Monday, August 27, 2007

And Then There Were Two

Today the Attorney General (but more important, long time friend and cabinet member) Roberto Gonzales resigned as the Attorney General and like Karl Rove the Democrats and liberal press, including CNN and MSNBC, gloated. There is not many original Bush friends and supporters left in key positions in the White House or as Cabinet Members, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are the next prominent targets for the Democratic Congress.

In my book, I set up a scenario of the Democrats taking control of the Congress in 2007 and trying to impeach the President. When their effort fails they try to isolate the President and weaken him by going after his close friends, cabinet members and advisers. By holding hearing after hearing the friends, advisers, and Cabinet members begin to resign. Even though Congress could find nothing illegal in the decisions or official acts these people performed, the pressure and constant attack on their reputation was more than they could bare.

Since before the 2006 election was held, there has been a constant attack from the Democrat Party and Liberal media to destroy this Administration. They are slowly accomplishing their goal. That goal is to win not only the White House in 2008 but also an absolute majority in both the House and Senate. The sad thing about this strategy is it's working. The American people are getting tired of hearing the negative news from Washington and are starting to turn off everything concerning Washington D.C. So who is next, Rice, Cheney, Chertoff, or Gates.

I have to give the Democrats and liberal media credit for this strategy. Even though I believe they are on the borderline of treasonous acts during a time of war, the constant attacks and misinformation has kept the publics' eyes off the miserable job the Democrats have done since gaining control of the House and Senate. They have also been able to hide illegal acts of fellow Congressmen and slow down criminal investigations of Democrats, remember the $95,000 hid in the Congressman's freezer. (It was an FBI sting.) How about the documents stolen from the National Archives, Sandy Berger ring a bell. In a move to halt the investigation Berger gave up his license to practice law in D.C. Now we will never know what documents he stole and destroyed. Did they relate to how the Clinton Administration handled or mis-handled Al Qaeda?

On my Internet radio show yesterday a young man called in asking for help starting his own radio show. He said he and his friend wanted to do a show for teenagers that was more positive and less negative. I agreed there is too much negative news and talk on the air but I believe he missed the point. The sole purpose for all the negative news and talk by the politicians and liberal media is to win in '08. The American people must open their eyes keep informed and in touch with their representatives to let them know we will not tolerate their self serving acts as Congressmen and Senators. If the polls are right (I don't trust or like polls) this Congress has the lowest approval rating in history and that is appropriate for the way they have totally disregarded the American people and the interest of our country during this time of war.

So what is next under the Democrat Get Bush At All Cost Strategy. Stay tuned and a word of caution for Secretary Rice, watch your back.

Monday, August 20, 2007

So How Much Did She Really Care

So how much did the illegal that hid in the church for over a year fighting deportation really care about her son?

She came here once illegally and was deported.

She came back illegally a second time, used a phony social security number and was deported.

Came back illegally a third time, had a kid and used the kid as a ploy for citizenship.

No one knows who or where the father is. After a year she finally got deported but only after leaving the "church" to publicly protest American laws. She was given the opportunity to take her son with her, she said "No" and left him with the so-called pastor and his wife.

My question to all the parents out there, especially mothers, "How many of you would leave your children behind, not knowing when or if you will ever get to see them again?"

Remember she has relatives in Mexico but none in America.

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Who's More Dangerous, Far Left or Al Qaeda

Just Curious; After listening to the Democrat Presidential Debates and hearing some of the weird double talk coming from the Dems, example:

pull out of Iraq/send troops to Darfur,

we've lost in Iraq and the Taliban is getting stronger in Afghanistan/attack Pakistan (our ally) to kill bin Laden,

the Iraqi government is wrong for taking the month of Aug off to return to their homes (some of whom fear assination everytime they leave home for work)/US Congress ON Recess From Aug To Sept (sounds like elementary school),

stop the fighting in Iraq sit down and talk with Tehran and negotiate peace/use nuclear weapons if need be to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear bomb.

this is Bush's war he messed it up/we have all the answers to fight and win war

Iraq is a civil war/we will need to redeploy our troops out of Iraq leaving just enough to fight Al Qaeda and the insurgents

"IF GEORGE BUSH DOES NOT END THIS WAR I WILL"/we cannot pull out of Iraq all at once, we must leave troops there to protect against Al Qaeda and to protect our new Embassy.

