Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site talcott.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!gjk
From: gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg Kuperberg)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Huh? (GRENADA)
Message-ID: <325@talcott.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EST
Article-I.D.: talcott.325
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Sat, 9-Mar-85 19:02:27 EST
References: <643@decwrl.UUCP> <541@fisher.UUCP> <5040@fortune.UUCP> <548@fisher.UUCP> <928@ru-cs44.UUCP> <314@talcott.UUCP> <364@enmasse.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard
Lines: 26

> Our efforts in Nicaraugua are just as bogus and self serving
> as the crap the Russians are pulling in Afghanistan. 
...
> 						Mark Roddy

Perhaps.  But there are big differences that you've overlooked.  I will
list the biggest ones:

1)  There are 100,000 Soviet troops in Afghanistan.  There are no U.S.
troops in Nicaragua.  There are not that many soldiers on all sides put
together in Nicaragua and El Salvador put together.

2)  The Soviets use napalm and attack helicopters.  The contras have no
attack helicopters and wouldn't know napalm if they saw it.

3)  There are no protests, no reports, and no comments about the invasion
of Afghanistan in the Soviet Union.  One very common answer to an opinion
poll I saw was, "Afghanistan?  Are there Soviet troops in Afghanistan?"

4)  The Reagan Administration is four years old, while the invasion of
Afghanistan is five years old.
---
			Greg Kuperberg
		     harvard!talcott!gjk

"2*x^5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.