Thursday, October 21, 2004

Carter at it Again

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you the question about—this is going to cause some trouble with people—but as an historian now and studying the Revolutionary War as it was fought out in the South in those last years of the War, insurgency against a powerful British force, do you see any parallels between the fighting that we did on our side and the fighting that is going on in Iraq today?

What? The British were trying to rebuild our infrastructure and help us set up a democracy? The British wanted to leave? They had a massive aid effort?

CARTER: Well, one parallel is that the Revolutionary War, more than any other war up until recently, has been the most bloody war we’ve fought. I think another parallel is that in some ways the Revolutionary War could have been avoided. It was an unnecessary war.

Had the British Parliament been a little more sensitive to the colonial’s really legitimate complaints and requests the war could have been avoided completely, and of course now we would have been a free country now as is Canada and India and Australia, having gotten our independence in a nonviolent way.

Of course Jimmy is thinking about the Civil war. The Revolutionary War was a conflict in which we lost under 5000 total. I admire the man's earnestness but he's looking further and further out of touch.


Anonymous said...

I used to admire his earnestness, and the fact that he helped build houses for the poor. Now I think he's dangerous.

Instapundit points out that India got its independence in 1947. Only a few years later than we did, wasn't it?

Combat deaths: Rev War 4435, Civil war 184,594; WWII 292,131; Iraq 793 (although I thought that had passed 1000 recently).