The boys doing the dying and fighting in Iraq are just as young. Big difference now is you have lots of young chickenhawks and their families who are so divorced from the dying that they don't identify with the youngsters who are fighting and dying.
I thought I'd read somewhere that the first couple of years in Vietnam had similar casualty rates to the first 18 months in Iraq.
You are correct, sir. http://pieterfriedrich.com/blog/entries/00000272.htm "This article says: "A Reuters analysis of Defense Department statistics showed on Thursday that the Vietnam War, which the Army says officially began on Dec. 11, 1961, produced a combined 392 fatal casualties from 1962 through 1964, when American troop levels in Indochina stood at just over 17,000. "By comparison, a roadside bomb attack that killed a soldier in Baghdad on Wednesday [November 12th] brought to 397 the tally of American dead in Iraq, where U.S. forces number about 130,000 troops -- the same number reached in Vietnam by October 1965." (Note that this is total war-related deaths - combat deaths in Iraq number 270 as of the 13th...I don't have the combat death numbers available for Vietnam.) If the similarities continue, then things can only get worse. The article says, "Vietnam casualties, which amounted to 25 deaths from 1956 through 1961, climbed to 53 in 1962, 123 in 1963 and 216 in 1964, Pentagon statistics show...casualties in Vietnam soared to 1,926 in 1965 and peaked at 16,869 in 1968, the year of the Tet Offensive." A closer look at the average casualty statistics for the first three years of the Vietnam War is very revealing...especially when those statistics are compared with average Second Gulf War statistics. For instance, on average the first three years of the Vietnam War claimed the lives of .35 soldiers a day - that is, 392 deaths over about 1095 days. Currently in Iraq the casualty rate stands at an average of 1.8 dead a day - that is, 397 deaths over about 210 days."
Not even close. There were only 401 U.S. military deaths in the first eight years of military involvement in Vietnam, so the casualty rates are much higher in Iraq. Of course, if you begin the count after the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which would probably be more appropriate, U.S. military deaths went from 1,863 in 1965 to 6,144 in 1966 to 11,153 in 1967 to a peak of 16,589 in 1968. Of course, the peak of involvement in Vietnam didn't occur during the first three years, while I doubt you will find many military analysts who believe the peak of action in Iraq is yet to come.
Its not that I dislike Kerry or Bush or support either of them. But I do dislike Michael Moore. I didn't like what he did with Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 uses the same editing techniques to put spin on things. http://fahrenheit_fact.blogspot.com/
Nice find on the "blog" Tenchi... Looked up the book. The Connection : How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America . Interesting. Why would so many witnesses and sources lie? Just to be in a book? Just for Dubya? FACTS can be so hard to take. Too bad Moore doesn't like the FACTS.
Welcome to last year. LOL, most of those "facts" (which apparently, you gleaned from looking at the cover) if I am correct, are Hayes' standard ones, which have been long discredited or otherwise deemed dubious by such left wing icons as the FBI, CIA, Senate Committee, DoD, DIA --- etc. I think I'm done arguing "facts" with you for today; Why do facts hate America?