So the question is: who is more dangerous, people that say different things to different folks simply to win an election (and at the same time encouraging our enemies) or people who say the same thing over and over, Death To America and Israel. Are they, More dangerous? Less dangerous? Or, Equally dangerous?

Friday, August 10, 2007

How Our Enemies View America and Iraq

How Our Enemies View America and Iraq

For anyone that doesn't believe Iraq is the center of the war on terror, I have put together some statements from our terrorist enemies that you should probably read:

Osama bin Laden, leader of al-Qaeda, April 23, 2006:

The West created the United Nations to defend their unjust doctrine.
America and Europe considers the Jihad groups in Palestine,
Chechnya, Iraq and Afghanistan as Terrorists, so how can we dialog
with them without the use of weapons. And the leaders of our region
considers America and Europe as friends and allies, and consider the
Jihad groups against the Crusaders Terrorist groups, so how can we
have an understanding with them, without weapons? The UN is an infidel
organization, and whomever accepts its ruling is also an infidel. It
is a tool to execute the Crusader and Zionist decisions against

Mohsen Rezai, Iranian Expediency Council Secretary, June 8, 2006:

America seems so big, but in fact is like a paper tiger, even the
slightest tremor could easily make it crumple and disappear. That's
why America's strength depends upon maintaining its hegemony.

Shehzad Tanweer, one of the London bombers, July 8, 2006 :

We are 100% committed to the cause of Islam. We love death the way you
love life. I tell all you British citizens to stop your support to
your lying British government, and to the so-called "war on terror,"
and ask yourselves, why would thousands of men be willing to give
their lives for the cause of Muslims?

Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, September 28, 2006:

The American military bases, with their large areas, are an ideal
environment for trying out your Muslim scientists' and experts'
non-conventional bombs: the biological and the so-called
"dirty" bombs.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda deputy leader, December 22, 2006:

The first is that you Democrats are not the ones who won the midterm
election, nor are the Republicans the ones who lost. Rather the
Mujahideen, the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq, are the
ones who won, and the American forces and their Crusader allies are
the ones who lost.

Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, October 10, 2006:

We haven't had enough of your American blood yet….

We call on the lame duck Bush not to hurry up in escaping the same
way the defense minister did….

Remain steadfast in the battlefield you coward, George W.

We will not rest from our Jihad until we are under the olive trees of
Rumieh and we have blown up the filthiest house, which you call the
White House.

Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, al-Qaeda head of the Islamic State of Iraq,
February 2, 2007:

We are not afraid of your coalitions.... We have drunk blood in the
past, and we find no blood sweeter than that of the Byzantines
or, Christians…. Roast their flesh with car bombs, cut off their
supply lines with explosive charges and tear out their hearts with
sniper fire. Know that offense is the best form of defense, and be
careful not to lay down your weapons before the war is over…. We are
not fighting out of nationalism, but with the aim of making Allah's
word supreme.

Mullah Dadullah, March 2, 2007:

Next spring, we will bring shameful defeat upon the Jews and the
Christians. The cries you are now hearing from them once a day, you
will hear them 20 times a day. The number of countries aban­doning
America will be doubled, and countries will refrain from helping or
allying with the U.S. America will remain alone. We pray to Allah that
America will remain without an ally.

Abu al-Layth al-Libi, leader of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, April 28, 2007:

Immediately after the collapse of the Taliban, gloomy events
hindered the people and prevented the movement of the mujahideen….
Everyone was shocked and overwhelmed waiting to see what the West,
which was coming with its military machine, would do…. Today we are
experiencing mountains of realistic and true hopes in Afghanistan,
while our enemy is experiencing mountains of weakness, fear and
apprehension.… We will finish off the remnants of the enemy's force
and completely crush it.… Abu Musab al-Zarqawi took the jihad from
the edges of the place of the real conflict to the focal point of the
conflict, which is Iraq.

