraq that we did in the entire Bosnia OR Kosovo missions. If fact, IIRC, we have lost more people in combat in Iraq than in all wars combined since Viet Nam.


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.

Again untrue...we've been looking since '91 and destroyed all but a very small percentage of them..even Bush's hand picked inspector David Kaye conceded as much...don't you read?...people who read this shit and buy it have no historic memory


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.




Really? First not true...second...what about that body in Joe Scarborough's office?

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

Um...they never all got counted..we're still fucking waiting.

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.


LOL. The military hates George Bush and the media knows you are a fucking ignoramus..why do you think we are there?

[lovedems]

18. NSMA...

You Rock! I love your wealth of knowledge! Thank you for all of the info. You have given me alot to work with!

:yourock:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

27. thanks..have fun

[tom_paine]

15. Some good stuff for the second half of that Lying Bushevik Blast Mail

Is XXXXX(or whoever wrote the e-mail) trying to say that those wars didn't constitute sets of special circumstances given the various battles against Nazism and Communism (both waged for excellent reasons, in my opinion)? That would seem to me to be disingenuous as well as an insult to the Brave Americans who fought in those wars to preserve out Liberty and defeat Totalitarianism--what an odious and pathetic pissing on their graves, in my opinion, by whoever actually authored this Republican Lying Blast E-Mail that XXXXX forwarded).

Oh, and here's a BIG LIE alert: Germany declared war on us FIRST. Then we declared war on them, two days after Japan (see how easy it is to source your info as evidenced below...that is if you are being truthful)

http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html

BIG LIE ALERT: Yes, N. Korea never attacked us. They attacked S. Korea, our ally we were treaty-bound to defend. Don't these Bushevik Propgandists crack a history book? Does ANYONE anymore?

(wow, look, a CREDIBLE SOURCE backing up my assertion...from that well-known Communist Organization, George Washington University...go figure)

http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/koreaintro.html

LOGICAL FALLACY ALERT: The whole "no terrorist attack has occurred since 9/11" is a fallacy. By example: I assert my presence here prevents Bengal Tiger attacks. How do I know this? Have there BEEN any Bengal Tiger Attacks since I joined? See."

Rhetorically, this claim is similar. LIE OF OMISSION ALERT: What about the increased numbers of al-Qaeda attacks elsewhere, such as Spain and Iraq?

LOGICAL FALLACY ALERT: The whole "no terrorist attack has occurred since 9/11" is a fallacy. By example: I assert my presence hereprevents Bengal Tiger attacks. How do I know this? Have there BEEN any Bengal Tiger Attacks since I joined? See."

Rhetorically, this claim is similar. LIE OF OMISSION ALERT: What about the increased numbers of al-Qaeda attacks elsewhere, such as Spain and Iraq?

REALLY REALLY BIG LIE ALERT:

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.

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

(maybe this scholarly treatise is a fabrication made up by the Clintons and none of it happened, eh?)

Next point: Taliban destroyed? Here's that Known Communist Publication (heh heh), The Economist, refuting that.

http://www.economist.com/World/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1699375

[lovedems]

23. tom_paine

:loveya:

Thanks for the links! It will help.

The bad thing is, this came from my own brother (he forwarded it, thinking he was cute). In good concious, I cannot let him get away with this garbage. No way. Thanks for the resources! I don't want to pull information out of my ass, like the author of this email has done!

:yourock:

[xchrom]

16. with no wmds .... no immediate threat ....

would the writer send his or her kids to liberate iraqies from saddam?
the innocent that the other posters note would more than likely NEVER have died because of saddam. they died because of us.

[DrWeird]

19. 3,000 people died on 9-11.

Smoking kills far more people.

Therefore, using your logic, 9-11 wasn't that big a deal.

[wryter2000]

20. Hoo-boy

First, Germany declared war on us because we declared war on Japan because Japan had attacked us. Ask him if he ever heard of a place called Pearl Harbor. You might also point out that we won that war and did take care of our vets afterwards. Ask him if he ever heard of the GI Bill of Rights. Ask him how that compares to how veterans are being treated today.

On edit: You might admit that Johnson wrongly escalated the Viet Nam war. That teeny bit of the e-mail is correct. But you could also add that we learned our lesson. What's his excuse for continued ignorance?

[lovedems]

26. Good points!

He probably doesn't know how veterans are being treated today. Thanks so much for your input!:hi:

[wryter2000]

30. The GI Bill of Rights

An entire generation of Americans found prosperity because of college scholarships for GI's and home loans and all sorts of things. All sorts of people who would never have gone to college got to enjoy the American dream.

