PDA

View Full Version : Bushies send record numbers to their deaths



gabosaurus
11-06-2007, 11:53 AM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/11/06/international/i011647S41.DTL&tsp=1

A new record of blood on Bush's hands. I am sure celebrations are under way already.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa137/gabriella8406/a026af1b51cbd27715d86b4438c6f8c2d7a.jpg

darin
11-06-2007, 12:09 PM
what's that article about? Why would anyone click it?

hjmick
11-06-2007, 12:10 PM
Bushies send record numbers to their deaths

Record numbers? I think not.

-Cp
11-06-2007, 12:10 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/11/06/international/i011647S41.DTL&tsp=1

A new record of blood on Bush's hands. I am sure celebrations are under way already.


does that mean all the Presidents from these countries also have "blood on their hands" from the Death Toll in WWII?

Quoting from WWII for Dummies -"Over 60 million people died in WWII and of those 60 million, more were civilian than soldiers." Pages 363 and 364 give a run down with some numbers but does not offer a breakdown of the total civilian vs. soldier.

The Soviet Union lost the most with 25 million deaths, but only about a third were combat related.

China's death toll is incomplete but estimates are between 15 and 22 million.

Poland had 6 million deaths including 3 million Jews, roughly 20% of its prewar population.

Germany lost 4 million soldiers and 2 million civilians, many of them women.

Japan had 1.2 million battle deaths and another 1.4 million soldiers listed as missing, almost 1 million civilians were killed in the bombing raids between 1944 and 1945.

Over 1.7 million Yugoslavs and 500,000 Greeks died in the war.

France lost 200,000 soldiers and 400,000 civilians.

Italy lost 330,000 people.

Hungary lost 147,000 men in combat.

Bulgaria lost 19,000 in combat.

Romania lost 73,000 in combat.

Great Britain lost 264,000 soldiers and 60,000 civilians in bombing raids.

The United States lost 292,000 soldiers.

The Dutch lost 10,000 soldiers and 190,000 civilians.

Australia lost 23,000 men in combat.

Canada lost 37,000 soldiers.

India lost 24,000 men in battle.

New Zeland lost 10,000.

South Africa lost 6,000.

These totals do not include the 6 million Jews who perished in the Final Solution of Nazi Germany or the 17 million dead as a result of Japan's policies in Asia from 1931 to 1945.

darin
11-06-2007, 12:14 PM
Record numbers? I think not.

pssst - the facts don't matter to her. :)

gabosaurus
11-06-2007, 12:20 PM
If you don't approve of the topic, I suppose you can always move it to the humor section. :)

Pale Rider
11-06-2007, 12:27 PM
If you don't approve of the topic, I suppose you can always move it to the humor section. :)

I'd laugh if you posted an article about blood on terrorists hands... you know... the islamic jihadists that saw people's heads off, and kill and burn our soldiers bodies and then drag them through the streets? The people libs love and protect.

hjmick
11-06-2007, 12:32 PM
pssst - the facts don't matter to her. :)

What was I thinking? :dunno:

On June 6, 1944, the U.S. casualties included 1,465 dead, 3,184 wounded, 1,928 missing and 26 captured. In one day.

gabosaurus
11-06-2007, 12:37 PM
Unlike other conflicts, Iraq is the Bush War. He started it, others are merely participating. Lest they fall out of favor.
We are the instigator and invading force. This is the Bush War. All the blood, from every participating country, is on his hands. And on the hands of those who support him.

KarlMarx
11-06-2007, 12:38 PM
If you don't approve of the topic, I suppose you can always move it to the humor section. :)
It is so unfortunate that Debate Policy doesn't have a "stupid" section.. this thread would be perfect.

Hobbit
11-06-2007, 12:40 PM
Getting your panties in a wad and calling it record-setting because it was the deadliest year for the Iraq war is like calling somebody a loser because he was the slowest runner in the Olympic finals. Most wars see more casualties in a week than we saw in all of 2007.

