Attention Democrats: What's Your Definition of Multilateral?

Posted By Blackfive

Tanker Schreiber, a former Army Armor Officer, sent me some very interesting information about coalitions - specifically, our U.N. coalition in the Korean War versus the one we have now. Maureen Dowd's column, today, offended him and stirred him to action.

Here's what Dowd has to say:

...You wonder how many votes he scared off with that testosterone festival: the taunting message, the self-righteous geographic litany of support? The Philippines. Thailand. Italy. Spain. Poland. Denmark. Bulgaria. Ukraine. Romania. The Netherlands. Norway. El Salvador.

Can you believe President Bush is still pushing the cockamamie claim that we went to war in Iraq with a real coalition rather than a gaggle of poodles and lackeys?

So let us take a look at previous coalitions, shall we? Tanker Schrieber does some checking:

Here's a rough comparison of Bush's "poodles and lackeys" in Iraq as of September 2003, and the UN's multilateral masterpiece in Korea.

If you take out the South Korean troops who fought in Korea, and the Iraqi troops we have trained after the war, these are the percentages for foreign troops in each conflict.

Korean War: 303,000 US - 39,474 Foreign - 339,474 Total - 88% US

Iraq War: 130,000 US - 21,350 Foreign - 151,350 Total - 86% US

I posted about the breakdown of forces in Iraq (the Japanese weren't there when I posted the numbers).

Here's the breakdown of UN forces in the Korean War:

Australia 2,282
Belgium 900
Canada 6,146
Colombia 1,068
Ethiopia 1,271
France 1,119
Greece 1,263
Holland 819
Luxembourg 44
New Zealand 1,385
Philippines 1,496
South Africa 826
South Korea 590,911
Thailand 1,204
Turkey 5,453
United Kingdom 14,198
United States 302,483

Tanker Schreiber also sent this money quote about D-Day and our "coalition" there:

There were over 150,000 allied troops who landed on D-Day. Know how many were French?

About 160 "Commandoes."

He's right.

Here are some others that are taking a look at the Coalition of the Willing:

Understanding a Color Coded Map by Ruste.org

Washington Post Undercounts the Number of Countries Committing Troops to Iraq by Darren Kaplan

Citizen Smash has a great post on the "poodles and lackeys" comment and has links to some other related posts as well.

---

Mission: To protect and promote the reputation and dignity of America's Warriors.
Join us!

Comments

Attention Democrats: What's Your Definition of Multilateral?

Tanker Schreiber, a former Army Armor Officer, sent me some very interesting information about coalitions - specifically, our U.N. coalition in the Korean War versus the one we have now. Maureen Dowd's column, today, offended him and stirred him to action.

Here's what Dowd has to say:

...You wonder how many votes he scared off with that testosterone festival: the taunting message, the self-righteous geographic litany of support? The Philippines. Thailand. Italy. Spain. Poland. Denmark. Bulgaria. Ukraine. Romania. The Netherlands. Norway. El Salvador.

Can you believe President Bush is still pushing the cockamamie claim that we went to war in Iraq with a real coalition rather than a gaggle of poodles and lackeys?

So let us take a look at previous coalitions, shall we? Tanker Schrieber does some checking:

Here's a rough comparison of Bush's "poodles and lackeys" in Iraq as of September 2003, and the UN's multilateral masterpiece in Korea.

If you take out the South Korean troops who fought in Korea, and the Iraqi troops we have trained after the war, these are the percentages for foreign troops in each conflict.

Korean War: 303,000 US - 39,474 Foreign - 339,474 Total - 88% US

Iraq War: 130,000 US - 21,350 Foreign - 151,350 Total - 86% US

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfadb53ef00d83420ccc253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Attention Democrats: What's Your Definition of Multilateral?:

» Poodles and Lackeys from Citizen Smash - The Indepundit
MAUREEN DOWD doesn’t get it, so I’m going to draw her a pretty picture. For the geographically illiterate, the above... [Read More]