T Nation

War, time and human costs

I received this from a former Sea Wolf yesterday and figured I could get some blood pressures up.

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 18,333 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 Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and?captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost? 600?soldiers. Bush did all this abroad while not?allowing another terrorist attack at home. Worst president in history??

Brahahahahaha!

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 Teddy 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 military is GREAT! Thanks Guys and Gals!

fabulous post. it will be cut and pasted many times my man.

You’re welcome :wink:

By the By, those Sea Wolf Guys are bad ass! Let him know that us young bucks owe em a lot.

Puts everything in the right perspective.

Semper Fi.

It could not have been stated any better…great points to ponder while waiting in line to vote in November.

Great post…All I can say is Great!

Me Solomon Grundy

“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”

Explain to us how FDR could have carried on a war in the Pacific Theater and NOT gone to war in Europe as well? I suppose since Germany “never attacked us” FDR had no reason to support our European allies?

Your comprehension of world history is mortifying and severely undercuts the credibility of your thesis.

good post, the only thing I dislike is the whole WW2 part, but other than that it does raise some good points.

“Germany never attacked us”—

I guess that whoever wrote that article didn’t count this–

October 31-1941
The U.S. Navy destroyer “Reuben James” is torpedoed by a German U-boat off Iceland, killing 115, even though the United States had not yet entered World War II.

Comparing one war to another war is, as the saying goes, like comparing apples to oranges.

The writer of the article forgot to mention that Iraq never attacked us.

It is still premature to say that we have “only lost 600 people” because the war is still going on, and people are still dying. Here is an interesting link http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/USfatalities.html

I would disregard the money counter at the bottom, but the chart is quite interesting.

I am not going to debate the legitamacy of the war, hell I was basically for it, but this article is kind of misleading.

When are people going to stop taking emails and posting them as truths. For another view on this same email

From http://www.buzzflash.com/perspectives/04/worstpresident.html

[quote]The “Worst President” and His Management Claims

A BUZZFLASH PERSPECTIVE
Submitted by Maureen Farrell

There’s another Bush-embracing e-mail making the rounds. History buff and scrupled Republican Richard Harden of Huntington Beach, CA and Professor Cary de Wit, of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, are fighting ignorance with fact.

Your readers may be familiar with the e-mail, which (at least if information about its origin is accurate) is actually a letter to the editor from a Durham, NC newspaper.

But, in case they need a quick rebuttal:

<The following appeared in the Durham, NC local paper as a letter to the editor. Please forward to all on your list as this will put things in perspective:

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn’t have started this war. They complain about his prosecution of it. One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S. history.

Let’s clear up one point: We didn’t start the war on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.

Let’s look at the “worst” president and mismanagement claims:

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 18,333 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 Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year. Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history? Come on!>>

From Richard Harden: "That is not perspective, it is distortion. Unfortunately, cold truth doesn’t travel as well as entertaining fiction but if this response could travel back up the e-mail chain to the author of the original misinformation, we might all be spared further nonsense.

Letter: “We didn’t start the war on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.”

Richard Harden: "Indeed it was and not a one of the perpetrators of any of those acts of terrorism against us was an Iraqi or a member of the Taliban.

I will not address the ‘casualty count’ as a measure of the success or failure of Presidents except to say that if that were the only criteria, then Coolidge might be our best and Lincoln our worst.

On to the history!

Letter: “Germany never attacked us: Japan did.”

Richard Harden: "That’s true, and FDR never tried to convince us it was the Germans! Within a few days, Hitler declared war on the U.S. then we declared war on Germany.

Letter: “Truman finished that war and started one in Korea, North Korea never attacked us.”

Richard Harden: “Harry Truman did finish WWII but he hardly started the Korean War. Soviet-armed North Korean armies poured over the internationally-recognized border into an unprepared South Korea. There were so few U.S. troops there available that it was seriously considered abandoning the Korean Peninsula. The war was fought by and authorized by the United Nations.”

Letter: “John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.”

Richard Harden: "Again, President Kennedy did not start the Vietnam war. It was a continuation of the civil war that followed the French withdrawal.

Letter: “Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.”

Richard Harden: “Hard to argue there. But this is history in 20-20 hindsight. What were his options? Could he realistically have allowed the North Vietnamese to take over South Vietnam in 1965?”

Letter: “Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent,”

Richard Harden: "That conflict was fought by NATO within NATO’s operational area, i.e. Europe. As supporters of this ill-starred war in Iraq can attest, the French have rarely consented to anything the Americans have done since D-Day!