Mullah Dadullah, high-ranking Taliban leader, May 14, 2007:

We will be executing attacks in Britain and the U.S. to demonstrate
our sincerity and make them understand how hard it is to endure under
a foreign occupation.

Adam Gadhan, a.k.a. Azzam the American, American spokesman for
al-Qaeda, May 29, 2007:

You and your people will…experience things, which will make you
forget all about the horrors of September 11, Afghanistan and Iraq,
and Virginia Tech. And let us be clear: A pullout from Iraq alone, in
the absence of compliance with the remainder of our legitimate
demands, will get you nowhere, and will not save you from our strikes.
So stop wasting your time and trying to save face with these futile
farcical maneuvers on Capital Hill and start making some serious moves.

Sheikh Hussein bin Mahmoud, senior al-Qaeda leader, April 17, 2007:

May Allah send the Muslim nation someone who will kill them even
more savagely, strike terror in their souls, tear their hearts
out…cut their heads off, tear them limb from limb and shed their blood
in rivers.

These are all their own words. You don't have to listen to our politicians or government, simply listen to them. They want nothing more then to kill as many of the infidels, that is everyone that is not of the true Islamic faith, and control the world. In their warped way of thinking this is ordained upon them by the Koran and will guarantee them martyrdom and a place with Allah, each with 40 virgins. I may not be a political analyst or expert, but if I was one of the Democrat Presidential candidates I would not be happy with the statement of Ayman al-Zawahiri...."you Democrats are not the ones who won the midterm election, nor are the Republicans the ones who lost. Rather the Mujahideen, the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq, are the ones who won......" Even tho he is dead maybe he understood our Congress better than the American people.

Sunday, August 5, 2007

Iraqi Vets The Next Vietnam Vets

The Next Vietnam Vets

Everyone has heard how the Vietnam veterans were treated upon coming home. Sadly I believe we are about to see history repeats itself. This time it will be the Iraqi vets. If they served in Afghanistan and not in Iraq they may be spared the anti-war slurs and total disdain. It doesn't say much for a country or people when they treat their young and bravest members of their society this way. Why do I believe history is about to repeat itself? Hollywood, and how people have a tendency to believe everything they see in the movies and on television. I hate polls and don't believe 90% of them, but if you do they are saying 60% of the country is calling for withdrawing from Iraq. This reminds me so much of the Vietnam era before Walter Cronkite blew the Tet Offensive out of proportion and declared the war was lost. Hollywood started shifting from Pro-American war movies like The Great Escape, The guns of Navarone, The Longest Day, and Battle of the Bulge, to Anti-War films that were based more on American military suffering than the war and our reason for trying to keep the South Vietnamese from falling under communist rule. Films like Platoon, Catch 22, Full Metal Jacket, Casualties of War and Apocalypse Now were simply trying to turn people against the Vietnam War. By showing Americans suffering, causing suffering and being as graphic as possible Hollywood set in motion the idea war is wrong and soldiers become murders, rapists and assassins. I must applaud them, they succeeded. Between the movies, television and the pictures in the newspapers of dead/wounded American soldiers, young Vietnamese children running down a road naked, monks setting themselves on fire and public executions of suspected VC the American public turned against the war.

Now I understand Hollywood is getting ready to do it all again. It is my understanding they have a large lineup of Anti-War movies coming out this fall. The first will be "In the Valley of Elah". From what I've heard it will be similar to Platoon and Casualties of War. The internet, news media and newspapers have laid the ground work and planted the seed of discontent, now all Hollywood has to do is put it on screen and nightly television. The message will sink in and more and more the lies and fiction will become reality to the American people. The more people see and believe the propaganda fed to them by the left wing anti-war crowd using the big and little screen, the more they will cross over to the far left position and we will loose in Iraq and our military will receive the wrath of an angry people. While the American people will take it out on our military, in reality they will only have themselves to blame. I really don't look forward to a repeat of history.

