Originally Posted by FredtheGnome

I hate to chime in on a politically charged thread on an airline post, but I think there is an opportunity to learn something here that might cool down the political rhetoric and lemming-like behavior.

For the O'Reilly comment: To put thinks in context, at the time Abu Ghraib was the center of the media. I believe BO was trying to make the point that atrocities during war time were A. not new, B. have been worse than what Abu Ghraib demonstrated, and C. have never generated the media circus that Abu Ghraib did. There are people who believe that George Bush should be put before a war tribunal because of Abu Ghraib, which is truly absurd.

History lesson time. Olberman is correct is saying that at Malmandy the SS executed 84 American soldiers. The incident was one of many atrocities committed by Germans to be prosecuted after the war. Therefore, it was well documented. However, Olberman's fervor to play high and mighty and say "Gotcha" to BO shows what an idiot he is. Approximately two to three weeks after the incident Dec 1944, there is evidence that American troops may have reciprocated the act of Malmandy at the nearby village of Chenogne as retribution. Sort of like, "Remember the Alamo". Reports and trials on that incident are far less documented mostly because "History is written by the winners" as the cliche goes.

Much like the Chris Matthews clip with Kevin James, we need to avoid just jumping in and parrotting someone else's agenda filled talking points. Jumping in and cheering Olberman for "proving" BO is against American troops is more idiotic than Kevin James shouting and stammering prior to his (rather humorous) history lesson by Chris Matthews. I'd bet 90% of the people who thought Kevin James was an idiot for not knowing Chamberlain's actions, would also not be able to answer the question. 99.9% do not know about Chenogne and only know about Malmandy due to Olberman.

In the grand scheme of things, nobody cares about Chenogne and very few even care about Malmandy. In a war that killed about 40-50 million people, events like that pale in comparison. War is an ugly thing, but our desire to sterilize it in Iraq hindered the effectiveness of it. Had our country been united prior to going in, it would have been over by now. It is embarrassing that our President needed to "sell" the invasion to the american people. There were hundreds of reasons to invade. Citing WMD's and needing to "liberate and bring democracy" to the Iraqi people were two tag lines to get Democrats on board.

People on both sides would benefit by doing more research and getting educated. If we had an educated and interested citizenry when it came to our politics and government affairs... there might be about a dozen incumbants in Washington. Taxes would be practically negligible and the national debt would be smaller than Bill Gates bank account and paid off regularly. Laws would make sense and regulations be appropriate. We certainly wouldn't be electing the Ted Stevens (R) and Maxine Waters (D) of the world. We certainly would have better choices for president than Obama, Clinton, McCain... Bush, Kerry... Bush, Gore.

Now, can somebody find me a ladder so that I can climb down off this soapbox?