Letter: “Bush has liberated two countries,”

Richard Harden: “‘Liberated’ maybe. Occupied, definitely. We now have massive Army forces in those two countries. National Guard men and women have been torn from their lives here and sent to fight shadowy enemies in these countries with no end in sight. The cost cannot yet be counted. Recruiting for our armed forces is understandably down.”

Letter: “Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home”

Richard Harden : “Nor do we bother charging the 600 people we hold without legal recourse of any kind in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Most of them are probably dangerous people but if so, let’s prove it openly. By the way, nobody has been convicted of any crime related the World Trade Center attacks. Good detective work there, Mr. Bush.”

Letter: “Worst president in history? Come on!”

Richard Harden: “Come on indeed.” – rdh

From Prof. Cary de Wit:

"The original author conflates the invasion of Iraq with the ‘War on Terror.’ Most liberals don’t.

The Taliban may have been crushed, but it has sprung back with a vengeance, and women in Afghanistan are hardly feeling liberated.

Regional tribal warlords rule most of the country, and opium production is up to pre-Taliban levels.

There were UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors in North Korea until Bush called Kim Jong Il a pygmy and named NK to the Axis of Evil. NK then kicked them out. As far as I know, NK hasn’t allowed inspectors in since.

Bush didn’t put nuke inspectors in Iran or Libya, the UN IAEA did.

Libya’s cooperation with IAEA is credited by most of the people involved (not politicians or the press) to long-term, persistent diplomacy and delicate negotiations over the past decade. By the way, it’s spelled Libya, not “Lybia.”

The IAEA is the same agency that Bush and Cheney attempted to discredit
during the runnup to the Iraq invasion because the IAEA Director General, Mohamed ElBaradei, stated that there was no credible evidence that Iraq had nuclear weapons or had reconstituted any of it’s pre-1990 nuclear programs.

Other than that, I couldn’t agree more with Mr. Harden."

A BUZZFLASH PERSPECTIVE[/quote]

Hogwash, Bedz - there’s only one side to this story!

I second Chrisr
I usually enjoy reading Avoids posts but this time he is off the mark. His knowledge of history leaves a lot to be desired. He also conveniently leaves out the fact that Iraq did not attack us. You can also say that Afghanistan did not attack us but Taliban did offer protection to bastards who did. You can argue that Saudi Arabia did attack since most of the people involved including Usama ben Douchebag are Saudi but we did not go there did we? Who attacked whom is not always related to why nations go to war. To paraphrase Calvin Trillin on GW
" ?I got compassion down to my toes,
for oil, unborn babies and CEOs?"
(Btw I?m not a democrat)

Funny thing is, I’m a Bush support!

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

Don’t forget that technology plays a big role in the invasion of Iraq. The high tech world we live in now is a lot more sophisticated than it was during the first Gulf War. Just an observation.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/US/smartgulfweapons030226.html

Chrisr,

You wrote:

“Germany never attacked us”—

I guess that whoever wrote that article didn’t count this–

October 31-1941
The U.S. Navy destroyer “Reuben James” is torpedoed by a German U-boat off Iceland, killing 115, even though the United States had not yet entered World War II.

The truth of the matter is that FDR and Winston Churchill met off Nova Scotia in 1941. FDR took a National Geographic Map and made a vertical line right down the middle. FDR said to Winston, we’ll escort our Lend Lease convoys to the west of this line and you escort them to the east of this line. We were de facto engaged in Europe from the time Lend-Lease occurred. FDR knew, far before the isolationist public, the threat that the Nazi’s posed. By the way, the Tripartite Pact known as the Axis powers (Japan, Germany, and Italy) was signed in 1941. Fighting Japan, necessitated fighting the other two.

All that being said, you could make a case for FDR putting our ships (including Reuben James) in “harms way” knowing full well what might happen. I happen to agree with leaders leading the public in certain circumstances. You could make a case that FDR was exercising an early form of preemption by escorting the convoys and engaging in Lend Lease. Therefore, if Democrats want to slam Bush for preemption, remember, their hero, FDR engaged in the same de facto policy. Oh, there was LBJ in the Gulf of Tonkin.

" ?I got compassion down to my toes,
for oil, unborn babies and CEOs?"

I hate these trite little comments. They make good little bumper stickers for the uninformed. However, they are insulting.

Point #1:

How are the oil prices these days? If we went to war to develop vast amounts of oil, why are the prices so ridiculously high?