If The Democrats Are Serious About Supporting The Troops

I'm really getting sick of hearing the Democrat candidates complain about how the war is being fought, and saying the surge isn't working. If they are really serious about being a responsible leader capable of leading a country in a time of war, then they must first learn how to win the war. The first thing is to unite your people, next keep your mouth shut do not tell your enemy your plans in advance, and do not allow the media, opinion polls or politics to decide how you fight the war. Above all do not order your military to retreat when they tell you they can win.

The candidates keep talking about our casualties since we invaded Iraq. I regret each and every one but it is war and we will take casualties. No matter how great the technology becomes the outcome of the war will always be decided by the boots on the ground. Our military has been in Iraq for 4 years and 4 months, it began March 20, 2003. As of this writing we have 2,990 killed in action, with 647 non combat related deaths, for a total of 3,637 dead. Total wounded in action has been 26,953, however out of this number 14,838 have returned to duty after 72 hours. The other 12,115 did not return to duty. Keep in mind these numbers are not only for Iraq but also most of the Middle East, except Afghanistan.

I am a Vietnam vet and my heart goes out to each and every family and service member that has paid the ultimate price or been injured by this war. But, look at this war the same as previous wars Americans have fought in the past. On Iwo Jima in 35 long days of fighting we suffered 6,766 killed in action with a total 26,000 reported casualties, on an island covering 8 square miles. On Okinawa we suffered 38,000 casualties, 12,000 KIA or MIA over 82 days, 463 square miles. You could place either one of these islands within the Baghdad area. On June 6, 1944 while invading Europe America alone suffered 1465 dead, 3184 wounded, 1928 missing and 26 captured.

These are only 3 examples of battles in a war that lasted 4 years with millions of casualties. How did we win that war? We literally destroyed every major city in Germany and Japan. We saturated the ground with bombs from air, sea, and ground regretting but understanding there would be civilian casualties in the thousands. With boots on the ground our military fought the enemy where they found them until we finally said enough and used the atom bomb. Never during that war did our leaders inform the enemy of our plans. Never with all the death and casualty reports coming back to the US did Americans say stop we can't win. The leaders and the American people knew when they entered that war there would be no turning back until there was victory.

The Democrat candidates will not tell you how to win, they don't know. They won't explain how to withdraw without taking a large number of casualties, they don't know. If they believe this war should be fought the way WWII was, then they should say so and be ready for the fall out when we literally destroy Iraq to restart it from scratch. If they don't believe this, then they should shut their mouths and start listening to our military. They should stop helping and encouraging the enemy by saying we are loosing. Lastly, they should stop using the war and our troops to win an election.

Message From Osama bin Laden?

"I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the American Media (and some in your American Congress and Senate) for helping the enemies of America. Your distortion of what is really going on in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East has helped our cause more than any bombing of any American city. As long you continue to distort the truth of how we are actually loosing in Iraq and Afghanistan we will not bomb your cities or kill your reporters, at least for now. Please continue to show and sensationalize the car bombings and successful attacks on your troops. Do not show the unsuccessful attacks or how many terrorists are dying daily from both Iraqi military and American military raids. Do not show how everyday Iraqis and their tribal leaders are turning in my people. Do not show how they are helping your troops and the Iraqi military destroy us. With your help the American will to fight in Iraq will be destroyed and the Democrats can be victorious in forcing that dog Bush into retreating. As long as America stays divided we have the opportunity to succeed, thank you again especially CNN and MSNBC. Praise be Allah (and your Democrat Controlled Congress), together we can destroy America." Osama bin Laden, Grand Leader of Al Aqaeda

Questions For Our Congress

I'm a Vietnam era old Marine with experience in Vietnam. Does this give me the right to tell our military in Afghanistan or Iraq how to fight their war or tactics they should use to defeat Al Qaeda or other terrorist type insurgents? The answer is no for me and I believe it should be no for everyone having no experience in these countries or fighting this type of enemy.

