alzelt wrote:

>
> > Well Alan I asked in this group and asked you directly if you had
> > committed atrocities. Of those who identified themselves as Viet Nam
> > vets in this news group, you did not respond, so I'm assuming you did
> > not commit atrocities. One responded that he saw atrocities. So at
> > least in this group only 50% even saw any atrocities, and none
> > admitted committing any.
> >
> > Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
> > any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
> > So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
> > widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
> > Pan Ohco
>
> Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
> on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
> covered with napalm.

Naw. That was just another case of "friendly fire". She was one of a number
of civilians were a little too close to the action and got hit with a bit of
napalm. My Lai was an atrocity.

alzelt wrote:

>
> > Well Alan I asked in this group and asked you directly if you had
> > committed atrocities. Of those who identified themselves as Viet Nam
> > vets in this news group, you did not respond, so I'm assuming you did
> > not commit atrocities. One responded that he saw atrocities. So at
> > least in this group only 50% even saw any atrocities, and none
> > admitted committing any.
> >
> > Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
> > any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
> > So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
> > widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
> > Pan Ohco
>
> Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
> on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
> covered with napalm.

Naw. That was just another case of "friendly fire". She was one of a number
of civilians were a little too close to the action and got hit with a bit of
napalm. My Lai was an atrocity.

Pan Ohco wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:37:22 GMT, alzelt
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Well Alan I asked in this group and asked you directly if you had
>>>committed atrocities. Of those who identified themselves as Viet Nam
>>>vets in this news group, you did not respond, so I'm assuming you did
>>>not commit atrocities. One responded that he saw atrocities. So at
>>>least in this group only 50% even saw any atrocities, and none
>>>admitted committing any.
>>>
>>>Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
>>>any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
>>>So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
>>>widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
>>>Pan Ohco
>>
>>And you reached this conclusion exactly how?
>
>
> Read the above and apply logic.
> Pan Ohco

I did and I am laughing. Your scientific survey!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Alan

"I don't think you can win the war on terror."

...George (flip-flop) Bush, 8/30/2004

Pan Ohco wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:37:22 GMT, alzelt
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Well Alan I asked in this group and asked you directly if you had
>>>committed atrocities. Of those who identified themselves as Viet Nam
>>>vets in this news group, you did not respond, so I'm assuming you did
>>>not commit atrocities. One responded that he saw atrocities. So at
>>>least in this group only 50% even saw any atrocities, and none
>>>admitted committing any.
>>>
>>>Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
>>>any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
>>>So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
>>>widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
>>>Pan Ohco
>>
>>And you reached this conclusion exactly how?
>
>
> Read the above and apply logic.
> Pan Ohco

I did and I am laughing. Your scientific survey!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Alan

"I don't think you can win the war on terror."

...George (flip-flop) Bush, 8/30/2004

Pan Ohco wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:38:41 GMT, alzelt
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
>>on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
>>covered with napalm.
>
>
> And as horrendous as that was, it is not an atrocity as we are
> speaking of. Atrocity = war crimes.
> Pan Ohco

So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

--
Alan

"I don't think you can win the war on terror."

...George (flip-flop) Bush, 8/30/2004

Pan Ohco wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:38:41 GMT, alzelt
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
>>on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
>>covered with napalm.
>
>
> And as horrendous as that was, it is not an atrocity as we are
> speaking of. Atrocity = war crimes.
> Pan Ohco

So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

--
Alan

"I don't think you can win the war on terror."

...George (flip-flop) Bush, 8/30/2004

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:14:21 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:

>
>
>Pan Ohco wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:38:41 GMT, alzelt
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
>>>on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
>>>covered with napalm.
>>
>>
>> And as horrendous as that was, it is not an atrocity as we are
>> speaking of. Atrocity = war crimes.
>> Pan Ohco
>
>So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
>civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
>Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

i'm not sure when, but it seems the principle of not killing civilians
seems to have gone out of style.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:14:21 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:

>
>
>Pan Ohco wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 02:38:41 GMT, alzelt
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Now that I think of it, I can remember an atrocity. It was even captured
>>>on film. The little Vietnamese girl running down the road, naked and
>>>covered with napalm.
>>
>>
>> And as horrendous as that was, it is not an atrocity as we are
>> speaking of. Atrocity = war crimes.
>> Pan Ohco
>
>So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
>civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
>Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

i'm not sure when, but it seems the principle of not killing civilians
seems to have gone out of style.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:12:49 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:


>>>>Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
>>>>any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
>>>>So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
>>>>widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
>>>>Pan Ohco
>>>
>>>And you reached this conclusion exactly how?
>>
>>
>> Read the above and apply logic.
>> Pan Ohco
>
>I did and I am laughing. Your scientific survey!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said that it was a scientific survey. Just my contention.
Now where did you get your information that atrocities were wide
spread?
Pan Ohco

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:12:49 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:


>>>>Of the vets that I have spoke to in this regard, none have admitted to
>>>>any actions that would have been considered atrocities.
>>>>So yes, I know that there were atrocities, but they were not as
>>>>widespread as was made out to be by the war protesters.
>>>>Pan Ohco
>>>
>>>And you reached this conclusion exactly how?
>>
>>
>> Read the above and apply logic.
>> Pan Ohco
>
>I did and I am laughing. Your scientific survey!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said that it was a scientific survey. Just my contention.
Now where did you get your information that atrocities were wide
spread?
Pan Ohco

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:14:21 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:


>
>So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
>civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
>Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

In all wars civilians are killed. Not intentionally. In all wars
military people are killed by friendly fire. All accidentally.
Pan Ohco

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:14:21 GMT, alzelt
> wrote:


>
>So, let's see if I get this right. Go to 10,000 feet, drop napalm on
>civilians and you don't call it an atrocity? Now I know why the
>Canadians we killed in Afghanistan got off. Some thought process you have.

In all wars civilians are killed. Not intentionally. In all wars
military people are killed by friendly fire. All accidentally.
Pan Ohco