Author Topic: Worst president in history? (Read 1084 times)

Huk · « **on:** April 19, 2004, 01:21:58 PM »

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: President Bush didn't
start the war on terror 9/11.

Let's look at the worst president and mismanagement
Try to remember, it was started by terrorists
BEFORE 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.
Over 2,900 lives lost on 9/11.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North
Korea without firing a shot, 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!

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 with his girlfriend in it.

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

Our military is GREAT!

Huk :agree:

jhm · « **Reply #1 on:** April 20, 2004, 02:41:25 AM »

Huk: Great data, thanks!!!

JIM

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #2 on:** April 20, 2004, 03:59:26 AM »

Quote from: Huk

FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us: Japan did.

Huk :agree:

Germany, as a ally of Japan, declared war on us before we declared war on them. FDR did however have a pre-existing "Europe first" agreement with Winston Churchill.

Germany did sink U.S. vessels prior to our entry into the war and the U.S. was of course, blatantly engaged in aiding Great Britain at the same time.

Also, Truman sent a small number of military advisers to Vietnam to assist the French. Einsenhower and Kennedy both also sent military advisers to train South Vietnamese military forces.

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #3 on:** April 20, 2004, 05:18:48 AM »

The formal declaration of war against Germany was by FDR,not the Germans.Johnson use a false attack and declared war on the bases of that false information

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #4 on:** April 20, 2004, 07:42:54 AM »

Quote from: IntrepidWizard

The formal declaration of war against Germany was by FDR,not the Germans.Johnson use a false attack and declared war on the bases of that false information

Hmm, that's interesting since FDR used Germany's declaration in his request to Congress for a declaration of war against Germany.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/wwii/dec/dec04.htm

Of particular note:

FDR to Congress:

"On the morning of December 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world conquest, declared war against the United States."

From the proceedings:

"Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the Government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore be it

"Resolved, etc., That the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany, which has thus been thrust upon the United states, is hereby formally declared;"

There was no declaration of war with North Vietnam. What you are referring to was the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #5 on:** April 20, 2004, 08:59:39 AM »

Police Action,Resolution call it what you may.

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #6 on:** April 20, 2004, 09:38:05 AM »

Quote from: IntrepidWizard

Police Action,Resolution call it what you may.

Can I call it backpedalling?

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #7 on:** April 20, 2004, 01:07:17 PM »

It deprnds what is,is!Declarations are made br Pres,Congress makes war

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #8 on:** April 20, 2004, 01:15:35 PM »

Quote from: IntrepidWizard

It deprnds what is,is!Declarations are made br Pres,Congress makes war

Sigh...

Quote

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8
The Congress shall have Power:

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #9 on:** April 20, 2004, 01:20:39 PM »

Jack what is your point,what are you trying to say,several Pres. have declared war,with Gongress Waging,and several have call for action,with Gongress waging?

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #10 on:** April 20, 2004, 01:46:31 PM »

Point 1.

Germany declared war against the U.S. before the U.S. declared war on Germany in WWII.

Point 2.

Kennedy was not the first President to send military advisers to Vietnam. Truman and Eisenhower both did it before him.

Point 3.

LBJ did not declare war on North Vietnam. War was never declared against Vietnam.

Point 4.

Constitutionally, only Congress can declare war.

Point 5.

Yes, I know we sent combat troops to Vietnam and fought a war there for ten years. It was not a declared war and LBJ did not declare war.

My original intent was to correct inaccuracies in the first post of this thread. These I backed up with facts.

I don't think that John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, LBJ or Truman are or were Presidential material. FDR I think was in the right place at the right time which may prove the axiom that it's better to be lucky than intellegent. I think he was the one person more than any other who is responsible for the Constitution today be treated like toilet paper.

That aside, I don't agree in using inaccuracies to make my point. That is what the left does. That is why there is no shame any more in being called a hypocrite. The right should not stoop to that or to rewriting history for it's own purpose. I'm not saying that is what the poster did because I've heard this line of reasoning before put another way: Democrats start wars, Republicans end them.

One thing that the press hated about Ronald Regan as President was his ability to be straight forward in public. They were dumb-struck. They were used to making people cringe at the thought of admitting a mistake. They didn't know what to do with him.

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #11 on:** April 20, 2004, 02:51:11 PM »

I agree with you completely,though you left out Korea.

Huk · « **Reply #12 on:** April 22, 2004, 03:50:30 AM »

Quote from: Jack Crevalle

Point 1.

My original intent was to correct inaccuracies in the first post of this thread. These I backed up with facts.

That aside, I don't agree in using inaccuracies to make my point. That is what the left does. That is why there is no shame any more in being called a hypocrite. The right should not stoop to that or to rewriting history for it's own purpose. I'm not saying that is what the poster did because I've heard this line of reasoning before put another way: Democrats start wars, Republicans end them.

H'lo Jack,
Your work in correcting the inaccuracies of my post is admirable.
However, the source of the "facts" used in backing up your corrections and making your point may or may not be any better than mine.
Let's just consider my post harmless linguistic repartee and save everyone a lot of work.

Huk :-)

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #13 on:** April 22, 2004, 05:27:59 AM »

Quote from: Huk

H'lo Jack,
Your work in correcting the inaccuracies of my post is admirable.
However, the source of the "facts" used in backing up your corrections and making your point may or may not be any better than mine.

Let's just consider my post harmless linguistic repartee and save everyone a lot of work.

Huk :-)

No, sorry, I don't go for rewritting history. If you find the facts I presented in question, as implied by your quotes, post some credible sources to refute them.

Huk · « **Reply #14 on:** April 22, 2004, 06:24:43 AM »

Thank you Jack. I'm glad that you "don't go for rewriting history".
If you will reread my last post, you will find that I stated "your sources may or may not be any better than mine".

Information is only as valuable as it's source.

Who is to judge the credibility of a source?
Will a Socialistic Liberal professor of law give one a factual unbiased representation of the 2nd Amendment? I know that many won't, Yet there are those that take it as Gospel.

Huk :-)

Jack Crevalle · « **Reply #15 on:** April 22, 2004, 07:54:18 AM »

Your mileage may vary!

Save 50% or more!

Saying that my sources "may or may not" be as good as yours is meaningless. If you dispute what I wrote, cite credible sources that refute it. It you don't, don't.

Everyone had better judge where information comes from. If they don't then they are probably sending money to OJ to find the "real killers".

Huk · « **Reply #16 on:** April 22, 2004, 08:27:13 AM »

Quote from: Jack Crevalle

Your mileage may vary!

Save 50% or more!

Saying that my sources "may or may not" be as good as yours is meaningless. If you dispute what I wrote, cite credible sources that refute it. It you don't, don't.

Everyone had better judge where information comes from. If they don't then they are probably sending money to OJ to find the "real killers".

All of this Oneupsmanship is "meaningless".
I'm sorry that I posted anything.

Have a good day.

Huk