If we were there to take over the oil, why are we spending $87,000,000,000 without asking for a dime (including oil revenues) in return?

Point #2:

Remember all the Democratic crap about how George W. would repeal Roe vs. Wade? It is still the law of the land.

Point #3:

The CEO crap. Plenty of innuendos made by Democrats. Absolutely no evidence that the administration did anything even remotely illegal. Don’t bring up Dick Cheney meeting with Enron when formulating the energy policy. Why WOULDN’T he meet with experts in the field? If he didn’t meet with experts, it would be like appointing Hillary Clinton as the point person to “overhaul” healthcare in 1993.

That is a scary post. Scary on how ignorant it is of world history. Wow.

Every war since WWI is the Democrats’fault. Wow.

The worst thing I get from this post is:
Nobody cares that BUSH STOLE THE ELECTION! BUSH WAS GIVEN THE PRESIDENCY BY A RIGHT-WING SUPREME COURT STOCKED WITH 2 OF HIS FATHER’S APPOINTEES!

Bush is not the legitimate President of the US, and if Gore was not a gentleman who decided to do what is best for this country, who knows what would have happened.

BUSH’S BROTHER IS THE GOV. OF THE STATE WHERE THE VOTES MYSTERIOUSLY COULDN’T BE COUNTED!

MANY BLACK MEN AND WOMEN IN FLORIDA WERE !ILLEGALLY! STRIPPED OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE GRANTED TO ALL US CITIZENS BY THE US CONSTITUTION!

THis happened in the weeks right before the election!
Blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic-this was not a coincidence!

BUSH and Cheney have given their ex-business partners at Halliburton BILLION dollar governemnt contracts.

Bush is someone we all hate: a lazy, unsuccesful slacker, ultra rich boy who has had everything handed to him on a plate, and has not worked for anything he’s gotten! He got out of 'nam thanks to his dad, while Kerry got two purple hearts, and Kerry is criticized for protesting when he got back?

This is fucking bizarro world!

Limbaugh didn’t serve. Gingrich didn’t serve. Jeb Bush didn’t serve.

Bush was a failure in everything he did out of college, and lost money in every single business venture he tried. Kerry became a US senator.

No comparison betw the two “men” . Bush ain’t much of a man.

Though I don’t see myself as Republican or Democrat, since I fall in the middle and really hate our unfair and inaccurate 2 party system, I will say this re the CLintons:

The CLintons may have made some money on a shady land deal. Maybe. There is no comparison between these leaders in terms of moral and ethical corruption, greed and nepotism.

THe Rep right spent years trying to defame the Clintons.

Yeah, Bill got his dick sucked and was a womanizer. Well, most men are out to fuck a lot of women, ao Bill was a normal guy who did what many men want to do. So maybe it was jealousy cuz lord knows Limbaugh and Gingrich weren’t getting much -until they were famous, anyway.

Please spare me a sermon on how every man is not like that. I know many men respect their marital vows. I also know most men would like to have fucked many more women than they actually ahave.

CLinton was criticized for smoking weed. Lord knows how much drugs Bush was doing in college. But you knwo what? The Democrats haven’t dug up dirt on him, and I don’t care. I judge the candidates on who they are, not how many 8 balls they’ve done or how many BJs they’ve gotten.

ANd, CLinton worked for everything he ever had. Nothing was handed to him in his life.

And you wonder why Bush is hated…

SonnyS,

Wow!!! What a bunch of unprovoked trash!!! I read over the posts and found nothing that should have triggered this juvenile rant. You sound very much like Terry McAulliffe the DNC chairman. You are long on soundbites and short on facts.

“The worst thing I get from this post is:
Nobody cares that BUSH STOLE THE ELECTION! BUSH WAS GIVEN THE PRESIDENCY BY A RIGHT-WING SUPREME COURT STOCKED WITH 2 OF HIS FATHER’S APPOINTEES!”

Don’t you hate it when the electoral college provided for in the Constitution gets in the way of your candidate? Those Supreme Court Judges. How dare they uphold the law of the land when Gore could have been President?!?

“BUSH’S BROTHER IS THE GOV. OF THE STATE WHERE THE VOTES MYSTERIOUSLY COULDN’T BE COUNTED!
MANY BLACK MEN AND WOMEN IN FLORIDA WERE ILLEGALLY STRIPPED OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE GRANTED TO ALL US CITIZENS BY THE US CONSTITUTION!”

