Senate majority leader: Iraq war is LOST

[Toad]

Originally posted by Viking
As long as your argument is about your opponents person or character it is an ad hominem attack …

[/b]

Again, review the thread. I didn't say anything about Vietnam being a "bloodbath" one way or the other.

Thus, I wasn't not arguing with you.

Later, I merely made some observations about you, much in the same way as saying jackrabbits have long ears. This apparently has caused some emotional trauma, or so it would appear.

So you’re saying it wasn’t a bloodbath and thus proving me right? Or are you saying it was a bloodbath and thus proving your last post a lie?

I have never taken a position on it; I merely attempted to see if either Aqua or you had the faintest clue about what you were discussing with others. It appears to me from what you have written that you did not.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Toad
Again, review the thread. I didn't say anything about Vietnam being a "bloodbath" one way or the other.

Thus, I wasn't not arguing with you.
 

Really?

Originally posted by Toad
Aqua, how many would it take for you to call the post NV victory a "big bloodbath" then?

Originally posted by Toad
The basic question is really do you have any idea how many South Vietnamese died in the aftermath of the North Vietnamese victory? That would include those sent to re-education camps and those sent to forced labor camps that died as a result of NV action/inaction.

So far, you've shown no indication that you've researched it at all. Rather, you just deny it was a bloodbath without attempting to define the term.

Originally posted by Toad
It is indeed clear that you haven't done any research. "Tens of thousands" is incorrect. The best research I can find would raise that into the hundreds of thousands range.

This does not count the dead at sea category of the boat people, which is significantly larger than both camp figures combined. I'm sure you'll say the NV did not kill these people, they chose to flee and died because of that decision. Of course...they were fleeing the labor and re-ed camps but that doesn't count, I'm sure.

But that's certainly not enough to merit calling it a slaughter or bloodbath is it?

Originally posted by Toad
Vietnam Democide

Most detailed study I've seen so far. Interesting reading; numbers are on table 6.1B, line 671-687.

By the way, nice semantic dodge there. Just what would you call the killing of a few hundred thousand people after hostilities were over?

Originally posted by Toad
I guess you would then call the Holocaust "the killing of a few million people", right?

Clearly you were arguing against me not calling it a bloodbath.

Originally posted by Toad
Later, I merely made some observations about you, much in the same way as saying jackrabbits have long ears. This apparently has caused some emotional trauma, or so it would appear.

Making an observation about a person is a personal attack if said observation is of a negative nature. It is impolite and against the forum rules. That you have sunk to that level is disappointing, but not unexpected.

Originally posted by Toad
I have never taken a position on it; I merely attempted to see if either Aqua or you had the faintest clue about what you were discussing with others. It appears to me from what you have written that you did not.

Actually it seems we did know what we were talking about, unlike you. You demanded that I define what a “bloodbath” is (while not offering your own definition of course). I posted my definition of “bloodbath” and also the definitions from several online dictionaries.

Then you demanded I express how many I thought died at the hands of the NVA in the aftermath of the war. I told you “tens of thousands”. You argued I was wrong and posted a link to “the most detailed study” you had seen yet. Of course that study supported my “tens of thousands” argument. Had you bothered to read the study properly you might have saved yourself this embarrassing defeat.

Just to nail your coffin shut I compared your “most detailed study” to statistics on deaths in US state prisons, published by your government. Calling the Vietnamese camps “blodbaths” would now reflect most badly on your own prison system, so I correctly predicted you would not pursuit this line of argument.

The only avenue of attack left to you was making personal attacks … despite your pathetic denials that likening me to a propaganda minister and known liar is not an attack on my character.

Originally posted by Dadano
Viking...pwn'd everyone.

Indeed.

[Toad]

LOL! You do read your own press reports, don't you?

Nah, sorry bud.

You and Aqua were nattering on in a semantic debate without having defined the terms. As you can see from the quotes I tried to get you to define your terms and make a call. In context, you never really did.

As for reading the study, it has low, medium and high estimates. Your estimate was in the low range and you admitted you didn't really know at all. Most studies put it in the 160k range which would jibe with the medium range in the study, although there are others out there that go beyond the high estimates in that study. I would say it's in the medium range given all that I've read.

So if I call a skunk a stinking little creature it would be a personal attack? I gotta smile.

