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.