English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Yes, during Clinton`s "peacetime", there were over four thousand military deaths. These figures were taken from the D.O.D. website. Between the years 1993 through 1996, there were more peacetime military deaths than during this whole Iraq conflict !
Again, the source is the D.O.D. website. Any military death is sad, but many people need to put things into perspective. The liberal media has tricked many Americans. Have you been duped ?

2007-02-20 05:29:16 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

19 answers

I am not against the war. I am against not fighting a most viscious , aggressive war. The US should have leveled any and all cities which showed any amount of resistance to our armed forces.

We should have bombed down mosques and every building in the entire country of Iraq and then let oil rich Iraq pay to rebuild their own country and quit taking my hard earned dollars in taxes and giving them to Iraq. Taxation without representation. Use my taxes to benefit me here in the USA. Our military fights with its hands tied behind its back and is criticized for killing the enemy or humilating them.

I don't think because more people died during another time period is any comfort for the lives lost in this war. It makes me sick that the USA has the weapons to literally crush its enemies beyond recognition but won't do it. We just send our men into the streets to get blown up by IED's. How dumb we are!!!

I say fight to win or don't fight at all. I'm sick of the way our country wages war. If the terroists had our military we would all be breathing radiation if we were breathing at all.

So what was your question , oh yea people die daily in all sorts of ways. Here is a question for you.

When should a US military person's life be sacrificed for the enemies life? Isn't that what we are doing. We won't annilate them but we will allow them oppurtunities galore to kill our service men and women. WAKE UP!!!!

2007-02-24 20:52:20 · answer #1 · answered by Bill 2 · 1 0

Did you know that the death toll in the united states is 50% higher than the death toll for the Soldiers that have died in Iraq. Of course not many people find out if someone got shot by a gang member on the corner of some dark alley. It is sad to see that so many soldiers are dying over here in Iraq. But there is still more violence in the United States which is killing off way more people than this war.

2007-02-20 06:26:04 · answer #2 · answered by Just Tryin 2 · 4 0

Yes, I freely admit it. I was duped.

I realize that the soldiers killed in this war pales in comparison with other conflicts. I think in the "police action" in South Koread there were about 54,000 deaths; in Vietnam there were 57,000 deaths. Over 250,000 in WWII.

President Bush warned us that this war would be neither quick nor easy. We weren't going to have clearly defined victories, such as in traditional wars where you capture a city, or a general surrenders.

The media tricks us not only through overt bias, but by nightmarish repetition. At last count (I stopped after a while), the NY Times had 46 Front Page articles on Abu Ghraib. Of course, this is done purposely to give the impression that the abuse was more widespread than it was, and that it was sanctioned.

The only way I have gotten a balanced view is by watching Fox News.

2007-02-20 06:16:31 · answer #3 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 8 0

As someone else said before, this is just another conservative bending of the truth. Yes, in absolute fact there were 8189 military deaths during the Clinton years (1992-1999, not just the three years cited above). Of those, just 60 were hostile deaths. The rest were illness, suicide, homicide and other incidents that kill all people, not just the military. 1575 alone were self-inflicted. I guess when you compare all the people, total, who dies during those three Clinton years to just those who died in Iraq, then yes, it is very damning. The website doesn't have non-hostile deaths for Bush's years, or else we could really compare numbers.

2016-05-23 23:02:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't deny it, but it would be nice to have the link to support this.

I served from 85-99 and remember each 6-month cruise was a statistical fact that we'd lose a MININUM of 2 people to accidents.

I lost 36 friends during those 15 years... not ONE of them a combat-related death. It was just a fact of working Naval Aviation.

I thank the individual who pointed out the Florida Traffic fatalities.

California has had an average of 3,458 Annual traffic fatalities each year during the period of 1995-2004. In 2005 the number reached 4304 !!

Why hasn't Congress decided to investigate the Auto-Industry or the respective Highway Patrols and Departments of Motor Vehicles for THEIR failed policies ??

2007-02-20 05:52:19 · answer #5 · answered by mariner31 7 · 6 0

No, I haven't been duped. I was active duty during the Clinton administration. Not only did more servicemen and women die during that administration, it was during a time when Clinton was dessimating our military with severe personnel cuts. The Clintons are communists in disguise as socialists who have no love for this country and want to see a global community where they can rule supreme.

A country is only as strong as its' military. Our all volunteer military is well trained and strong. They just need the politicians to stay out of their jobs so they can complete their mission and come home.

2007-02-20 05:39:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 9 0

I wouldn't be surprised a bit. The Clinton's hate the military! As one ret. Air Force Col. put it, if Clinton was held accountable as any commission officer is under the UCMJ, Clinton would have been brought up on charges of treason. Needless to say, if Hillary is elected President, she will do her best to destroy our military and this country! If you hate America, vote for a democrat.

Personal in the military are not crossing their fingers when they have their photograph taking with her for nothing!

2007-02-20 06:50:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Not to mention Clinton CUT the number of our Military, so those unfortunate deaths occured when we had LESS troops then we do today. But watch and see, the bashers and haters only answer questions they can side with, most of them shy away from posts like this for failure to produce a decent fact for their theorys.

2007-02-20 05:38:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 9 0

One of the odd little facts of this war is that deaths from motor-vehicle accidents are still the #1 killer of members of the US armed forces.

And that - even with a war going on, the death rate for military personnel is lower than that of college students.

2007-02-20 05:37:22 · answer #9 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 7 0

Bullseye,Buddy.
Clinton only fought politically correct civil wars,Haiti,Somalia,East Timor,Bosnia.
Under Clinton many were lost due to lack of spare parts and lack
of maintenance for aircraft.
Then he cut the size of our forces 25%.

2007-02-20 06:33:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

fedest.com, questions and answers