You've built your own image here Scholz; YOU were the one that defined yourself with your posts over the years.

Again, "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.”.

[john9001]

Scholz
not sure i follow what you are trying to say, but here are the numbers and causes for deaths in US prisons.

<Nine in Ten Deaths Due to Illness

           WASHINGTON -- The nation's state prison officials reported that 12,129 inmates died while in custody from 2001 through 2004, the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The deaths over this four-year period constituted an annual mortality rate of 250 deaths per 100,000 inmates, which was 19 percent lower than the adult mortality rate in the U.S. general population.

            Overall, 89 percent of all state prisoner deaths were attributed to medical conditions and 8 percent were due to suicide or homicide. The remainder of deaths were due to alcohol/drug intoxication or accidental injury (1 percent each). A definitive cause of death could not be determined for an additional 1 percent. Two-thirds of inmate deaths from medical conditions involved a problem that was present at the time of admission to prison.

            Half of all inmate deaths during this period resulted from heart disease (27 percent) or cancer (23 percent). Liver diseases, including cirrhosis, accounted for 10 percent of deaths, followed by AIDS-related causes (7 percent).

            Among cancer deaths, lung cancer was the most common, accounting for 910 deaths from 2001 through 2004, followed by liver (276), colon (171), pancreatic (124) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (114). Deaths due to gender-specific cancer sites varied. Breast, ovarian, cervical and uterine cancer accounted for 24 percent of female cancer deaths. By comparison, prostate and testicular cancer caused 4 percent of male cancer deaths.

            State prisoner mortality rates increased steadily with age. The mortality rate of inmates age 18-24
was lowest, at 34 deaths per 100,000 inmates. Among inmates age 55 or older, the rate was 1,973 deaths per 100,000 inmates. Inmates age 45 or older represented 14 percent of state prisoners, but 67 percent of the prisoner deaths from 2001 through 2004.

            More than half (59 percent) of inmates age 65 or older who died in state prisons were at least 55 or older when admitted to prison. Only 15 percent of elderly inmates who died were younger than 45 at the time of their admission to prison.

            While the leading causes of death — heart disease, cancer and liver disease — were the same for both male and female inmates in state prisons, the death rate of males was 72 percent higher. The only cause of death with a higher mortality rate for females than males was septicemia (e.g. streptococcal and staphylococcal infections).



it seems to be saying that the death rates in prison are lower than in the general population, and 9 of 10 deaths are due to illness.

where is the "blood bath"?

[Viking]

Originally posted by Toad
You and Aqua were nattering on in a semantic debate without having defined the terms. As you can see from the quotes I tried to get you to define your terms and make a call. In context, you never really did.

Yes I’m afraid I did …

Originally posted by Viking
You are correct that I have done no serious study of the aftermath of the South-Vietnamese defeat, but I believe the deaths, including those from long-term incarceration (camps), were in the tens of thousands range. While slow lingering deaths in a prison camp over a number of years is worse than a summary execution, they do not constitute a “bloodbath” in my opinion.

I have found a couple of dictionary definitions of “bloodbath” and they seem to agree with my point of view:








From what I have read, and even what you’ve told me, the “purging” done in South-Vietnam after the war was not ”indiscriminate”, nor did it involve much ”bloodshed”. It was more of a cold, calculated and orderly “process”. At least that’s my impression of the events.

… you on the other hand never gave us your definition of “bloodbath”. So why don’t you?

Originally posted by Toad
As for reading the study, it has low, medium and high estimates. Your estimate was in the low range and you admitted you didn't really know at all. Most studies put it in the 160k range which would jibe with the medium range in the study, although there are others out there that go beyond the high estimates in that study. I would say it's in the medium range given all that I've read.

160,000 is not a multiple of 100,000 and thus not in the “hundredS of thousands” range. 200,000 and more is in the hundreds of thousands range.

Again your lack of understanding your own language has led you astray.

Originally posted by Toad
So if I call a skunk a stinking little creature it would be a personal attack? I gotta smile.

Ah, now you bring irrelevancies to the debate. Obviously a skunk cannot understand your insults, but if you were to call a short man with bad body odor a “stinking little creature” then yes that would be a most insulting personal attack.

