Phibes, you got some 'splainin' to do...

[Mister Bushice]

well at least we saved some money after the fact.

two years to reconstitute with little or no opposition towards doing so is meaningless. The end result was millions of people dying under their rule just the same.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Oh come on. More people died under post vietnam communist rule than they did during the war itself. The NVA was hardly "wrecked"

Complete rubbish. Did it hurt pulling that out of your ass?

And since when did the Pentagon start taking orders from the media.

Utter garbage.

[Mister Bushice]

Sorry to burst your commie bubble Marty:

n the viet war:

South Vietnamese dead: 230,000
US dead: 58,191
Australian Dead: 500
South Korean dead: 5,000
Civilian (total Vietnamese) Dead: 1,100,000
Chinese dead: 1100

Post war saw nearly 2 million people alone killed by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia from '75 to '79, and another 250,000 boat people killed by the communist vietnamese government, not to mention the 250,000 or so additional boat people who died while fleeing the new communist regime.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Post war saw nearly 2 million people alone killed by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia from '75 to '79...

Hey moron, it was the Communist Vietnamese Army that bust into Cambodia to put an end to Pol Pot's insanity, when nobody else did a damn thing.
Your own government sought to censure the Vietnamese for possibly the greatest humanitarian military intervention of the second half of the twentieth century.

You are as utterly fucking clueless as the rest of your countrymen.
Fuck.
Did they replace your history books with Archie comics? Jesus, you people are thick.

Oh BTW, when the Vietnamese finished packing Pol Pot's shit in, they left.
Sorry I can't say the same for you dopes in Iraq.

"A war that will not end in our lifetime" ain't just catchy jingo verbiage.

[Mister Bushice]

The Khmer Rouge a communist organization, were in power for 4 years in Cambodia as a direct result of the US leaving Vietnam, and were allies of the viet cong prior to that time. They were taken out because the vietnamese government was tired of the border disputes and the endless flow of refugees they couldn't take care of, as well as to stop the ethnic cleansing going on.

and Vietnam occupied a good part of Cambodia for 10 years, and that occupation was fought by more than just the khmer rouge.

It wasn't all humanitarian by far, and all involved in the post war killings were communists.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Well, at least that was a little more nuanced than your previous ramblings.

[Mister Bushice]

Yet, bottom line is that more people were killed over there following the vietnam war than were killed in it.

All by your buddies, the communists.

[Dr_Phibes]

Yet, bottom line is that more people were killed over there following the vietnam war than were killed in it.

All by your buddies, the communists.

Please use credible sources. And if you are going to use Wikipedia, why did you leave out these numbers?:

South Korean dead: 5,000
South Korean wounded: 11,000
Civilian (total Vietnamese): c. 2–4 million
Wounded: 600,000
Chinese wounded: 4200

The only way you can make your point is by lying. 2-4 million are quite a few people.

And Khmer Rouge came to power as a result of US bombing. Before: 5,000 members, after: 75,000.
When the killing fields took place, Pol Pot was not in charge, Khmer Rouge was no monolithic force - there were three distinct seperate factions that resulted in a gang fight.
And 300,000 people died in the killing fields, not 4 million. As a result of every square inch of arable land being destroyed by the US the entire rural population flooded into the cities for food - they were going to starve regardless.

Also, why during the Vietnamese invasion did the US give Pol Pot 80 million dollars and why was he portrayed as a heroic figure on the cover of Newsweek magazine?

You're full of shit about boat people aswell, please get your facts straight before posting.

[RadioFan]

You're full of shit

Cooking kettle in the pot tonight, I see. Good gob. Eat hearty.

[Mister Bushice]

Yet, bottom line is that more people were killed over there following the vietnam war than were killed in it.

All by your buddies, the communists.

Please use credible sources. And if you are going to use Wikipedia, why did you leave out these numbers?:

South Korean dead: 5,000
South Korean wounded: 11,000
Civilian (total Vietnamese): c. 2–4 million
Wounded: 600,000
Chinese wounded: 4200

#1 wounded aren't dead.

#2. Civilian what dead. wounded missing? c. means what exactly?

The only way you can make your point is by lying.

That coming from the fake communist

And Khmer Rouge came to power as a result of US bombing. Before: 5,000 members, after: 75,000.

They came to power after we left.

And 300,000 people died in the killing fields, not 4 million.

I didn't say 4 million I said nearly two.


From your wikipedia:

Estimates of the number of dead range from 1.5 to 3 million out of a population of nearly 8 million people.

From a BBC article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2634307.stm

An estimated 1.7 million people died under the Khmer Rouge's ultra-Maoist rule - from torture, execution, starvation and disease.

As a result of every square inch of arable land being destroyed by the US the entire rural population flooded into the cities for food - they were going to starve regardless.

So why not force them to work 12 hour days and not feed them then, eh?

Also, why during the Vietnamese invasion did the US give Pol Pot 80 million dollars and why was he portrayed as a heroic figure on the cover of Newsweek magazine?

After Pot was removed from power the US used him to try and get Vietnam out of power in Cambodia. Not any different than what we've done with saddam and bin laden.

And I'd like to see a link to that newsweek edition.
[/quote]

You're full of shit about boat people aswell, please get your facts straight before posting.

No I'm not. Here's a little data analysis for ya:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP6.HTM

How many of these deaths is the responsibility of the communist Vietnamese, that is, democide? Neither the extremes of "none" or "all" is reasonable. Surely those who were forced to face death at sea, or risked it out of mortal fear of the regime or because their lives and families had been irretrievably ruined by it, should be counted as democide (by analogy consider that if children fled their family in winter because they fear being killed or are brutally abused, and then die of exposure in the snow, the parents could be tried for murder). However, those boat people who left for non-vital reasons, such as for economic reasons, and died at sea should hardly be counted as democide. What the proportion is between the two types of refugees is unknown. I assume that those for which the regime must be held responsible could vary from one-third to two-thirds, most reasonably a half of them. Applying this to the number who fled yields a likely Vietnam democide of 250,000 boat people (line 753).