American troops dying at rate of over one per day in Iraq

jons911 · Feb 4, 2004

minus said:
Just because the inspectors were pulled out of Iraq 98 doesnt mean we werent watching him like a hawk from our satellites. We were also patrolling the no fly zone which took up most of the country. If those weapons were being manufactured in Iraq between 1998 and 2003 we would have known about it. I think it can also be said that if he had them he wouldve used them. He obviously still has many loyal followers who are still fighting for him as I am writing these words. (this is not to say that they are all Saddam loyalists, some are fighting to be free of US presence in Iraq and others are probably Al-queda who have swarmed the country since the resistance fighting began last summer.)

Right - and we have satellite imagery of buildings that we believe to be nuclear facilities. We have photos of "material" being moved just before inspectors were supposed to be arriving. But satellites were the best we could do.

Dont you think that if these weapons existed that many of the field commanders wouldve know where they are located and how to use them so that they could use these weapons to fight off our troops.

I dont think they would have. It would have immediately turned the entire world againt Iraq and on the side if the US.

Plus, remember... they are buried.

And unaccessible because they are so well hidden.

LOL it's all speculative.

Plus I would have felt much more comfortable if Bush gave the inspectors a fair chance to find the stuff because I was extremely frightened of seeing Saddam use any hidden WMDs on our troops.

I was worried about that too. And I still am. To a degree. Which is why it's so much better to have our people there looking unhindered, you know?

As for Pakistan, if they are not disarming and Bush and Musharaf are upsetting the Pakistani Taliban is it not a likely scenario that these Taliban forces will attempt to overthrow Musharaf?

From what I understand, it's the Pakistani people who are upset about this, and they don't plan on overthrowing the government. There are people who are addressing parliament, etc. But I believe Musharaf is just as in control as he was before

Jacey · Feb 4, 2004

UnhandledException said:
So, I guess you answer is "I don't know"?

So, it could be 100, 1000, 10000 terrorist acts have been prevented?

No, my answer is the lack of terra-ist attacks doesn't mean anything. I don't think they're trying actually. It'd be easy to pull something off on a grand scale, especially if you're not worried about getting out alive. No, I'm not interested in going into specifics.

UnhandledException · Feb 4, 2004

Jacey said:
No, my answer is the lack of terra-ist attacks doesn't mean anything. I don't think they're trying actually.

And why do you suppose that is? **hint** **hint**

Jacey · Feb 4, 2004

UnhandledException said:
And why do you suppose that is? **hint** **hint**

Because they're scared of GW obviously.

To confront terra-ism we needed to stay in Afghanistan.

UnhandledException · Feb 4, 2004

Jacey said:
To confront terra-ism we needed to stay in Afghanistan.

I respect your opinion.

datan · Feb 4, 2004

UnhandledException said:
How many died on September 11th?

about three thousand. What's your point?

How many terrorist acts have been prevented because of the Iraq war?

how many terrorist acts have there been since the war? Many.
Just this week there was one which killed over a hundred.

datan · Feb 4, 2004

anyway, firstly, you need a whole infrastructure to support a WMD program. Transport vehicles, drivers, scientists, storage facilities, manufacturing facilities. They haven't found any of these. The "it's buried in the ground" theory is just for people who refuse to admit the egg on their face.

secondly, Iraq did give the UN inspectors free access to wherever they wanted to go. Bush kicked them out of Iraq to start his own little war. Stop trying to distort history.

IrishJohan · Feb 4, 2004

Jacey said:
Bush has not attended a single funeral of a servicemember who died as a result of the Iraq Invasion.

Interesting that Bush can attend over a hundred fundraisers but no funerals.

Name me the past presidents in wartime that have done what you criticize Bush for.

IrishJohan · Feb 4, 2004

Jacey said:
Michael- How many millions of people live in NYC versus the 6 figures we have in Iraq? (I haven't seen an accurate troop count lately). That's the issue, I saw........hm, maybe it was Brit Hume, someone on Fox News, marginalizing the deaths.

No, putting them into perspective. Total casualties at Antietam over two days during the Civil War were 24,000 including 3,500 deaths; Allied casualties just on D-Day in WWII was around 10,000 including 2,500 deaths; etc. Every life that is lost is indeed precious because they were someone's son, father, brother, etc., yet you will not have a war of this size without some cost in lives. These men and the couple of women who have died freely volunteered to serve their country and thank goodness that the number of soldiers, Marines, sailors, and airmen that have had to give this ultimate sacrifice is very low compared to wars of comparable size. Btw, this article is misleading because the total number of deaths from combat is around 350 and the rest are from other ways like accidents.