[Viking]

Originally posted by john9001
it seems to be saying that the death rates in prison are lower than in the general population, and 9 of 10 deaths are due to illness.

where is the "blood bath"?

I’m not calling it a bloodbath. It’s NOT a bloodbath, and that’s my point. Toad would have called it a bloodbath if he had the guts to take a stand on the issue.

[john9001]

Originally posted by Viking
I’m not calling it a bloodbath. It’s NOT a bloodbath, and that’s my point. Toad would have called it a bloodbath if he had the guts to take a stand on the issue.

nono, you said more people died in US prisons than when the north viet took over the south, or did you, your ramblings are hard to follow sometimes.

[Viking]

Originally posted by john9001
nono, you said more people died in US prisons than when the north viet took over the south, or did you, your ramblings are hard to follow sometimes.

My posts are quite easy to read if you’ve passed elementary English. I said the unnatural death rate was lower in Vietnamese “reeducation camps” and labor camps than in US State prisons. The highest number Toad could offer was 7.5% for the Vietnamese camps. The US Bureau of Justice gives an 8% or 9% number for US State prisons. Your numbers give a 1 out of 10 or 10% number for US prisons.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Viking
Toad would have called it a bloodbath if he had the guts to take a stand on the issue.

Toad wasn't interested in the debate other than to see if you even knew what you were talking about and clearly you did not.

T'was just more typical Scholz from the olden days. As is your comparison of US prisons to NV re-ed and forced labor camps. A pretty red herring there and an example of why you are simply not worth the candle.

As for your short stinking little man allegory, if it were true, it wasn't an insult; it was just the truth. The insult is in his personal hygiene and the insult is to others.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Toad
Toad wasn't interested in the debate other than to see if you even knew what you were talking about and clearly you did not.

Clearly I did know what I was talking about. Clearly you did not. The unnatural deaths were in the tens of thousands range, not hundreds of thousands you claimed. Clearly it was not indiscriminate and did not involve much bloodshed and thus was not a bloodbath by any commonly accepted definition.

What is your definition of “bloodbath” Toad … or are you really such a hypocrite that you won’t answer?

Originally posted by Toad
T'was just more typical Scholz from the olden days. As is your comparison of US prisons to NV re-ed and forced labor camps.

It is not my fault that US prisons compares unfavorably to Vietnamese prison camps. Nor is it my fault that you are incapable of backing up your arguments with documentation. The only documentation you’ve presented supported my arguments.

Originally posted by Toad
As for your short stinking little man allegory, if it were true, it wasn't an insult; it was just the truth. The insult is in his personal hygiene and the insult is to others.

You don’t have to lie to make an insult. You really do have a problem with definitions don’t you Mr. Toad.

[Yeager]

US prisons compares unfavorably to Vietnamese prison camps
====
By this statement you are insinuating that there is real torture, like that experienced at the Hanoi Hilton, occurring in Gitmo?

What the heck are you talking about?

[john9001]

the 7.5% is a assumed number because no one except the NV have the real numbers or if they even bothered to keep count, but at that assumed rate it is still over 200,000 dead by unnatural means, now we must wonder how many died by a "natural bullet" to the back of the head or being worked to death, starved, etc.

total passed through the re-ed camps estimated at 2,500,000.

this says nothing of the "boat people" that died or other refuges that died trying to escape.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Yeager
US prisons compares unfavorably to Vietnamese prison camps
====
By this statement you are insinuating that there is real torture, like that experienced at the Hanoi Hilton, occurring in Gitmo?

What the heck are you talking about?

No. I’m not talking about “Gitmo” or “Hanoi Hilton” at all. Where did you get that?

[Viking]

Originally posted by john9001
the 7.5% is a assumed number because no one except the NV have the real numbers or if they even bothered to keep count, but at that assumed rate it is still over 200,000 dead by unnatural means, now we must wonder how many died by a "natural bullet" to the back of the head or being worked to death, starved, etc.

total passed through the re-ed camps estimated at 2,500,000.

Then why is the assumed number so low? If that report truly represents the most detailed report Toad has seen surely the people making it knows what they are talking about.

Originally posted by john9001
this says nothing of the "boat people" that died or other refuges that died trying to escape.

The boat people have already been discussed. Feel free to review the thread.

[john9001]

so your saying 200,000 killed is not a blood bath?