stuwii Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 7.9 but not many deadhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6948888.stm
Sparko Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 You seem almost disappointed that the death toll isn't higher Don't you think nearly 500 people is a lot?
Ant-Shimmin Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 You seem almost disappointed that the death toll isn't higher Don't you think nearly 500 people is a lot? Taking in the magnitude of the Earth Quake in a more dense populated area he has a poiint it could of been more.... And your are pretty much taking his words in the context of which he didn't mean it to be which is pretty un-fair 500 Compared to other Earthquakes we have seen and heard of over time is a relativly small death toll...
Slaggis Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Taking in the magnitude of the Earth Quake in a more dense populated area he has a poiint it could of been more.... And your are pretty much taking his words in the context of which he didn't mean it to be which is pretty un-fair 500 Compared to other Earthquakes we have seen and heard of over time is a relativly small death toll... Why compare it to others? 500 people are dead, thats alot of people. Pretty bad.
conzer16 Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 %00 dead is horrific. About 1500 injured as well. Awful. Just awful.
Ant-Shimmin Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Why compare it to others? 500 people are dead, thats alot of people. Pretty bad. I Know It is, I am not denying that Still think his words have been taken in the wrong light
stuwii Posted August 17, 2007 Author Posted August 17, 2007 considering 3000,000 died in the asian tsunami
Recommended Posts