Why Arabs Need Their Foreign Mercenaries

[tanlixiang28776]

SK - 138 K
US - 36.5K
rest - 5 k
---------------
NK - 215 K
China - 183 K official, 400 K western estimates
USSR - 0.3 K

Source please. And please not from that SK site filled with drivel. And not wikipedia because the SK site is the source.

I provided links to official MOD sites, you have nothing but some memorial.

The memorial used official statistics from the US government.

 

[gambit]

You're right that Americans didn't intentionally use their allies as a buffer but that was how it turned out anyway. Weakest links were attacked first. And sometimes they did it voluntarily like the Turkish brigade which was decimated to protect a retreating US force.

Good...Then we can say that you are doing what is expected of intellectually dishonest folks: creative interpretation. Say that Luxembourg sent 10 men, two men died in combat, two died from violent but non-combat deaths, the rest wounded in assorted ways, now you are going to argue that Luxembourg had a %100 casualty rates, therefore it is 'evident' of American neglect of their allies without bothering about the details.

Why would you use wikipedia as a source? I figured you would at least get better sources than that

Of course I could but there is no need to. Keyword search for 'korean war combat deaths' will do just as well.

The Korean War memorial literally set the statistics in stone. No fire here.

That does not mean it is correct. Monuments are never meant to be data repositories.

And seriously stop with the Chinese boys crap. Its disturbing.

It is appropriate. I see a bunch of conscript rejects talking smack about stuff beyond their ken.

 

[500]

Source please. And please not from that SK site filled with drivel. And not wikipedia because the SK site is the source.

My sources are from official gov sites:

Defense.gov News Article: Korean War Death Stats Highlight Modern DoD Safety Record
´ëÇѹα¹ ±¹¹æºÎ À¯Çع߱¼ °¨½Ä´Ü
Korean war

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Good...Then we can say that you are doing what is expected of intellectually dishonest folks: creative interpretation. Say that Luxembourg sent 10 men, two men died in combat, two died from violent but non-combat deaths, the rest wounded in assorted ways, now you are going to argue that Luxembourg had a %100 casualty rates, therefore it is 'evident' of American neglect of their allies without bothering about the details.

Look I only care about the results. What the intention was has little to do with that.

Of course I could but there is no need to. Keyword search for 'korean war combat deaths' will do just as well.

I did and none of those are accurate because 80% of the data was destroyed in a fire.

That does not mean it is correct. Monuments are never meant to be data repositories.

The statistics on the Monument have to come from somewhere. It is a national monument and there would be outrage if the information was falsely provided by the US government.

It is also the only source that has not been tampered with since it was made.

It is appropriate. I see a bunch of conscript rejects talking smack about stuff beyond their ken.

And I'm talking to a old aircraft technician that has little knowledge of Korea as well.

 

[CardSharp]

Let it go, the reality on the ground is not going to change because one side or the other wins an argument.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Let it go, the reality on the ground is not going to change because one side or the other wins an argument.

LOL fine but its just funny how they cherry pick their information from multiple sources to suit their needs.

Hmmmm Chinese KIA estimates from US sources is very high I'll pick that

Crap it also officially lists the UN KIA as also very high. Guess I'll just pick it from a SK source, and British source. They are the largest part of the UN besides US. Obviously no bias here.

Chinese sources are propaganda. Even when they have practically matching data with the US on the POWs and casualties.

At least I only use American sources.

 

[below_freezing]

LOL fine but its just funny how they cherry pick their information from multiple sources to suit their needs.

Hmmmm Chinese KIA estimates from US sources is very high I'll pick that

Crap it also officially lists the UN KIA as also very high. Guess I'll just pick it from a SK source, and British source. They are the largest part of the UN besides US. Obviously no bias here.

Chinese sources are propaganda. Even when they have practically matching data with the US on the POWs and casualties.

At least I only use American sources.

Some of the US soldiers are just padding the US's record with "victories" against countries like Iraq and Libya (which I'm not sure will actually lose). It's part of their loser slave mentality. After being humiliated in Korea then humiliated again in Vietnam, they took it out on Grenada and Nicaragua. Uncontent, since everyone knows Grenada and Nicaragua are loser countries, they take more anger out on Iraq!

just like street thugs that got beat up by a rival gang so they take it out on school children.

If the US cares so much about human rights, do they dare put a no fly zone over Chechnya?

At least the US statistics office keeps their lies sort of consistent!

 

[Cyrus the Great]

In Korea China suffered about 10 times more casualties than US. Similar rate of casualties Arabs had during Six Dar war. During Iran-Iraq war Iranians suffered about 3 times more casualties than Iraq.

I do not know about the N. Korea and six days war.
if you go to number of destroyed war plan and navy or P.W you will now Iraq suffered more than Iran. just an evidence Iran destroyed Iraq whole navy force 95 days after war.

 

[gambit]

Look I only care about the results. What the intention was has little to do with that.

Of course you care only for results. Intellectually dishonest people usually care only for results. They do not care for the crucial details that usually shed new understandings or support the current ones for a historical event.

The statistics on the Monument have to come from somewhere. It is a national monument and there would be outrage if the information was falsely provided by the US government.

But what if that source is in error? When you have to latch onto a figure etched in a monument that tells me you lack critical thinking skills and is lazy. There are no shortages of reliable sources on how many US combat deaths in the Korean War...

Korean War Educator: Korean War Casualty Information

According to recent Department of Defense statistics, a total of 36,576 Americans died while serving in the Korean War. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of misinformation about the casualty figures for the Korean War. This is caused by the fact that casualty statistics recorded by the US government for that time period are generally of a global nature. One frequently sees the casualty figures for the war at 54,246. That is because the statistics also include 17,670 deaths that occurred outside of the Korean theater of battle. (For example, a person killed in an accident in Germany while the war was going on in Korea is considered by the government to be a "Korean War casualty.")

If the lower figure is new to you, that mean you have not done 'due diligence' before spouting off. This lower figure has been publicly available for decades and pored over by historians many times over.

It is also the only source that has not been tampered with since it was made.

Right...So a monument that has an incorrect figure but because the figure is literally etched in stone and unalterable, that mean the incorrect figure is historically accurate.

And I'm talking to a old aircraft technician that has little knowledge of Korea as well.

And what make you think your scant knowledge of military affairs superior to mine? You Chinese boys are the ones with a history of being frauds, making up stuff as you go along and lying about what you know.

Here are a few recent examples of your group that got busted as liars and frauds...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...s-way-local-supercomputers-2.html#post1561393

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...s-telling-mideast-protests-3.html#post1524778

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...bound-but-people-friendly-27.html#post1598069