Iraq Pullout

The first was a lighthearted question and a bit of a piss take (to coin the English term) but a question to be answered.

The latter point you make shows only that we had fewer men in vietnam "at this point" in comparative terms than we do in Iraq. That point does not detract from the falsehood of your claim nor the substantiation of my counter claim that over the course of an approximately 12-13 year military engagement in Vietnam we lost upwards of 58,000 men. With the bulk of those losses arriving at the latter stage of our engagement one can easily see that current figures in Iraq far outweigh those losses suffered in Vietnam (all the more so if this war continus for as long as that conflict did).

 

You didn't coin the term, you borrowed the expression.

Coining means coming up with something original, a skill you lack.

 

Ahhh once again the grammar nazi grasps for whatever he can find to make a snide retort.

You truly must revel in being a contrarian.

 

Why the sad face, Lick? It was just a "lighthearted" remark. You know, like your "lighthearted" remark about whether Jozak's family ever served in Vietnam?

 

No long face, certainly none caused by your routine insubstantial blather. As for lighthearted, well given the number of times you resort to little more than word correction to score your much needed debate point (evidence of a debate clown if ever there was one), id say its far from lighthearted in your case.