I've been FREEPED.....help me debunk this

[rodbarnett]

A FEEPING co-worker sent this to me. I would like to wipe the s**t eating grin off his face. Help with a rebutal.


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 5800 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? Think about it!

[seabeyond]

1. the easiest

if it was about combating terror they needed to stay in afghanistan and do what needed to be done. they left that country shy of money and forces. taliban is back al queda is regrouping, as we go off to a war that had nothing to do with 9/11. the second day after 9/11 it was said clearly saddam did not have a hand in it. and to this day it is true saddam was not a terroristic threat, so if it is about going after terrorism, they should have done it in afghanistan, adn using universal support instead of dismissing the world and all the resources

[Dogmudgeon]

2. E-Z

I normally tell people to ignore the typical conservative list of pseduo-questions, but these are too easy:

1. Nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea: All were placed during 1993-2000. Who was president then? Bill Clinton, maybe?

2. The Taliban still exists -- it is a political party. al-Qaida is MUCH more active than it was before 9/11/2001.

3. Clinton was NEVER offered bin Laden's "head on a platter". That was a lie by (NewsMax's) Chris Ruddy toady Mansour Ijaz, who tried to trade lies for American citizenship, and was exposed by the Bush administration.

4. Are you saying that the USA should have sat WWII and Korea out? Tell me, how long have you been supporting the Nazi Party and the North Korean Communist Party? I know that the CONSERVATIVES SUPPORTED HITLER (like Prescott Bush did) but I wasn't aware of their support for the Reds.

5. When Clinton went into Bosnia, who complained about it? THE LIBERALS.

6. You are a blithering idiot. Please learn to argue before pronouncing yourself the "Scourge of the Libbruls".

--bkl

[GreenPartyVoter]

14. Hoohoo.. this is a good one. Use this one *g*

Thanks for clarifying all of that, BKL.

[bryant69]

3. Osama Bin Ladin's head on a platter

Is a flat lie.

President Clinton was offered Bin Ladin by a Sudanese Business Man, who had no authority to make any sort of a deal. The Clinton Administration checked out his story, and it didn't hold up. We don't negotiate with individuals on this kind of deal.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dogmudgeon]

25. Mansour Ijaz

Can't repeat that enough.

Ijaz has about as much credibility as "Kenny Boy" Lay.

The Bush Administration also checked him out, and laughed him out of the whorehouse.

--bkl

[displacedtexan]

4. First of all...

Eisenhower did the Korea thing, and we had 'advisors' in Viet Nam before Korea ended.
And:
The worst years (in terms of death) in Viet Nam were under Nixon.

Bosnia was a humanitarian effort, something which re pukes would never condone because they're heartless and greedy. And I don't think there were any US combat-related deaths in Bosnia (there were accidents... all Army).

The world understands that we are less safe now than we were before our new war doctrine (post 911).

And they don't even mention our domestic crises!
*****

I'm writing from memory. If someone has precise info, please correct me.

[stopthegop]

9. Eisenhower did the Korea thing? huh?

it started under Truman...can't be denied..Eisenhower inherited it

[displacedtexan]

22. Thanks for the correction.

The memory goes first!

[Richardo]

29. KOREA WAS A U.N. ACTION...much like Iraq wasn't.

North Korea + China was more an "imminent threat" in the region than Iraq was to anybody.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. WWII, Bushes gave money to the Nazis

I thought that Viet Nam asked for help, as did Korea and Bosnia??

Osama bin Laden is a product of Poppy Bush's CIA.

Look up the info for some of this stuff at Greg Palast's site and common dreams (Use a google this site search as their own engine is wacky)

[stopthegop]

6. statements are factually correct, but spun...

ie: Germany didn't attack us, but they did declare war on the US prior to the US declaring war on Germany...

Truman didn't 'start' the Korean war, but he did take the US into it as part of a UN force (admitedly the largest part)

the part on Vietnam is pretty straight...

Clinton stuff is spun also..as is Bush stuff

[K-W]

13. And that was a different time diplomatically

Alliances were a very serious thing, going to war with Japan meant we were at war with Germany. We didnt get to choose. We were either going to fight the axis or not.

[Tempest]

18. The part on Vietnam is wrong

Eisenhower got the U.S. involved in Vietnam.

The first U.S. combat deaths in Vietnam was in 1954, under Eisenhower.

[stopthegop]

23. true...but went from 'advisors' to troops in early 60's...

thanks

[Tempest]

27. Semantics

The U.S. "advisors" were conducting patrols and were involved in combat long before the 1960's.