Plus, I've personally met two who had legs blown off by landmines. Their pain and sacrifice can hardly be measured.

I also know wounded veterans from Vietnam to Persian Gulf 1. What's your point?

IrishJohan · Feb 4, 2004

elanor said:
This is a real pet peeve of mine. Opposing this war (or any war the country is involved in) does NOT mean lack of support for the military personnel who are sent into the conflict. A person can honestly support the troops--including writing letters of encouragement, praying for them, sending care packages--and be involved in activities directed at ending the war and bringing those troops home again. Opposing policy is not the same thing as opposing people.

An improvement from the antiwar protesters of Vietnam, many of whom were enamored with Ho Chi Minh and communism. Nevertheless, here the perspective is one sailor fresh from Iraq on this:

I WAS SITTING in a carpet shop in Dubai when an Arab merchant asked me a startling question. America is a very powerful country, he began, Why do you not finish Saddam?

The year was 1998, and two US Navy carrier battle groups were on station in the Gulf, flying around-the-clock missions over the southern no-fly-zone. I took a moment to collect myself, and then offered the man a fumbling explanation about UN weapons inspectors and international law.

The merchant wasnt impressed. Saddam is a very dangerous man. You cannot trust him. Why dont you finish the war? You do not need United Nations.

Thats when it hit me: for many Arabs, the Gulf War didnt end in 1991. They realized that Saddam wasnt finished, and they believed that he was playing a waiting game, hoping that the Americans and British would ultimately grow weary of containing him and go home. Indeed, many Arabs suspected that Saddam had designs on the entire Arabian Peninsula.

They saw our reluctance to finish the job as a sign of weakness. But this wasnt just an isolated incident. They remembered our tepid reaction to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and our helplessness during the Iran hostage crisis. They remembered how we turned tail and ran away after setbacks in Beirut and Mogadishu. They saw how we failed to respond after attacks on the USS Stark and, a few years later, the USS Cole.

In short, they believed we were a paper tiger.

It wasnt the first time in history that we had created such an impression. When the Japanese Empire rampaged across the Far East in the late 1930s, President Roosevelt responded with harsh condemnation and an oil embargo. Meanwhile, the Imperial Japanese Army raped and pillaged the Chinese city of Nanking, while the Imperial Japanese Navy made plans to seize the East Indian oilfields by force. But first they would have to strike a knockout blow to the Western powers that stood in their way.

We all remember what happened next.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a superpower such as the world has never seen. This nation possesses unprecedented economic might, and all of the diplomatic leverage that goes along with it.

But such power and wealth inevitably attracts enemies. No matter how noble our deeds, no matter how pure our intentions, we will always experience resentment from those who feel threatened by our dominance it comes with the territory.

If America is to remain a world leader, a credible military force must exist to back up this economic and diplomatic power. And our military force cannot be considered credible if our enemies doubt our resolve to use it.

It is precisely such a misperception of American resolve that resulted in the horrific terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM wasnt so much a new war as the sudden acceleration of a twelve-year-old simmering conflict. Most Americans had long since forgotten about Iraq, but the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon finally brought the problems of the Middle East back to the fore. Before the United States could begin to address the core problems that fed into the radical Islamic death cults, however, we first had to settle accounts with Saddam.

Any strategic plan for the Middle East that left Saddam in power was doomed to failure.

I supported the war in Iraq, and not just from behind a computer keyboard. It never ceases to amaze me how some people can claim to oppose the war, but support the troops. Let me clarify something here: were all volunteers. Almost every one of the brave men and women that I served with were proud to be defending our country, and passionately believed that our mission was worthwhile and just.

When you express opposition to the war, youre ****ing all over what we were fighting for. So please dont insult us by explaining how we were just hapless victims of Dubya and his cronies. Our biggest complaint was that it took twelve years for someone to give us the order to finish the job!
http://www.lt-smash.us/

IrishJohan · Feb 4, 2004

SqueezetheShaman said:
Oh I support a soldier daily. To my husband, a soldier who is supposed to leave in a few weeks for 18 months. I earned my right to speak up, no thanks to people like you who want to shut us up. Have you served?? My husband gets peeved sometimes and says you should keep your mouth shut until you have put yourself or your spouse and the mother/father of your kids in danger for this country. He isn't serious, though, he understands free speech. He wouldn't ask another to shup up and just say thanks.

