OT: Worst President. I don't think so!

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. Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home. Worst president in history? Come on!

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!!!!

Worst president ever?

Reply to
Mike Gordon
Loading thread data ...

Shut the f*ck up and keep it on topic, asswipe.

Reply to
James Calivar

That was nice. If the truth hurts then move to France. remove my-wife to reply :-)

Reply to
Icrashrc

It's not the content I was arguing with - it's the completely out of place posting. This is an RC group, not alt.politics. The very least the dumbass could have done was pre-pend his post with "OT:" but he's clearly too stupid to do so.

The thing is, does he really expect anyone to be swayed in their opinion by his post? If he does, he's a fool.

Reply to
James Calivar

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Reply to
Paul McIntosh

Yes, but what precisely had that to do with Iraq. Precisely f*ck all.

A stupid presidnet can be a good thing if there is no crisi. Probably won;t fiiddle with anything and break it.

In a crisis however, the ability to think clearly, or even think at all, is useful.

Yes.

Its not the going to war, its the going to war for the wrong reasons, lying about it and having it make things markedly worse that history will blame the monkey for.

>
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Ah, you are right - but he is still a fool.

Reply to
James Calivar

Well it is the content I object to. Specifically your filthy foul mouth! That too neither belongs here nor is wanted here!

Reply to
C.O.Jones

And we can all see how much your crisis management skills are in demand!

Reply to
C.O.Jones

SNIP

won;t fiiddle with anything and break it.

Which you repeatedly prove to be incapable of.

SNIP

Hey D.H., there are no right reasons to go to war. There are just choices like fight them now or wait until they grow up and fight them then. You know, like Neville made the choice to wait until they grew up. Look where THAT decision ended up going!

Reply to
Six_O'Clock_High

Can you? From there? I think not.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

No, those were not the choices. Those are the choices you were led to believe there were.

Who do you mean by 'them' anyway?

Who are 'they'?

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Oh! I see! You mean to say you know what "REALLY" happened abck there in Munich?

Why your Nazi Commrads from the 30's of course! Don't all you scocialists stick together?

Any and all who would plot the subjugation of a single nation, group of nations or the world as a whole. You know! Enemies of a free society! Like you!

Reply to
C.O.Jones

D.H., If those are really questions you are asking, I feel sorry for you because once again you have stepped up to the plate, as it were, and proved your intellectual shortcomings. At least this time you appeared to be reasonably sober, so I will attempt to give you some guidance and hope your intelligence is high enough to figure out all the answers from the hints..

"They" and "them" are references to the peoples forced (by fear or threats) to fight wars by their dictatorial leadership. That happens to describe your heroes in Nazi Germany and those recently in control of Iraq. As the aftermath and rebuilding from WWII proved in Germany, decapitation of regimes hostile to the world does work. They even get to fly model airplanes in Germany these days!

Reply to
Six_O'Clock_High

Well the far left and the far right are pretty much indistuingsable ultimately. Both tend to impose their wills absolutely and indiscriminately on the population. The only difference is in the propaganda. Both appeal to national pride and external threats as a way of militarising or forming a police state, Both suppress freedom of speech in order to keep the Message Pure. Both lock up people without trial for 'reasons of national security'. Both start wars out of a need to gain more power into a central hierachy or bureaucracy.

Both are ultimately enemies of the people.

Both claim to be the best friend the people ever had.

Both have a large fraction of the GDP reserved for them and their cronies.

Both tend to emerge out of democracies and get elected - once. Somehow after that they change the laws or fix the elections so they stay in power. Or they may be a bluntly military coup style leaders. It matters little.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

The greatest danger to any society are individuals who KNOW they are right, will brook no oppositionm and are prepared to go to any lengths to impose their view of life on you.

It matters not whether they wrap themselves in the US flag, a hammer and sickle, or a Burkah. Ther are all the enemies of freedom.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.