Julius Caesar Had Gaul; Bush Just Has Gall

[Orrin_73]

A nice comparison between Bush and Julius Ceasar.

For a start, Julius Caesar, as we all know, was bald, whereas George W Bush has a fine head of hair.

George W Bush, on the other hand, was already in power when he invaded Iraq and, in any case, he didn't need to boost his popularity, because the popular vote had nothing to do with his getting into power in the first place. Julius Caesar was also a very adroit propagandist who made damn sure that his version of events prevailed. He even wrote eight books about his wars in Gaul to make sure it did. George W Bush doesn't need to go to such lengths. He has Fox News.

When Julius Caesar claimed his glorious victory over the Helvetii, he made it sound as if he had destroyed a vast army of 'wild and savage men'. Julius Caesar reckoned he had slaughtered more than 250,000 'insurgents'. In fact, documents found in the remains of the Helvetii camp showed that out of 368,000 people, only 92,000 had been capable of bearing arms.

In other words, it wasn't an army that Julius Caesar massacred, but a whole population including women, children, old and sick, which, I suppose, is one thing that George W Bush and Julius Caesar do have in common: pretending civilians are armed insurgents.
But there the similarity ends. One of the most fundamental differences between Julius Caesar and George W Bush is that Julius Caesar counted his dead, whereas George W Bush can't be bothered. It seems that, as commander-in-chief, George W Bush instructed his soldiers not to count the enemy dead. So the fact that he still sticks to an estimate of only 30,000 dead Iraqis, even when a recently published study in the Lancet suggests he's slaughtered at least 655,000, can only be the result of his extraordinary modesty.

Julius Caesar Had Gaul; Bush Just Has Gall

[Xipe Totec]

1. Julius Caesar crossed the river stix

George Bush has a pig ranch in the sticks.

[Jack Rabbit]

2. I have caught Terry Jones in an error

EDITED for typing

Before he says . . .

(I)t wasn't an army that Julius Caesar massacred, but a whole population including women, children, old and sick, which, I suppose, is one thing that George W Bush and Julius Caesar do have in common: pretending civilians are armed insurgents.

. . . he says . . .

(Caesar) didn't need to boost his popularity, because the popular vote had nothing to do with his getting into power in the first place.

That's obviously two things: the popular vote had nothing to do with Bush's getting into power, either.

[Orrin_73]

3. you are right, thanks