George W Bush and the real state of the Union
Today the President gives his annual address. As the election battle begins, how does his first term add up?
20 January 2004
232: Number of American combat deaths in Iraq between May 2003 and January 2004
501: Number of American servicemen to die in Iraq from the beginning of the war - so far
0: Number of American combat deaths in Germany after the Nazi surrender to the Allies in May 1945
0: Number of coffins of dead soldiers returning home from Iraq that the Bush administration has allowed to be photographed
0: Number of funerals or memorials that President Bush has attended for soldiers killed in Iraq
100: Number of fund-raisers attended by Bush or Vice-President Dick Cheney in 2003
Obfuscation and propaganda at its finest.
Note the switch:
232: Number of American combat deaths in Iraq between May 2003 and January 2004
501: Number of American servicemen to die in Iraq from the beginning of the war - so far
0: Number of American combat deaths in Germany after the Nazi surrender to the Allies in May 1945
The number of combat deaths depend on the number of people who die during combat. Not after. So, how many combat deaths occured after the Nazi surrender? None, because COMBAT WAS OVER. By definition, if there is no combat, there are no combat deaths.
Were there deaths after the nazi surrender? Yes. But trying to make some political point by comparing the number of deaths after the end of combat in Iraq with the number of COMBAT deaths after the Nazi surrender is the height of dishonesty. There is no comparison between the two. Now, if you wanted to be honest, you would compare the number of combat deaths in Iraq after the fall of Baghdad- ZERO- with the number of combat deaths after the Nazi surrender- also zero- but then again, truth makes for fairly toothless rhetoric.
Or you can compare number of post-surrender deaths in Germany to the number of post-carrier-landing deaths. But then, the numbers would not be as drastic. There have been more deaths in Iraq than after WWII however, but the only reason that is so is that, unlike in the case of germany, we did not demolish entire cities and dismantle the entire society. We did not arrest 200,000 people. This is why there was little resistance after WWII. The entire Nazi party had been arrested. The only thing we did in Iraq was bar former Ba'ath party members from participating in the new government.
I find it hard to believe, given your orientation as a hard-core 60's leftist (as it appears by your writings) would advocate carpet-bombing entire Iraqi cities, decimating the entire industrial capacity and infrastructure of that nation, and jailing 200,000 ba'athists in Guantanamo. Those actions, I suspect would have you howling in outrage even more loudly than your feighed outrage over a couple of hundred deaths.
Posted by Brian at January 21, 2004 12:10 PMgiven your orientation as a hard-core 60's leftist
Seems you know less about the 60s than you do about me.
Posted by P6 at January 21, 2004 01:31 PMLOL
Posted by Al-Muhajabah at January 21, 2004 08:50 PMRespect I have for people who reduce these issues down to (inaccurate to boot) numbers: None
Posted by Phelps at January 22, 2004 02:43 PM