I was thinking.

[Bustem' Down]

They mentioned a couple more soldiers died last night in Iraq which got me thinking. Are we so removed from Vietnam? I here over and over about the 2000+ death toll over there, but that's over a span of 2 and a half years. Anybody know what the average death toll in Vietnam was for one year? I'm too young, but some of ya'll remember it, why doesn't every one else?

 

[kwillia]

Interesting read... be sure to look at more than just the first chart

 

[Ken King]

Looking at 1966 to 1971 you had;

1966 - 6144
1967 - 11153
1968 - 16589
1969 - 11614
1970 - 6083
1971 - 2357

 

[Bustem' Down]

That's what I thought. I study history all the time, and what we have now pales in comparison to other wars. I think that ultimately, our technology me now generation has ceased to look back on the lessons learned before.

 

[kwillia]

I think if you really want to compare apples to apples, read the fillowing. The graph shows deaths for the Iraq war starting from march 03, the begining of the comrehensive military assult on Iraq. The graph for Vietnam starts from Dec ‘61 When troops in south vietnam were advisors to the south. They operated mainly with the South Vietnmese troops, teaching combat to the South Vietnamese army. The first notable combat of the war wasn’t until early ‘64 when Five hundred Viet Cong troops cross the border and seize three strategichamlets. They are forced to withdraw after a 14 hour gun fight with South Vietnmase troops. From wat I can find, the US didn’t start active combat within enemy territory until after Aug ‘64. The first air attack in North Vietnam was Aug 6 ‘64, in response to an attack on the U.S.S. Maddox. Aug 7 ‘64 The United States Senate approves the Tonkin Gulf Resolution authorizingthe President to “take all necessary measures” to repel attacksagainst US forces and to “prevent further aggression” in the area. The first major assault on the north was Operation Rolling Thunder in March of ‘65. This date, IMHO, would be a better date to start the comparison with since it is most similar the the Mar ‘03 event. Before that time we were not actively engaged in combat in enemy territory.

Quoted from post in link I provided above.

 

[dustin]

They mentioned a couple more soldiers died last night in Iraq which got me thinking. Are we so removed from Vietnam? I here over and over about the 2000+ death toll over there, but that's over a span of 2 and a half years. Anybody know what the average death toll in Vietnam was for one year? I'm too young, but some of ya'll remember it, why doesn't every one else?

That 2000+ number is what the news media wants us to hear ALL the time.

 

[SamSpade]

They mentioned a couple more soldiers died last night in Iraq which got me thinking. Are we so removed from Vietnam? I here over and over about the 2000+ death toll over there, but that's over a span of 2 and a half years. Anybody know what the average death toll in Vietnam was for one year? I'm too young, but some of ya'll remember it, why doesn't every one else?

As wars go - this one's safer than driving on our roads. From what I understand, almost all of the deaths occur within a small area near Baghdad. The entire rest of the country might as well be Southern Maryland - well, with Iraqis and sand.

I think - for some reason I can't fathom - people don't seem to remember that we're actually *at war*, and while ALWAYS tragic, death is a reality of war. It's the main reason why we don't do it all the time. You know, if you go to war, it's kind of stupid to argue "omigod - men are *dying* - we should LEAVE". Well, that's the reason war isn't so wonderful to begin with - it always costs lives. Who in their right mind thinks you go to war and not lose men?

Recently a Japanese minister mentioned publicly that the United States would absolutely lose a confrontation with China, over, say, Taiwan - because all the Chinese would have to do is kill about 2,000 Americans, and they'd all go home. Is anyone sickened by the fact - that he might be *right*? If that's all it would take, they might as well invade THIS country right now - because I think we're all turning *French* or something? (Question: How long does it take to hold Paris against a foreign invader? Answer: No one knows -- it's never been DONE).

 

[SamSpade]

That's what I thought. I study history all the time, and what we have now pales in comparison to other wars. I think that ultimately, our technology me now generation has ceased to look back on the lessons learned before.

Don't you know? "If it happened before I was born, it doesn't matter".

I'm amazed - occasionally - by the astonishing ignorance of kids today. I've grown weary of explaining things like "well the last time Gore ran for the White House - what? Back in '88. So? So it was before you were born. Anyway, he voted against the first War in Iraq. Yes. BECAUSE HE WAS A SENATOR. He claimed he would vote either way depending on TV coverage. No, but he DID go to St. Albans. It's another private school. Hardly. He barely ever lived near Tennessee. Because his dad was also a Senator. Jeez. What DO they teach you guys? I just know this from reading the *paper*".

Drives me crazy. To them, Vietnam is ancient history.

 

[2ndAmendment]

As wars go - this one's safer than driving on our roads. From what I understand, almost all of the deaths occur within a small area near Baghdad. The entire rest of the country might as well be Southern Maryland - well, with Iraqis and sand.

I think - for some reason I can't fathom - people don't seem to remember that we're actually *at war*, and while ALWAYS tragic, death is a reality of war. It's the main reason why we don't do it all the time. You know, if you go to war, it's kind of stupid to argue "omigod - men are *dying* - we should LEAVE". Well, that's the reason war isn't so wonderful to begin with - it always costs lives. Who in their right mind thinks you go to war and not lose men?

Recently a Japanese minister mentioned publicly that the United States would absolutely lose a confrontation with China, over, say, Taiwan - because all the Chinese would have to do is kill about 2,000 Americans, and they'd all go home. Is anyone sickened by the fact - that he might be *right*?

If that's all it would take, they might as well invade THIS country right now - because I think we're all turning *French* or something? (Question: How long does it take to hold Paris against a foreign invader? Answer: No one knows -- it's never been DONE).