[lovedems]

34. My sister-in-law and her husband bought their first home a couple

years ago with a GI loan. Guess what? They vote republican! :puke:

[Sandpiper]

21. 39 Combat related killings in a month in Iraq

In proportion to the populations of Americans in both places...

Would be the equivalent of 252 homicides in a month in Detroit.

[lovedems]

38. Thanks!

:toast:

[rucky]

22. The message I get from this...

war is bad when it's waged under a Democratic administration

war is not so bad when it's waged under a Republican administration, compared to how bad thigs are stateside.

[lovedems]

57. Isn't that the truth!

They would all follow their great leaders off a cliff!

[lapfog_1]

31. Jeez it's hard to believe that there are so many who are

as brainwashed as this.

Other DUer's are responding to some of these things.

I'll tackle a couple here.

-------------------------------------------
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.

---------------------------------------------

OK, one, FDR did not lead us INTO war in WWII, we were attacked
by Japan.

Germany did not attack us (right away), BUT Hitler DID declare
war on the United States shortly after we declared war on Japan.
Historians wonder why Hitler did this, even though Germany was
a signatory to the Tri-partite Act (German, Italy, Japan), it
was not demanded that Germany declare war. But Hitler did, and
the rest, as they say, is history.

Truman did NOT start the war in Korea. We had signed a "mutual
assistance" treaty with South Korea. South Korea was attacked and
asked the UNITED NATIONS to respond to the attack. The United
States responded, along with many other nations.

About the Osama / Sudan BS, it's been debunked many times. not worth
further comment.

As for the rest of it. If ANYONE believe the military morale is
high, they are smoking funny cigs (or doing too much crank).

[lovedems]

35. Thank you!

:hi:

[HawkerHurricane]

48. Why Hitler declared war on the U.S.

"Germany did not attack us (right away), BUT Hitler DID declare
war on the United States shortly after we declared war on Japan.
Historians wonder why Hitler did this, even though Germany was
a signatory to the Tri-partite Act (German, Italy, Japan), it
was not demanded that Germany declare war. But Hitler did, and
the rest, as they say, is history."

Many many theories on this. But one of them is the belief that with the U.S. and Britain now allied against Japan, the U.S. would eventually declare war on Germany and it was better to get the first blows in while America was still organizing rather than wait.

Also...

The United States is the ONLY country that Hitler formally declared war on before attacking.

[lovedems]

50. Thanks HH! That theory is worth noting!

Thanks for the input!:hi:

[avb7]

33. What a streath......

The US declared war on the Axis powers after Japan attacked us. Germany was a member of the Axis, ergo we declared war on Germany as well as Japan. The fact that this moron could equate WWII and Iraq shows how stupid right-wingers are.
The UN started the show in Korea. As far as I know we went to war as the lead element in a UN approved police action to rectify an unprovoked attack on the South by the North. Very similar to what the boy king's father did in the first Gulf War.
There is more than enough blame to go around concerning Viet Nam. It strikes me as funny that a typical hawk would even be concerned about calling the Vietnamese conflict a mistake considering that we did get to kill massive amounts of people, which seems to be a priority for the right wing.
Democrats aren't complaining about the length of the war in Iraq, they are outraged at the way the war was justified and about the wild predictions that were made going in. They can look for WMD from now until Doomsday and they aren't going to find them, even though they (Bush, Cheney, Powell) said they knew right where they were.
Just because there are 35 murders in Detroit in any given month doesn't mean anything in relation to a war in a foreign country with up wards of 150,000 troops engaged in combat operations. How many people get killed in car accidents every month? More than 39 I would suppose. So that makes Iraq safer than I-95? Tell this asshole to get a grip on reality.
If the piece of shit in the White House spent as much time thinking about the repercussions of his actions as he did sitting on his ass in that Florida schoolhouse this country wouldn't be in the mess we are in.
Good luck with your brother, but I fear he was drunk the Kool-Aid and cannot be saved.

[lovedems]

36. Thanks!

Yes, he drank the Kool-Aid. He is not salvageable but it is my duty as his "big sister" to show him how wrong he is.

[BayouBengal07]

37. Ok, my list

1.) Comparing Iraq to any US city or state is stupid, because we are not under occupation. If there are murders here, its not coming from a hostile population that hates our troops presence here.

2.) Germany actually declared war on us though. In fact, they are the only country that declared wae on us (the rest they just attacked and invaded). Saddam did not declare war on us.

3.) The Korean War was a UN operation, with dozens ofUN sanctioned countries opperating in it. Even Zimbabwe sent UN troops.

4.) Bosnia was a NATO mission. IT bothers me that there was no UN support, but NATO responded correctly.