[Flubadubya]

7. Well for one thing...

with regard to other presidents starting unnecessary wars... everybody knows that two wrongs don't make a right.

Get right back in their face and say that just because it happened in the past doesn't excuse Bush for taking this country to war with Iraq, and on a lie. There is NEVER a good reason to preemptively strike a sovereign nation, period... especially when the reason is predicated on the most bald faced of lies!

[meegbear]

8. Send this to www.breakthechain.org

They disect emails like this and show if they are 100% truthful or not, showing any illicit facts.

[chopper]

10. here's a bit...

"In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries"

since when are the people of Afghanistan 'liberated'? or Iraq, for that matter? i suggest the author go visit Afghanistan for a few moths and tell me how 'liberated' he feels.

"crushed the Taliban, crippled Al-Qaida"

you mean the Taliban that runs 90% of Afghanistan? and Al-Queda, who seems to be blowing up even more crap on a regular basis? crushed? crippled? really?

"and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people."

with weapons we gave him, while we watched and nodded approvingly. brilliant.

[BeyondGeography]

11. First President to deliver a net loss of jobs

over the course of his term since Herbert Hoover.

[GOPisEvil]

12. On that first point...

When the USA declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor, Germany, being an ally of Japan, declared war on the USA. In response, the USA declared war on Germany as well.

[Tempest]

15. A few answers

"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."

Germany declared war on the U.S. and Germany was sinking U.S. ships in International waters.
Also point out that conservatives, like Prescott Bush, were trading with Hitler before and after the U.S. entered the war. Bush had his bank taken away from him and was fined for trading with the enemy.

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

"John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962."

The Vietnam conflict was started in 1952 by Republican president Eisenhower. The first U.S. combat deaths in Vietnam was in 1954, during Eisenhower's administration.

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

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

Clinton went to war in Bosnia with NATO support and approval.
More nations were directly involved in Bosnia than in Bush's war 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 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."

Afghanistan is hardly liberated. The only safe place for the U.S. and the U.S. created government is in Kabal.

Iraq is hardly liberated. The acts of just the other day prove that.

The Taliban control a vast majority of Afghanistan once again.
Also point out that opium production, after being wiped out by the Taliban, is now at record levels.

Crippled al-Qaeda? Tell that to the 271 Iranians and Iraqis who were killed Tuesday.

Clinton started the de-armament talks with Libya.

Iran agreed to inspectors to prove they are using the nuclear facility for fuel, not weapons. And so far the inspectors agree with Iran.

North Korea wouldn't have started up it's nuclear program if it wasn't for Bush. N.K.'s nuclear rods were sealed and monitored by the U.N. up until Bush included N.K. in his "axis of evil" speech. After the speech, N.K. turned off the monitoring cameras, unsealed the rods and started developing weapons.

It was 8 years between the terrorist attack on WTC in 1993 and the attack on 9/11. To claim that no attacks have occurred on U.S. soil in the last couple of years because of Bush is just ignorant. And remind him that terrorist attacks worldwide have increased since Bush attacked Iraq.

[wug37]

16. This is easy

What is the point that this guy is trying to make? That Bush isn't the first president to be in a war or something? It seems to be about how other presidents have gone to war, so they did a worse job than Bush is doing first? There is no clear or logical argument to what this person is saying. But let's go paragraph by paragraph.

First off, were we just supposed to keep our attacks limited to Japan? Is that what this guy wants? Or should we just have stayed out of it altogether? In a world war, you can't attack just one nation. It's not a world war in that case. DUH!

I don't know too much about the Korean war, but it seems to me that it was fought in the name of fighting off communism.

Vietnam was a bad place to be, and was also fought in the name of fighting communism. But I'm not sure what this guy is complaining about so there is no response.

Clinton did go to Bosnia to end genocide. We lost not a single soldier over there, and stopped the killings. But it certainly wasn't a war by the standards of everything else mentioned.

Bush meanwhile, has also attacked nations that have not attacked us, which is a common theme in what this person is saying.

No, the concluding paragraph is entirely wrong. We do not have weapons inspectors anywhere except in Iraq. The UN has inspectors in Lybia and Iran, but there is nothing in North Korea. And as far as Bush not "allowing another terrorist attack at home", I have a stone that keeps tigers away from my house. It must work because there aren't any tigers where I live. Right?

In conclusion, tell this person to figure out what his point is, and then to do some work researching that position instead of stringing together random events and saying that they are connected and prove his (lack of) point.

