Why is it that Pres Bush is seen a bad with the military when Clinton had more military deaths in his term?

From a report published by the Congressional Research Service, during President Clinton terms, there were 13,417 military deaths, compared to President Bush's 7 years, there were only 9,016.

Don't get me wrong, any death of our military is a great loss. But you expect some death with war. All of the military deaths during Clinton's time were in peace time.

This is one of the reasons, I do not want another Clinton in office.

Your thoughts?

The actual report can be found at this link -- http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL3249...

The report is where I got the information -- page 11, it you would like to see.

As for the urban legand information, they are only looking a certain types of deaths. All deaths in the military are to be counted. Accidental or otherwise.

Urban legend

Total military deaths under each of the two administrations are as follows:

Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths

George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths

Moreover, of the 7,500 fatalities that occurred on Clinton's watch, only 76 were attributable to hostile action; the rest were the result of accidents, homicide, illness, self-inflicted injuries, or unknown causes.


http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl...

Good point!!!

probably because what bush had a horrible plan behind it where as clinton didn't even make the effort to get into the trouble convened in his terms. also bush still hasn't stated he was wrong , has wasted billions, if not trillions, of dollars, and he can't say nuclear.

I also don't want another Clinton in office. But it would be helpful if you were more specific about where the information is instead of linking to a 30 page report. I am not a Hillary fan by any means, but it's difficult to believe that Clinton had more deaths than Bush. From what???

That is what the press or media claims. These press/media are members of the liberal groups who dislike any thing that is morally correct. They have their own version of what is right or wrong. The Republican are the conservative group and that is what the press hate. The Democrats are the Liberal, so what ever they do, either they don;t comment or don't report it.

I'm gonna have to agree with Miso Pretty on this one.

Excuse my harsh opinion, but bush is a dumb****. I personally believe that Clinton was one of our best presidents in the past 20 years. I know it wouldn't have made a difference, but If I could have voted I would NOT have voted for bush. I know a lot of people had problems with Gore but I believe he would have done a lot better for our country than bush did.

Now I'm not saying I support Hillary, but I completely supported Bill.

Because your statement is not based on active duty military.
Read the report you used as a source.

Active duty military deaths are listed as 8793 from 1992-2000.
Active duty military deaths are listed as 8792 from 2001-2006.

Still two more years of The Bush Presidency not on that list.

1. I'm afraid I've become very cynical regarding any reports from any source. The people who compile reports have biases, motives and agendas (conscious or subconscious) that are never disclosed to the readers. 2. If your numbers proved to be completely accurate, Bill Clinton didn't unilaterally destroy America's international reputation, create millions of Iraqi refugees and turn the Middle East into a war zone at a financial cost that will cripple our economy for generations for reasons I have yet to fathom.