Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (16391)	11/16/2003 2:37:01 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793824

-- is that the basis on which you're saying it's "misleading"? As even Reuters points out, we went from almost zero troops in '61 to 17,000 in '64. And we were still in an "advisory" position even then, with no real combat units there until the last part of the last year. Compare that with the number of troops we have had in Iraq, with which we defeated Saddams Army and are still fighting the remnants. That is what is "misleading." The left's position on Iraq is based on their Vietnam experience. That is why these type of comparisons are served up. And swallowed by those who want to believe them.

To: E who wrote (16391)	11/16/2003 3:23:57 PM
From: MSI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793824

Do you happen to know whether the US military is making any estimates of civilian casualties to date in Iraq? The official position as stated by Rumsfeld last week on Face the Nation is "we don't keep track of enemy killed", referring to a question about how many were killed in Iraq. This clearly includes both civilians and soldiers, since no such statistics are given in news reports after questions were asked. Reporters have now stopped asking questions they know won't be answered. It is like the recent questions of McClellan on why the White House interfered in the suit award to POWs who had been totured, millions from Iraq frozen funds. The WH decided that money would be better used by the WH than the POWs. McClellan robotically repeated six times, "no amount of money can compensate" for the victims experiences, rather than explaining what would be done with the money instead. Eventually reporters in the WH corps drink the cool-aid and just give up.