[BigMcLargehuge]

17. Here's some fodder

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.

Germany declared war on the USA following the Pearl Harbor attack to honor their alliance with the Japanese. The US did not attack Germany until they made their declaration. Previous to this event however, the US was supporting the British and Russians via the lend-lease program.

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.

The police action in Korea (not a war) was a UN action.

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 5800 per year.

The US entered French Indo-China at the behest of the French Colonials following the defeat at Dien Bien Phu. The war protracted under the mismanagement of Robert Macknamara. Freepers selectively forget that this was the heights of the cold war, and following the near armageddon of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US government wanted to maintain the balance of power in asia between communist and non-communist countries;l an action that virtually all Freepers would enthusiastically support.

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.

The US never intervened in Bosnia. We did intervene in Kosovo with a couple of squadrons of Blackhawk helicopters and jets from an aircraft carrier. But then, Freepers appearently like the idea that the Serbs were ethnically cleansing the Kosovars. We let it go in Bosnia and lost a tremendous amount of face. And hey, Slobodan Milosevic is currently on trial for crimes against humanity, which certainly ups the justification that an action needed to be taken.

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.

Yes we "liberated" Afghanistan after decades of arming and training them to fight their Soviet occupiers and after several deals between Bush and the Taiban over oil pipelines. At the time we began operations in Afghanistan they were one of the poorest nations on Earth. And hey, they still are! Taliban factions still control some of the country and opium dealing warlords control everything else but the capital where US puppet Hamid Karzai lives with a dozen US special forces guarding his every move.

Yeah, liberated...

Same with Iraq, they are certainly in a better shape now than they were under Saddam Hussein's secular regime, right? A decade of harsh US imposed sanctions bankrupted the country. Their economy is worse than ours, and worse than their was prior to March of last year. Open fighting between fanatical Shiites and "Saddam Loyalists" over control of the country is still a widespread problem.

Haiti too, although in no way a pleasant place to live under Aristide, he was a democratically elected President who LOST the aid packages that sustained that country in 2000. The US decided to back and train a group of thug drug dealers under Guy Phillipe to overthrow the government. Phillipe, for what it's worth, has already publically stated that he is the sole legal authority in Haiti.

Worst president in history? Think about it!

I did, and he's the worst.

[NewJeffCT]

19. No terrorists attacks at home? Hardly...

Have we so soon forgotten the anthrax attacks? How about the DC sniper? And, we do not yet know if the Ohio freeway shooter is a terrorist or not, but I'm sure residents of that part of Ohio are at least a little scared when they drive on the highway. And, let's not forget the ricin letters sent to the senate recently...

[KC21304]

20. Sorry, I'm not playing anymore. Somethings are just too obvious.

You have indeed been "FREEPED". LOL

[zbdent]

21. Okay:

1. Germany declared war on the US. FDR stayed out as much as he could, while still providing protection to the Allied forces. Japan attacked us (the same time the declaration of war was being handed over in Washington DC). By this logic, Bush 41 could not have fought Saddam to get him out of Kuwait.

2. Truman? Oh, goody, a case where a president was fighting the spread of Communism. Well, that made Reagan a "hero", but Truman?

3. Hmm, the idiot poster points out the timeframe for the 58K lost. Funny how it includes the years 1969-1975 when Nixon was supposed to be pulling the US out of the war. Another case where the Republicans "protest" the war, and yet trash any of the actual VietNam war protesters. Again, weren't we fighting the spread of Communism?

4. Clinton went to war with Bosnia with NATO consent. Funny how the "body count" average is not mentioned, since we didn't lose one casualty during the "major combat operations". Oh, and Osama? Hmm, if you count one unsubstantiated tall tale by a businessman, then you're right. Of course, then you're stretching enough to allow the truth to come out that W was in tight with Osama's family. Don't forget that the US flew them out of the country as quickly as possible after 9/11.

5. Funny thing again about averages. "In the two years . . . an average of 300 a year". Well, the majority (550) of those soldiers lost have been lost since 3/19/2003, and it hasn't been a full year yet. We also had inspectors in Iraq, but they were threatened (BY BUSH!) with being bombed if they stayed in Iraq. Al-Qaida is so crippled that they have stepped up their terrorist attacks.

These people make me sick.

[BillZBubb]

24. Rebuttal

Claim: 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.

Fact: Germany DECLARED WAR on the U.S. What was FDR to do, ignore that? Please.

Claim: 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.