To all the Senators that think you know better than our military that is on the ground, please explain to me how did you get so smart. Have you been on day or night patrols searching for the enemy in Afghanistan or Iraq? While on these patrols did you speak one on one with the citizens that are turning over names and positions of Al Qaeda members in their area? I suspect the answer is no.

To all of the Senators complaining about not being able to capture or kill Osama. Were any of you on the ground in Afghanistan when the fighting was at its highest point? Were any of you at Toro Bora when bin Laden was supposed to have escaped? Have any of you ever been to the area where he is supposed to be hiding in Pakistan? I suspect the answer is no.

To the Senators that voted for this amendment of surrender. Do you really support the troops? Were you serious when you said you would give them until September before making any decisions on whether things were improving or not improving in Iraq? Do you really believe you can defend Iraq from Iran and Al Qaeda, or protect the Kurds in the north from Turkey, by redeploying our troops either out of Iraq or sitting on the border watching the genocide? Don't you think it would cost more in American lives if we pulled out and within a year have to go back to stop Al Qaeda or Iran from completely taking over and committing absolute genocide and ethnic cleansing for anyone suspected of helping America or the Iraqi government? Do you really care what happens to the young children, women, and older Iraqis that cannot defend themselves? Do you honestly care if 2 million people are slaughtered after the fall of Baghdad? Do you care if after Iraq falls, Iran sets its eyes on Afghanistan? Will you pass a bill mandating the President send our military in to stop the massacres that will surely happen in both countries? Will you support our troops if they go into Pakistan after bin Laden without the Pakistani government approval, risking war with Pakistan? Again I suspect the answer is no.

If the answers are no to all the questions I have posed, again please tell me how you got so smart and where are you getting all of your information, CNN, MSNBC, or Al Jazeera. For me I will trust our military leaders on the ground, until the enlisted tell me different, and I hope the President continues to do the same.

The Surge Is Working

To The Anti-War Democrats

To all the Anti-War Democrats that say the Republican President is a murderer, liar, and war monger maybe you should look into the past Democrat Presidents before casting stones. Below is a list of Democrat Presidents that took us into war, sent our troops into foreign countries as peace keeping force for a limited period of time, or stood by while genocide was committed and did nothing. Before you throw it out as a right wing conspiracy, it came direct from Miller Center of Public Affairs, University of Virginia.

James Polk- "Under James Knox Polk, the United States grew by more than a million square miles, across Texas and New Mexico to California and even Oregon. More than any other President, Polk exercised "Manifest Destiny," a phrase coined by a magazine to express the conviction that the United States was entitled to rule as much of the continent as it could acquire. He successfully waged war against Mexico, and thereby obtained for the U.S. most of its present boundaries as a nation." He was accused of lying to Congress in order to declare war on Mexico.

Woodrow Wilson- "In foreign affairs, Wilson was determined to revise the imperialist practices of earlier administrations, promising independence to the Philippines and making Puerto Ricans American citizens. In the European war, American neutrality ended when the Germans refused to suspend submarine warfare after 120 Americans were killed aboard the British liner Lusitania and a secret German offer of a military alliance with Mexico against the United States was uncovered. In 1917, Congress voted overwhelmingly to declare war on Germany. With the nation at war, Wilson set aside his domestic agenda to concentrate on a full-scale mobilization of the economy and industry. Conformity and aggressive patriotism became the order of the day. Private patriotic organizations persecuted dissenters and anyone suspected of political radicalism, and the administration sponsored Espionage and Sedition Acts that outlawed criticism of the government, the armed forces, and the war effort. Violators of the law were imprisoned or fined, and even mainstream publications were censored or banned."

