Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I'll read this as an admission that any mention of Rove and Cheney makes Republicans look bad.> Well, that's no surprise. You usually misinterpt things.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Gee, didn't doug say just the other day how the USGS was ordered to put out some report by Al Gore when he was VP?> No. I simply said it was a possibility. But don't let the truth stop you.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Well, that's no surprise. You usually misinterpt things." Ooo! Do you realize you're getting off more and more cheap shots lately?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Gee, didn't doug say just the other day how the USGS was ordered to put out some report by Al Gore when he was VP?>> <No. I simply said it was a possibility.> This is like an episode from a bad courtroom show: Slimy Defense Lawyer: You'd like us to believe, Mr. Jones, that you saw my client shoot the victim in cold blood. But isn't it true that YOU, Mr. Jones, are in fact a child molester who eats puppies? D.A.: What?! Objection! Judge: Sustained. Slimy Defense Lawyer (with imperious wave of the hand): Withdrawn...
Originally Posted By jonvn "See the other thread where I mention bunker mentality." Pretty much. In one thread, in discussing the numbers killed in Vietnam, he insisted it was a certain way, I produced numbers that showed him wrong, and he still insisted he was correct, even though it did not mathematically work out. I suppose we'll get some nonsense about how things need to be added appropriately or some such. It's a joke. If someone refuses to do even simple addition, how is an individual expected to be able to make any sort of logical conclusions regarding data.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I produced numbers that showed him wrong, and he still insisted he was correct, even though it did not mathematically work out.> You really don't understand much of what you read, do you? The numbers you cited specifically said they included the millions killed in Cambodia, after we withdrew.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger Well, that's it for me, then. I'll eat at some other restaurant.
Originally Posted By jonvn "The numbers you cited specifically said they included the millions killed in Cambodia, after we withdrew." No, you are flat out lying again. Let me to repost what I actually said to show what a liar you are. What I posted said nothing of the kind. You do nothing but lie. Here is what I posted: "Read the Hitchens article." The Hitchens article does not explain how "or not" contains any facts whatsoever. It can't, because "or not" is not a series of facts. "That number probably includes the number killed by the Khmer Rouge following the war." Well, no. These are the figures: North Vietnamese Army: ~ 600,000 died and ~600,000 WIA South Vietnamese Army: ~ 250,000 KIA/MIA and ~ 1,169,763 WIA Vietnamese civilians (north and south): ~2,000,000 to 4,000,000 USA: 58,193 KIA and other dead 153,303 WIA 1,948 MIA Cambodia: ~700,000 During War ~1,500,000 by Pol Pot (some place as high as 2,000,000) Laos: ~50,000 Killed Aside from that, it really doesn't matter that SE asians killed other SE asians. They were killed in a war we entered, prolonged for no reason, and left. Within 2 years, it ended being exactly where it would have been if we didn't go into the place originally, minus about four or 5 million people.
Originally Posted By jonvn The original numbers I stated were that between 2 and 6 million people (from a separate site) were killed in the vietnamese war. If you do some simple addition, that can not possible add up to what you are saying. For what you are saying to be true, the value would have to be 1.5 million higher at least.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <No, you are flat out lying again. Let me to repost what I actually said to show what a liar you are.> All you are showing is that you spout off without understanding what you are talking about. It's right there: "Cambodia: ~700,000 During War ~1,500,000 by Pol Pot (some place as high as 2,000,000)" As I said, 1.5 to 2 million people were killed by the Khmer Rouge, after we withdrew. <Aside from that, it really doesn't matter that SE asians killed other SE asians.> It matters, if someone tries to imply that we killed the majority of people in SE Asia. We didn't.
Originally Posted By jonvn I'm thrilled you said what happened with the khmer rouge. That, of course, has nothing to do with what I said, which was that the vietnamese war had 2 to 6 million killed. After the war, another set of people were kiled by pol pot. That's not during the war. So if you wish to continue lying about whatever was said, fine. But the numbers are actually right there, and you are lying about what was originally said, and you are lying now in trying to cover up.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <After the war, another set of people were kiled by pol pot. That's not during the war.> The numbers you posted included the number killed by Pol Pot. I'm not sure what you are accusing me of lying about. In post 130 of the "Good News in Iraq?" thread, you said, "On top of the 2 million we had already killed? The TWO MILLION? Ok." Again, I don't believe we killed two million, and yes, the numbers killed by Pol Pot were on top of that. I'm not the one lying here.
Originally Posted By jonvn "The numbers you posted included the number killed by Pol Pot." You can't even add numbers. The discussion was about people killed in the vietnam war. I included those numbers because you mentioned them, and that they do not fit within the vietnam war figures that are generally given our of 2 to 6 million. You can't even add.
Originally Posted By jonvn I think what this goes to show when you have black and white fairly concrete numbers, Doug is going to simply go out of his way to lie and distort. The numbers are right there to be seen. I mean, it's ridiculous. Now he's saying "I said this, you said that." I said precisely what I said. In fact, if you even add the numbers at the low end, it comes out higher than 2 million and closer to 3 million. "I don't believe we killed two million" It doesn't matter what YOU believe. You believe in every fairy story the Bush admin puts out. You have absolutely zero credibility.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You can't even add numbers. The discussion was about people killed in the vietnam war.> I can add numbers, and I can read. So I really don't understand why you're blaming me because you posted figures that included the 2 million people who were killed after the vietnam war, just like I said they were. <The numbers are right there to be seen.> And they reflect just what I said. I'm sorry if you can't handle the fact I was right. <It doesn't matter what YOU believe. You believe in every fairy story the Bush admin puts out. You have absolutely zero credibility.> If I had zero credibility, you'd be able to refute me with facts, instead of insults.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I can add numbers, and I can read. " Back to one sentence time with you. You can't even count to 8.