Fact: North Korea attacked and over-ran a U.S. ally -- South Korea. What was Truman supposed to do, ignore that?

Claim: 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.

Fact: First, the Serbs were actively killing and "ethnic cleansing" tens of thousands of Muslims in central Europe. What was Clinton supposed to do, ignore that? Second, the offer of OBL to Clinton is not a true claim. It didn't happen by any credible Sudanese or other authority. Third, Osama did attack us, but Saddam Hussein did not.


Claim: 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.

Fact: First, what two countries are liberated? Their populations may have a differing opinion on that. Both Afghanistan and Iraq are still a mess with strong possibilities of civil war. Second, nuclear inspectors were kicked out of North Korea because of Bush--not let in. North Korea has reactivated it's nuclear weapons program due to Bush's policies. That's made matters much worse. The inspectors in Iran and Libya are there because of the Europeans and U.N.--you know those irrelevant guys--not because of Bush. Third, Saddam Hussein hadn't killed a great number of his people since 1992 when Bush Sr. told the Iraqi's to rise up and then left then to Saddam's revenge. Since then, he was a bottled up, third rate dictator with no WMDs and not actively slaughtering his people.

We lost 600 soldiers dead in under a year. We have thousands of horribly wounded. At least 30,000 Iraqis are now dead who wouldn't have been with being "liberated" by the miserable failure.

[Fozzledick]

26. Just the obvious

1) The invasion of Iraq had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11, Bush just used that as an excuse. Saddam Husein was actually a secular enemy of Al Qaeda and kept them out of Iraq (until Bush let them in).

2) The CIA originally created, armed, trained and financed the Bin Laden led organization that now calls itself Al Qaeda, indoctrinated them to hate and attack non-Muslim imperialists, pointed them at the Soviet Union, and turned them loose on the world. The Soviet Union is gone, but they're still here, looking for new targets and doing exactly what the CIA trained them to do.

3) Germany declared war on us right after we declared war on Japan.
BTW, does he think that stopping the Nazis from conquering the world was a bad thing?

4) The Republicans not only strongly supported the Korean war, they wanted to extend it into China (and the PNACers still do!).

5) Kennedy didn't start the Second Vietnam war, Eisenhower did in 1956.

6) The humanitarian intervention in Bosnia was carried out by NATO acting as a regional security organization under UN authority.

7) Bush supported the Taliban up until 9/11, but he demanded that they allow his oil company cronies to build a pipeline through their territory, offering to "cover them with a blanket of gold" if they agreed and threatening to "cover them with a blanket of bombs" if they didn't. After 9/11 they offered to extradite Bin Laden but Bush refused to give them a routine extradition request so he would have an excuse to invade and seize the territory for the pipeline.

8) We could have captured Bin Laden at Tora Bora but Bush was afraid to take the political responsibility for putting US troops on the ground where they might get shot at.

9) Bill Clinton persuaded the North Koreans to put their nuclear weapons program on hold. Bush's threats to attack provoked them to start building bombs.

One more point the message didn't touch on: The Bush and Bin Laden families have been partners in the oil business for decades; much if not most of Boy George's personal fortune came from this relationship. One of the first things Bush did after stealing power was to order the CIA and the FBI to cease and desist from their ongoing investigations of his friends the Bin Laden family and the terrorist organizations they supported.

[ComerPerro]

28. Do what they did to us. Tell him that he is a Nazi sympathizer

Not just in the sense that he supports Bush and his fascist bullshit, either.

By his logic, he is arguing that attacking Germany was a bad idea. He therefore didn't support the war in Europe in WWII.

If it were up to this guy, Hitler would still be in power.

If you want, you can tell him that the BS about Clinton being "offered Osama's head on a sliver platter" is a completel lie that only passes for truth on talk radio and on right wing message boards. It has been debunked countless times.

Shit, maybe even tell him that Bush was offered bin Laden in October 2001 by Afganistan but refused their offer. Then throw in Bush's March 2002 quote where he mentions that he doesn't know or care where Osama is.

Maybe send him a picture of Saddam and Rumsfled shaking hands, perhaps even send him a link to the video. Explain to him that the 300,000 deaths occured while Reagan and Bush I were allies with Saddam, and in fact the Reagan administration helped Saddam get the weapons with which he killed his own people.

For good measure, maybe explain how Prescott Bush supported Hitler up through the beginning of WWII, even after the US had gone to war with Germany. That is a crime.


Then, tell the person to go get fucked and to stop believing everything they read in fanatic, right wing emails.