 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
 Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 6:27 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mikest wrote: | I have friends and relatives who have fought in every war since WWII. The fact is that every one of them has different views on both Iraq and this admin.
Here is the falacy of your argument. The people in charge of this admin didn't have much, sometimes didn't have any, experiance before starting this war. And maybe the worst is Rumsfeld because he did and still talks about casualties being "fungable." But people like Cheney who had other priorities and Bush who didn't want to blow his eardrum out with a shotgun had no real experiance before this. That is why they believed the "cakewalk" scenerio from another famous person who never fought, Wolfowitz. |
I don't think you meant to say "fungible", which means interchangeable and is sometimes used to refer to personnel in the context of groups of individuals who can easliy be swapped for other groups because of similar skill sets applicable to the current situation. Wouldn't seem like Rumsfeld would use that term in reference to casualties because it wouldn't make sense. Regarding a cakewalk.... casualties, even one casualty, is a tremendous loss on a personal level and for our country. However, put it in context of other wars if you are trying to fairly portray the results of this war in Iraq, which could actually be viewed more in the context of a significant battle in the larger war on terrorism, |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mikest
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You are correct, I misspoke. He said the troops were fungible, not the casualties.
However my comment stands about the cakewalk. The admin told us we would see the Iraqi people throwing flowers at the troops. There have only been two days this month that did not have a casualty, that is pretty far from the flower throwing scenerio we were given. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ROTC DAD
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 147
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hist/student,
If we're going to start this slippery slope of who did what to whom when concerning the arming of terrorists, you need to go farther back than Kosovo. In fact, you have to go back to the Reagan Administration supplying arms to the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. I mean, at that time bin Laden was considered one of our allies, for Christ sake!
As for love of this country - I have supported and will continue to support the Constitution of the United States and shall continue to support the ideals that this great democratic experiment is based on. That does not mean I shall forget how to think and support an administration which does not support either the people of this country or the ideals this country was founded on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikest
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The admin is looking into using the IRS to find inactive reservists in order to call them up.We are also pulling sonething in the neighborhood of 4500 troops from Korea.
Cakewalk? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mikest wrote: | The admin is looking into using the IRS to find inactive reservists in order to call them up.We are also pulling sonething in the neighborhood of 4500 troops from Korea.
Cakewalk? |
Granted, I'm not sure I would call any situation where someone is shooting back a cakewalk, but here's some perspective:
Americans casualties:
Revolutionary War .......... 4,435
War of 1812 .......... 2,260
Mexican War .......... 13,283
Civil War .......... 364,511
Spanish-American War ......... 2,446
In World War I ......... 116,516
In World War II ......... 405,399
Korean War ......... 36,576
Vietnam War ......... 58,200
Persian Gulf War ......... 382 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hist/student
Lieutenant
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
unabashed comprehensive retraction
Last edited by hist/student on Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mikest
PO2
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not a site I spend much time on but one of the first to come up on Google for totals in the first year. Comparing the full Vietnamn war with the first year of Iraq is apples and oranges.. Another point is the fact that we are now pulling in inactive reserves and about 3,600 troops from Korea( I was mistaken earlier when I said 4,500) Even Wolfie said that we had underestimated the insurgents, although he is still blaming Saddam.
| Quote: | The Vietnam War started with a slower death rate. The United States had been involved in Vietnam for six years before total fatalities surpassed 500 in 1965, the year President Lyndon B. Johnson ordered a massive buildup of forces. There were 20,000 troops in Vietnam by the end of 1964. There were more than 200,000 a year later.
By the end of 1966, U.S. combat deaths in Vietnam had reached 3,910. By 1968, the peak of U.S. involvement, there were more than 500,000 troops in the country. During the same two-week period of April that year, 752 U.S. soldiers died, according to a search of records kept by the National Archives. |
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0417-02.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