Franklin Roosevelt- "Hamstrung in the 1930s by domestic economic woes and a strong isolationist bloc in Congress and the public, FDR confronted Germany and Japan only tentatively as those powers looked to establish dominance in Europe and Asia, respectively. Nevertheless, Roosevelt did extend massive amounts of aid to Great Britain as that nation successfully held out against the Nazi onslaught during 1940 and 1941 Working with America's allies in the Pacific, FDR also tried to contain the Japanese threat. The Hoover administration had acquiesced in Japan's flagrant occupation in late 1931 of Manchuria, a Chinese territory, rich in minerals, and the Roosevelt Administration proved no more willing in the intervening years to actively oppose Japanese aggression. Instead, like Hoover before him, Roosevelt merely refused to recognize Japanese control of Manchuria. Likewise, Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 provoked no significant response from the United States. The leaders of Japan and Germany surely noted the democracies' failure to respond to aggression in Manchuria and Ethiopia. The immense challenges that Roosevelt faced in the European conflict were compounded by the worsening situation in Asia, and particularly by the downturn in U.S.-Japanese relations. In 1937, that relationship deteriorated further after Japan attacked China, a nation to which a number of Americans had a strong attachment. FDR offered aid to China, although the neutrality laws and the power of the isolationist bloc in American politics ensured that such assistance remain extremely limited. Instead, FDR's strategy, in concert with other Western nations, was to contain and isolate Japan economically and politically. If he could keep the "Japanese dog" -- as Churchill referred to Japan -- at bay, FDR reasoned that he could deal with what he saw as the more pressing German problem. By isolating Japan, the United States and its allies exacerbated Japan's fears of being denied access to the resources it needed to prosecute further its war in China. By the summer of 1941, Japan's leaders felt increasingly hemmed in by a coalition of America, Britain, China, and the Dutch (the ABCD powers) and adopted overtly aggressive foreign and military policies. War came, but in a most unexpected fashion. On December 7, 1941, Japan launched a surprise attack against the United States at Pearl Harbor naval base in Hawaii, America's vital outpost in the Pacific." Some people accused Roosevelt of using Japan as an excuse to enter WWII in denfense of Britain and France.

Harry Truman- "The German leader Adolf Hitler committed suicide in Berlin only two weeks into Truman's presidency and the allies declared victory in Europe on May 7, 1945. The war in the Pacific, however, was far from being over; most experts believed it might last another year and require an American invasion of Japan. The U.S. and British governments, though, had secretly begun to develop the world's most deadly weapon -- an atomic bomb. Upon its completion and successful testing in the summer of 1945, Truman approved its use against Japan. On August 6 and 9, 1945, the U.S. Army Air Force dropped atomic bombs on two cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, immediately killing upwards of 100,000 people (with perhaps twice that number dying from the aftereffects of radiation poisoning). Japanese emperor Hirohito agreed to surrender days later, bringing World War II to a close. Significant foreign policy challenges persisted into Truman's second term. The President committed the United States to the defense of South Korea in the summer of 1950 after that nation, an American ally, was invaded by its communist neighbor, North Korea. The American military launched a counterattack that pushed the North Koreans back to the Chinese border, whereupon the Chinese entered the war in the fall of 1950. The conflict settled into a bloody and grisly stalemate that would not be resolved until Truman left office in 1953."

John Kennedy- Cuba "An invasion of Cuba was to be sponsored covertly and carried out by CIA-trained anti-Castro refugees. Assured by military advisers and the CIA that the prospects for success were good, Kennedy gave the green light. In the early hours of April 17, 1961, appro
ximately 1,500 Cuban refugees landed at Bahia de Cochinos (Bay of Pigs) on Cuba's southern coast. A series of crucial assumptions built into the plan proved false and Castro's forces quickly overwhelmed the refugee force. Moreover, the Kennedy administration's cover story collapsed immediately. It soon became clear that despite the President's denial of U.S. involvement in the attempted coup, Washington was indeed behind it. Soviet Union-The misadventure cost Kennedy dearly. Still recovering from this humiliating political defeat, Kennedy met with Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961. Khrushchev renewed his threat to "solve" the long-running Berlin problem unilaterally, an announcement that in turn forced Kennedy to renew his pledge to respond to such a move with every means at his disposal, including nuclear weapons. In a surprise move two months later, in mid-August 1961, the Soviets and East Germans constructed a wall separating East and West Berlin, providing the Cold War with a tangible incarnation of the Iron Curtain. Vietnam-America had been sending military advisers there since the mid-1950s to help prevent a Communist takeover of the Southeast Asian nation. In 1961, Kennedy increased this allotment and ordered in the Special Forces, an elite army unit, to train the South Vietnamese in counter-insurgency warfare. But war continued to spread, and by the end of Kennedy's presidency, 16,000 American military advisers were serving in Vietnam."