KarlMarx
11-06-2007, 12:40 PM
Unlike other conflicts, Iraq is the Bush War. He started it, others are merely participating. Lest they fall out of favor.
We are the instigator and invading force. This is the Bush War. All the blood, from every participating country, is on his hands. And on the hands of those who support him.
Mrs Agit-prop:

And those who died in Iraq before he started this war is on the United Nations' and Bill Clinton's hands...

KarlMarx
11-06-2007, 12:42 PM
(this space for rent)

hjmick
11-06-2007, 12:42 PM
If you don't approve of the topic, I suppose you can always move it to the humor section. :)

It's not the topic so much as the way you choose to frame the discussion.


Bushies send record numbers to their deaths

Hardly, hell, not even close. To make this claim is intellectually dishonest and specifically designed to raise the ire of many a member. There is nothing wrong with discussing the losses in Iraq, every one of them is tragic.


A new record of blood on Bush's hands. I am sure celebrations are under way already.

No one celebrates the losses of young men and women serving in our military, except for our enemies. The implication otherwise is asinine and juvenile.

KarlMarx
11-06-2007, 12:43 PM
Getting your panties in a wad and calling it record-setting because it was the deadliest year for the Iraq war is like calling somebody a loser because he was the slowest runner in the Olympic finals. Most wars see more casualties in a week than we saw in all of 2007.
How about D-Day??? More men died in a single day of combat than all four years of this war....

How about Antietem? The bloodiest single day of battle seen by Americans claimed 24,000.

Gettysburg was the bloodiest battle in American history, over 50,000 casualties in 3 days.

So, according to Gabbie's logic, defeating Nazism and slavery weren't the right things to do... we should be living in a world where slaves not tires wear chains and Jews instead of pizzas should be in ovens.

gabosaurus
11-06-2007, 12:49 PM
You people are trying to mix real wars with artificially created wars.
There are past wars where America was attacked and our freedom was threatened.
Then there are wars of aggression where a U.S. President wanted to take revenge on another leader that he didn't like. Costing thousands of lives in the process.
There is a difference.

manu1959
11-06-2007, 12:52 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/11/06/international/i011647S41.DTL&tsp=1

A new record of blood on Bush's hands. I am sure celebrations are under way already.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa137/gabriella8406/a026af1b51cbd27715d86b4438c6f8c2d7a.jpg

funny...i don't see and liberal senators trying to pass legislation to revoke the vote the took to send the US to war ..... seems they all have blood on their hands....

hjmick
11-06-2007, 12:57 PM
You people are trying to mix real wars with artificially created wars.
There are past wars where America was attacked and our freedom was threatened.
Then there are wars of aggression where a U.S. President wanted to take revenge on another leader that he didn't like. Costing thousands of lives in the process.
There is a difference.

Okay...Vietnam...U.S. dead: 58,209; 2,000 missing.

When did Vietnam attack the U.S.?

Which President got us involved there? Seems like the record lies somewhere else...

manu1959
11-06-2007, 01:05 PM
Okay...Vietnam...U.S. dead: 58,209; 2,000 missing.

When did Vietnam attack the U.S.?

Which President got us involved there? Seems like the record lies somewhere else...

when did north korea attack US soil?

germany....twice?

darin
11-06-2007, 01:09 PM
it's sickening to see Americans blaming their own while giving a free pass to terrorists. The terrorists are causing our deaths. Very simple to understand IMO.

avatar4321
11-06-2007, 01:13 PM
this is the dumbest thing ive ever seen.

hjmick
11-06-2007, 01:15 PM
this is the dumbest thing ive ever seen.

I've thinking the very same thing since my second post.

I believe I am done with this thread.

KarlMarx
11-06-2007, 01:21 PM
funny...i don't see and liberal senators trying to pass legislation to revoke the vote the took to send the US to war ..... seems they all have blood on their hands....

Meanwhile, those that protest the blood on George Bush's hands play footsies with mass murderers like Castro

manu1959
11-06-2007, 01:30 PM
Meanwhile, those that protest the blood on George Bush's hands play footsies with mass murderers like Castro

or chavez....or whoever is in charge of mexico this week....