|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#8
August 12th 04, 06:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"* US *" wrote in message ... Vietnam started with fewer deaths by far than the Iraq invasion. On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:36:40 GMT, "Jarg" wrote: When was the comparable period in Vietnam? Jarg You could know that already if you weren't effectively brain-dead. Strictly speaking, there's no truly comparable period, as this conflict has been escalated far-more rapidly than that one was. It is already far worse. You have to want to *waste* US troops to support Bush's war crimes. On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 02:43:15 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: ... extraordinarily light casualties ... The casualties in Iraq are already worse than those from the comparable period in Vietnam. There is no comparable period in Vietnam. This is not Vietnam 1965. This is not the Cold War. Get over it. The bushkultie isn't happy if too few US soldiers are killed ... He imagines that travesty didn't start more slowly than this one. 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode