|
Received an email today explaining how the casualties weren't a big deal and Bush is great, and Clinton sucked. I'm sure most of you have seen it before. Here's my response -- forwarded back to the whole list.
Honestly, everyone had to realize I'd respond to this. I honestly could go on all day about it, but I will spare you because most people frankly don't care. But just a handful of small points. If you want any of the other ones dealt with, just ask. I'll be happy to clear up any of these things for you.
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.
You're comparing 39 combat related killings in Iraq to 35 murders in Detroit. The problem with that is that you're choosing to only count AMERICANS that died. Since the war began last year, it is estimated that there have been over 13,000 civilian casualties. That boils down to over 850 casualties per month, and as violent as Detroit may be, there aren't 850 people dying there a month. But if for some reason you think that Iraqi civilian deaths aren't important, then consider that those 39 combat killings come from an American soldier population of about 130,000. If that is compared with Detroit's population of slightly under a million, that would be like if 269 people had been murdered in Detroit in January. You have to compare apples to oranges.
Bush liberated two countries.
That depends on your definition of "liberated". In Afghanistan, the capital city of Kabul is about the only place in the entire country that isn't under the control of warlords. Women still cannot go out in public without fear of being brutally attacked or worse. Children, particularly young girls, cannot go to school still. Hamid Karzai, the guy in charge, is owned by the United States and has almost no control over his own government. He is constantly the target of assassination attempts. The majority of the country remains an easy haven for terrorists, and we less troops in that entire country than we have police officers in just the Manhattan part of New York City. And Iraq -- It's still early to say exactly how effective the "new" government will have since we just turned it over a few weeks ago. Still, there are lots of places with no clean drinking water and no electricity -- places where those things existed before we attacked. And despite Iraq's faults, it was still one of the most open-minded Middle Eastern countries regarding women's rights. Not any more, with radical clerics gaining more and more clout. And obviously, most people do not feel "liberated" from the possibility that they will be killed in bomb blasts or other attacks at any moment.
He crushed the Taliban.
The Taliban continue to operate inside Afghanistan. One hour ago, two Afghan government officials and their driver were killed by Taliban fighters in Qalat. In the past year, the Taliban have attacked and killed over 800.
He crippled al-Qaeda.
Al-Qaeda continues to grow stronger, according to many reports -- partially because Iraq distracted US forces away from pursuing them, and partially because the invasion of Iraq served as a powerful tool to recruit people. Al-Qaeda is still so strong, in fact, that the United States Department of Homeland Security just issued another warning about their plans to attack the United States this summer.
He put Nuclear Inspectors in Libya, Iran, and North Korea Without Firing a Shot
Libya's decision to disarm was widely seen as an effort to allow it to enter European economic markets and ease pressure from the Lockerbie bombing. Iran and North Korea have both admitted to having nuclear programs and neither have announced any steps to disarm.
He captured a Terrorist Who Slaughtered 300,000 of His Own People
Over the course of two decades, much of that time while he was our ALLY against Iran, and some of it with weapons that WE gave him.
Okay, last one:
Clinton was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing.
According to the Washington Post: "The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to accept the offer in secret contacts that stretched from a meeting at a Rosslyn hotel on March 3, 1996, to a fax that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later. Unable to persuade the Saudis to accept bin Laden, and lacking a case to indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture."
Clinton did not "do nothing" -- he wanted bin Laden. But at the time he was offered, the case against him was flimsy. He hadn't attacked Khobar Towers yet, he hadn't attacked the USS Cole, he hadn't attacked the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. The Saudis wouldn't accept the deal, so Sudan expelled bin Laden to Afghanistan, which is where he had lived when Reagan was giving him guns and training to fight the Russians.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