5.) Clinton was NEVER offered bin Laden. The Sudanese government has no recollection of offering him up to us; it was a private citizen (Fox News analyst Mansoor Ijaz) who said he could get us UBL if we dropped sanctions on Sudanese oil (Ijaz had a stake in Sudanese oil and needed a way to get it out). The US government does not committ policy through back channels like that (read Al Franken's Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them for the full story).

6.) Clinton foiled many terrorist plots, put the 93 WTC bombers in prison, and would have passed a Patriot Act type counter terrorism bill, but the Republican Congress said it was a threat to civil liberties (http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/)

7.) The Taliban is reforming and warlords now control most of Afghanistan.

8.) Reports from numerous sources, including the Army War College, have stated that the war in Iraq has diverted attention and resources from fighting Al-Queda, and provided them with great recruiting tools.

9.) Nuclear inspections in N. Korea are at a stalemate, and Libya opened up its WMD capabilities to get its economic sanctions lifted.

10.) We still haven't caught Bin Laden, Al-Zarqaqwi (we could have, but the administration wanted him as justification to invade Iraq- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/). I don't know who this terrorist who killed 300,000 of his own people is, but if it's Saddam, he's technically not a "terrorist" as the State Dept. and other official government defenitions describe a terrorist, and 300,000 is a disputed number (Blair said the 40,000 person mass-graves was a lie)

11.) 51 days? Its been over 365 in Iraq.

12.) We still havent found any chemical weapons programs in Iraq. We have found scattered weapons (there were those shells with nerve gas in them that blew up), but nothing on the scale that suggests a full scale, million gallon production of chemical weapons was in order under Saddam. Any shells we've found were rusty and ineffective, left over from the Iran-Iraq war around 20 years ago. Saddam's defected brother-in-law said in 1995 that sanctions, bombing, and UN inspections destroyed 95% of Iraq's WMD capabilities.

13.) Ted Kennedy took 3 weeks to call the police? What does this have to do with 900+ deaths in Iraq anyway?

[lovedems]

39. Thanks for the excellent points!

I knew all of the wonderful people at DU would come through! It is going to take a couple of days to respond to this email so I can touch on all of the great points in a precise matter!:bounce:

[Mz Pip]

40. I'll take a crack at a couple of these

Germany never attacked us Japan did. - Japan and Germany were allies. Germany declared war on the US the day after Pearl Harbor. That sort of made them fair game.

JFK started the Vietnam War. Wrong. We had troops there way before that. And it's true Vietnam never attacked us, which is why there was such opposition to the war. (Kinda like Iraq)

Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. And he paid dearly for it. That quagmire pretty much ended his presidency.

From 1965 - 1975 58,000 lives were lost. SO what's the point? DO we need to wait until the numbers reach Vietnam levels before we question the involvement????

Bush has "liberated" two countries??? The Taliban is on the rise again in Afghanistan and Iraq is becoming increasingly dangerous. This is not how I describe liberated.

It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida. - These false analogies really don't make much sense.

MzPip
:dem:

[lovedems]

41. Thank you!

:hi:

You raise some excellent points!

[lovedems]

47. Do you know when the first troops were sent to Vietnam?

And who sent them?

[Mz Pip]

61. After the French left

we sent military advisors. This was in the mid 50s. It just kept escalating. We had troops there before JFK took office. Not sure of the numbers or the exact time line, though.

MzPip
:dem:

[lovedems]

62. It was 1954! I found the exact information! It was after the French

were defeated.

Thanks!

[gcomeau]

42. OH geez... where to begin.

1. There were 39 soldiers killed in the month of January. How many soldiers were killed THE PREVIOUS January?

2. Whoever wrote that needs to take a history class. This is the sequence of events anyone with a passing knowledge of history knows happened.

--Japan attacks U.S.
--U.S. declares war on Japan.
--GERMANY DECLARES WAR ON U.S. for declaring war on it's axis ally, Japan.
--U.S. declares war on Germany IN RESPONSE.

3. Interesting article on Kennedy, Vietnam, and Iraq:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/11/22/vietnam/

If you're not a subscriber, watch the little ad for the free day pass. An excerpt: "At one level, it isn't news. Certain facts -- that Kennedy wanted out of Vietnam, that he encouraged Sens. Mike Mansfield and Wayne Morse to keep criticizing his policy, that he told Kenneth O'Donnell that he would get out after the 1964 election, that he resisted all suggestions that main combat forces be sent to Vietnam -- have been known for decades."

4. When the hell did Clinton declare war on Bosnia? Oh wait... sending peacekeepers is exactly the same as going to war... everyone knows that!

5. The "offered Osama" nonsense has been refuted so many times it's ridiculous.

6. CRIPPLED AL QAEDA???? If by "crippled" you mean "made it possible for them to accelerate recruitment and increase in size" then oh yeah... he sure crippled them.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1532303,00.html

Who believes this idiocy?