Please provide proof of wrongdoing on the part of Jeb Bush or racist voting practices. I’m not interested in rumors. If you can’t provide facts, please be a man and apologize for this slander.

“BUSH and Cheney have given their ex-business partners at Halliburton BILLION dollar governemnt contracts.”

I wasn’t aware Bush had anything to do with Haliburton. Is Cheney involved with Haliburton in any way currently? Oh I hate it when politicians that I don’t like (Cheney) have the audacity to sell all their stock prior to entering office. I can’t reasonably accuse them of conflict of interest. By the way, name me one other company besides Haliburton who has the history and the know-how to have taken on the Iraq challenge. Please research how many times in the past the Democrats have hired Haliburton for jobs.

“Bush is someone we all hate: a lazy, unsuccesful slacker, ultra rich boy who has had everything handed to him on a plate, and has not worked for anything he’s gotten! He got out of 'nam thanks to his dad, while Kerry got two purple hearts, and Kerry is criticized for protesting when he got back?”

Please provide some facts that George Senior had anything to do with George Junior applying to and getting granted a commission in the National Guard. Did you know that he received excellent marks as a pilot of one of the most unstable combat jets of the era? Oh wait, they were all forged. This makes sense, George Senior, was a minor HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE member at the time. He had the power to muscle the military establishment into making false claims. Hell, he even made sure that George Junior didn’t go to Vietnam. Again, let’s have some proof.

“Bush ain’t much of a man.”

Tell that to the majority of military men and women. They respectfully disagree with you. Oh, wait, they are bought and paid for by George Senior.

“Yeah, Bill got his dick sucked and was a womanizer. Well, most men are out to fuck a lot of women, ao Bill was a normal guy who did what many men want to do. So maybe it was jealousy cuz lord knows Limbaugh and Gingrich weren’t getting much -until they were famous, anyway.”

Oh, bravo. What a detective!!! Does it occur to you that the Monica scandal broke because Paula Jones was trying to prove a pattern of sexually predatory behavior by Bill Clinton? Don’t you hate it when victims have the nerve to fight back against the establishment?!? It’s probably ok with you that the Chief Executive for Enforcing Laws of the United States lied under oath. Oh, I know, everyone does it. It must be ok.

“ANd, CLinton worked for everything he ever had. Nothing was handed to him in his life.”

Really? How about that time when he was in Oxford. He was called to active Duty in Vietnam. Remember the letter he sent around refusing to serve. THAT, MY SMALL FRIEND, IS A MUCH MORE DIRECT AND REPREHENSIBLE EXAMPLE OF PERSONAL MORALS AND USING THE SYSTEM TO GET OUT OF SERVICE. Don’t you hate that word, hypocrite. It gets in the way of the Democratic party acting “holier than thou.”

Finally, “And you wonder why Bush is hated…”

No, I do not. Honesty and conviction probably makes someone like you very uncomfortable. You are much more likely to follow someone who says, “Hey, if it feels good…”

Good post!

Well, I guess your vision of the world and world history is a little distorted… First of all, I don’t know where you get off saying Bush has liberated 2 countries. I guess “liberation” is in the eye of the beholder. Iraq is hardly better of with coalition forces than it was with Saddam. Keep coalition forces there and unfortunately the bodybags will keep coming in. Oh, by the way, Bush went absolutely against a decision from UN NOT to attack Iraq. I guess Bush is above the UN or thinks he is. And, where are the weapons of mass destruction??? We should call it “OIL”, shouldn’t we? Do a little research on the US oil reserves and Iraq’s and there you will see some of Bush’s “path to democracy”.
And as far as Bosnia goes don’t even get into that. US didn’t even go to war there. They were mere peace keepers there along with UN’s blue helmets. By the way, the only reason US didn’t get involved there it’s because it doesn’t have any interests there… I suppose if it wasn’t muslims that were being killed there (the majority), perhaps the US would’ve done something.
Afghanistan is also hardly liberated, just a question… is that the kind of liberation you would want for yourself and countrymen?
And unfortunately, the war on terror can’t be won. It will be over when world decisions are not made unilaterally but within a consensus of all nations.
Oh, and by the way, don’t be misled… In Afghanistan the target was NOT to crush the Taliban but to capture Osama bin Laden. But this hasn’t happened yet, so all in all the most feared terrorist is still at large and with or WITHOUT Taliban, attacks will continue. Do yourself a favor and put everything into perspective, what good does it do to US to have “crushed” the Taliban without capturing Osama???