cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 03:58 AM
Original message |
|
according to icasualties.org, 1886 troops have died. Add to that 100k+ of the innocents who died there as well. Then there are the 10-15,000 in New Orleans alone.
At a minimum, he's looking at over 112k people. Even allowing for some in the Gulf Coast, since I realize that these things most always take lives, it's still an outrageous number.
Has any president ever had so much blood on his hands?
|
wli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 03:59 AM
Response to Original message |
1. WWI and WWII saw larger IIRC. n/t |
I_Make_Mistakes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 04:01 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. There's a thread (search) about how the Red cross was downsized |
nicknameless
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 04:12 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Has any president had more deaths on American soil on his watch? |
|
Especially preventable deaths! Appalling.
|
cynatnite
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 04:21 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. You reminded me of the 9/11 victims |
|
Add 3,000 to that number.
|
akarnitz
(303 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 04:32 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Check out Civil War Casualties |
|
Pertaining only to combatants, more Americans died in the Civil War than in all of our other wars combined.
I guess this is a little off of the path you're on here. If we're talking civilians, LBJ and Nixon would be up there. And, depending which side of the argument one chooses to take, Truman is probably on the top of the list(I'm only talking about Hiroshima and Nagasaki here).
BTW, there are arguments over the necessity of the fire bombing of Dresden at the end of WWII. Something that's not as publicized is the campaign of fire bombing against Japan in 1945. This was Curtis LeMay's baby. It killed millions.
|
chalky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. Wow. There's actually a threshold? A number a president has to reach |
|
before outrage is allowed to set in? Unreal.
|
Alamom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 05:17 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Trail of Tears.
Indian Removal Act - 1830's
|
chalky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-04-05 09:57 AM
Response to Original message |
8. These responses are just bizarre to me... |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-04-05 10:17 AM by chalky
The overall tone of, "Oh, Bush is just a pisher....talk to us when the deaths he's responsible for reaches THESE numbers. THEN we'll start paying attention," is just....just...
Christ, I don't know what to say.
eta: I figured out what to say.
You know what? I don't give a crap about FDR, Truman or Andrew-fucking-Jackson. There's not a damn thing that we can do to change the deaths that they caused.
These people are dying in the HERE AND NOW! The soldiers and IRAQI citizens...we KNEW they were dying and we didn't do a DAMN THING TO STOP THIS MURDERER. And now this serial killers numbers are climbing, and what do I come in here and see? "Why the number of dead under the FDR administration...."
Who gives a SHIT? FDR's victims are not waving at me through the TV, crying and raging and praying that THIS FUCKER will send help. Help that DOESN'T arrive because he and his bitch-wife wanted to make a "Grand Entrance".
Shut the hell up about Truman & FDR, turn your damn TV from the History Channel to CNN, MSNBC, or hell, at this point even FOX. These channels ain't showing documentaries, people. This is happening NOW.
Now---what the HELL are we going to do about it?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:56 PM
Response to Original message |