LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 117
0 members and 117 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12-07-2006, 07:54 PM   #11
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 20,182
More Hot Air

Quote:
Originally posted by ltl/fb
Has anyone looked at the number of severely maimed people (who would almost certainly have died if they had sustained such injuries in Vietnam/WWII etc.)?

I don't really see any parallels to our involvement in WWII in this. We are an invading country, not a defending country, and there was no war in Iraq before we opted to invade. By the time we entered WWII, a bunch of countries had been taken over/were in the process of being taken over and there was full mobilization of a significant number of peer countries (developed world), if not nearly all of them.

I'm really curious how the death counts would compare if we had the same kind of medical care now that we had when we were in Vietnam.
This shows a lot, but not severity of wounds.

I agree that it's not comparable. Also, I think we were ready to take more risks and sacrifice more people in World War II - which has a lot to do with what tactics the army is willing to take.
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:32 AM.