-Grant

[lovedems]

60. Thank you for the links!

And thanks for your response! :hi:

[Sandpiper]

43. Casualties in the first four years of Vietnam

During the first four years of US military presence in Vietnam (1961-1965), there were:

1864 killed, 7337 wounded


After one year and four months of military occupation in Iraq the numbers are:

912 killed, 5976 wounded

[lovedems]

44. Thanks for the numbers! I intend to use them!

[onenote]

45. responding to the logic challenged

I have to do this all the time, since my in-laws think Rush is god. Its a pain since both facts and logic bounce off them like bullets off of Superman. Anyway, the last time someone tossed the "last month there were more murders in --insert name of city -- than American troops killed in Iraq" bull at me, I calmly asked them how many of the folks murdered were armed cops supposedly protecting the people...to me that's the comparison.
onenote

[CBHagman]

46. Your poor mother!

You're a good child to want to come to her aid.

[lovedems]

49. She is going to love it! She is a life long democrat and always forwards

me these emails saying "How did I raise a child like this?" It is all in good fun (not without frustration) and she obviously loves him dearly but doesn't understand his thinking at all!

The people of DU have been so good! I have so much wonderful information to work with!

[Fleshdancer]

51. WARNING: relying on spam for political info is dangerous to your IQ!!!

Who at the RNC is creating all of the chimp spam? Aren't we debunking this stuff on DU at an average of 2-3 per week now?

And besides, losing ONE soldier in a war based on a lie is one too many. These are people's lives we're talking about...someone's son, father, brother, sister, daughter, wife, aunt, uncle. For every soldier that is killed, imagine 6-12 lives in complete despair.

[lovedems]

58. I will have to put that warning at the end of the email!

When the author talks about "facts". LOL! He wouldn't know a fact if he read one!

[never cry wolf]

53. I was gonna search the archives for ya, but...

Archive search is down due to high traffic. There have been a number of debunks of this email in the recent past, many above have done a good job as well. Here's some info on Clinton doing "nothing."

HOW MANY TERRORIST ATTACKS CLINTON STOPPED.

Just for the record, under Richard Clarke's leadership as Czar of Counterterrorism:

CLINTON Developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.

CLINTON Stopped cold the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots.

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to kill the Pope

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Boston airport

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge

CLINTON Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania

-- Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).

-- Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.

-- Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.

--Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.

-Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.

-Clinton increased the military budget by an average of 14 per cent, reversing the trend under Bush I.

-Clinton tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism

-Clinton detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries

-Clinton created national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.

-Of Clinton's efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama"

-Paul Bremer, current Civilian Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden.

-Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort"

[lovedems]

54. Excellent! Thank you!

:loveya:

[Darranar]

55. I suppose 10,000+ dead Iraqis don't even register for him?

Seeing as how both Iraq and Afghanistan are now "ruled" by unelected leaders, I think screaming about "liberation" is a bit off. Not to mention the thousands of innocents slaughtered in both wars, and the fact that Afghanistan and Iraq are both in chaos, the latter despite the brutal pacification techniques used there? (More "liberation"?)

You may also wish to mention Allawi's declaration that he has the right to strip any Iraqi or group of Iraqis of their freedoms. It is incidents such as this that really should make us proud of the great job President Bush is doing in benevolently spreading freedom to the people of Iraq.

Some of his statements are just flat-out untrue. For instance: 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.

Seeing as how the war has taken over a year, and doesn't seem to have ended yet, I think its length extends a little beyond fifty-one days.

Also: 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.

This has been debunked multiple times.

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

Not sure about the truth of this one (he may have a hard time proving it, since the war isn't over yet), but you may wish to point out that if it is true, then "President" Bush was installed before the vote counts were completed, meaning that he is hardly a legitimate leader.

Furthermore: World War II had obvious humanitarian justification, and of course the Axis Powers attacked first. Germany did declare war on the US, though it did not attack first.

Vietnam was an unjustified, immoral, destructive war, so bringing it up here doesn't really lend any credibility to his point.

[lovedems]

56. Thank you!

Very good points! Your first paragraph is especially important to bring up. New boss same as the old boss!

[skygazer]

59. Frankly, it doesn't deserve a response

The author is comparing things that have no relationship to each other. WWII was a completely different war and fought differently. The so-called Sudanese offers of Osama bin Laden were not coming from the government but from a discredited civilian. I have no idea why he'd compare a search for weapons with a search for files but it's all a bunch of nonsense.

How about comparing Bush's economic record with Clinton's? Or comparing the number of jobs or the unemployment figures? Or anything that it makes sense to compare?