The level of violence in both Iraq and Afghanistan is now so low it hardly registers, much less than Northern Ireland in the mid-1970's

Of course it is possible to choose particular periods and claim some sort of comparison. But let's scotch this myth before it starts.

The current level of US (NB US only) deaths in Iraq is just below 4,000.

http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx

That chart shows the deaths month by month - they have not been especially high but not "so low it hardly registers" as Teribus claims. The deaths are close in numbers to those at the start of the conflict - see chart.

There were 14 military deaths in Afghanistan in January. (7 US, 7 others).

Current documented civilian deaths (almost certainly an underestimate) are over 80,000 in Iraq and they are going down - but NOT "so low it hardly registers".

The Northern Ireland conflict between 1969 and peace had a TOTAL of 3523. Soldiers and civilians.

Not a good comparison I would suggest.

I happen to think using a Downs syndrome woman as a suicide bomber is a despicable act of cowardice.

I happen to think using napalm on a civilian population is also a despicable act of cowardice. Lying about it makes it worse.

"Defense Minister, Adam Ingram, admitted that the US had misled the British high-command about the use of napalm, but he would not comment on the extent of the cover up. The use of firebombs puts the US in breach of the 1980 Convention on Certain Chemical Weapons (CCW) and is a violation the Geneva Protocol against the use of white phosphorous, "since its use causes indiscriminate and extreme injuries especially when deployed in an urban area."

I reckon both sides are as bad as one another. Let's condemn them both eh?