Lyndon Johnson- "When Johnson took office, he affirmed the Kennedy administration's commitments. He quickly approved NSAM 273, a national security agency memorandum, on November 26, 1963, which directed the U.S. government "to assist the people and Government of South Vietnam to win their contest against the externally directed and supported Communist conspiracy." When counterinsurgency failed, Johnson began to escalate U.S. commitments. On February 13, 1965, Johnson authorized Rolling Thunder, the sustained bombing of North Vietnam. On March 8, 1965, two Marine battalions, 3,500 troops, went ashore near Da Nang to protect the airfields, with orders to shoot only if shot at -- this was the first time U.S. combat forces had been sent to mainland Asia since the Korean War. On April 3, Johnson authorized two additional Marine battalions, one Marine air squadron, and an increase in logistical support units of 20,000 men. He also authorized troops to go on active "search and destroy" missions. By mid-April, Marines had moved to full-scale offensive operations. By November 1965, there were 175,000 troops and by 1966, an additional 100,000. The number would surge to 535,000 by the end of Johnson's presidency." People still accuse Johnson of lying about the Gulf of Tonkin attack in order to escalate the war.

William Clinton- Somalia- "What started out as a humanitarian mission to combat famine grew into a bloody military struggle, with the bodies of dead American soldiers dragged through the streets of the Somalian capital of Mogadishu in October 1993. Public support for the American mission waned, and Clinton announced a full withdrawal of U.S. forces, which took place in March 1994; United Nations (UN) peacekeeping troops remained in the country until the spring of 1995. The intervention ultimately accomplished little in Somalia: warlords remained in control and no functioning government was restored in the country after the United States and the United Nations left. The failure of American troops to be properly equipped for the mission led ultimately to the resignation of Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, and created the impression of a President ill-prepared for foreign affairs." Rwanda, "In April 1994, a vast killing spree broke out in Rwanda, a nation located in central Africa. An estimated 800,000 Tutsi and their defenders were murdered in a government-sponsored genocide. With the failure in Somalia still very much in the minds of American policymakers, neither the United States nor the United Nations moved aggressively to stop the slaughter. In 1998, the Clintons embarked on an extensive six-nation tour of Africa, during which the President stopped briefly in Rwanda to meet with survivors of the civil war and to issue an apology for actions not taken." Balkans- "Clinton sent a peacekeeping force of 20,000 American troops (part of a larger NATO deployment) into the region to enforce a cease-fire that was to be followed by free elections in September 1996. American and NATO troops enforced an uneasy settlement that stabilized war-torn Bosnia with no American casualties." Eleven years later our troops are still there. Serbia- "In 1999, Clinton moved with NATO to begin a massive bombing campaign against the Serbian government to end its "ethnic cleansing" of Albanians in the Kosovo region. With no American battle casualties during the fighting, U.S. troops joined British, French, and other NATO forces to occupy Kosovo as peacekeepers under an agreement worked out with Yugoslavia." As of 2007 our military is still there. During Clintons 8 years in office the United States or its interest abroad was attacked by Al Qaeda countless times with little or no response. This left the United States looking weak or unwilling to defend itself from aggression.

Before throwing stones at the present President, ask yourself is he really any different than past leaders responding to what they believed was in the interest of our country.