Nevertheless, your husband has a good point. I wore the uniform myself during the first go-round with Saddam. However, I respect your right to speak up even if I very much disagree since you do indeed have one of the toughest jobs.

IrishJohan · Feb 4, 2004

Jacey said:
Civilians, never was called that by another Marine, although I know that feeling was there.

They were fortunate not to have been handed their teeth. Marines may have been fodder for endless pranks by Squids (returned in spades I assure you), but they still wear the uniform and unless they disgrace it no civilian had better ever forget that.

Gunny · Feb 4, 2004

jons911 said:
Do you honeslty think we aren't keeping track of everyone hurt and injured in the war? Do you think the Purple Heart, Medal of Honor, Silver Star, etc medals are just given out for no reason?

Do you know first hand we aren't treating the US soldiers in the highest? War has consequences. You may or may not agree with the war, but it's going on, regardless. When you sign up for the Armed Forces, you are doing so because you are ready to die for your country. We didn't have a draft. Everyone of them is there on his/her own free will. True, they might not agree with the cause, but that's not what they signed up for. They chose to follow regardless - to trust the command of their superiors.

I don't know who Shrub is, but I can only imagine you are talking about the President, and in fact, he does attend funerals. He does have personally signed letters sent to the families of those who have died in the war. He might not make every funeral, but at the rate of 1/day, who could, let alone the President of the US!

I say - instead of trying to fight the man, write a letter to a soldier in the Middle East. Encourage them, tell them you are so glad they are prepared to fight (and die) to maintain the level of freedom we have come to love and enjoy!

AMEN!

UnhandledException · Feb 4, 2004

datan said:
about three thousand. What's your point?

That 3000 people can die with one terrorist act. Thanks for proving my point.

Gunny · Feb 4, 2004

Blemonds said:
Freedom isn't free

and comes at great cost.

datan · Feb 4, 2004

UnhandledException said:
That 3000 people can die with one terrorist act. Thanks for proving my point.

and that relates to the current war ... how?

Gunny · Feb 4, 2004

SqueezetheShaman said:
Oh I support a soldier daily. To my husband, a soldier who is supposed to leave in a few weeks for 18 months. I earned my right to speak up, no thanks to people like you who want to shut us up. Have you served?? My husband gets peeved sometimes and says you should keep your mouth shut until you have put yourself or your spouse and the mother/father of your kids in danger for this country.

You definitely have the right to speak up. I am sort of like your husband-if one hasn't been in harm's way or have had loved ones in harm's way I grow a might frustrated by the commentary. I served my country in the USMC many years ago and my son presently is on active duty in the USMC.

Gunny · Feb 4, 2004

Lanakila said:
I am so glad that people have learned something from the Vietnam era though and are treating the soldiers returning as heros even if they disagreed with the decision to go to war.

Amen, Lanakila. Coming home from Nam was like going to one kind of hell to another kind of hell. I did three tours of duty in Vietnam and when I came back to the world (home) it's like I was disowned from most of my friends and some family. Unfortunately, I climbed into the bottle in a feeble attempt to deal with being in Nam for three years and then coming back to the strange reality of a very hostile civilian country towards the Vietnam Vet.

LiberalChristian · Feb 4, 2004

GySgt said:
You definitely have the right to speak up. I am sort of like your husband-if one hasn't been in harm's way or have had loved ones in harm's way I grow a might frustrated by the commentary. I served my country in the USMC many years ago and my son presently is on active duty in the USMC.

First, any person who served in the military, willing to loose thier life for the country is a hero in my book. I never served in the military, but I admire anyone who so believes in thier convictions that they are willing to put his or her life on the line.
I have a question to ask, however. Am I misunderstanding you, do you maintain that when some one doesn't serve they have less of a right to speak up?

No gods · Feb 4, 2004

jons911 said:
Yup, June 30 this year. This is the best article I can find about the topic: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/7864306.htm

I'm sure you could pick something else up on news.google.com

Actually, the "official occupation of iraq" will end in June with the pull out of somewhere between 1/5 and 1/4 of the troops. The remaining US troops will stay in Iraq by request of the new authorities but the US will no longer be "occupying" Iraq. Quite a play on words the current administration is using to make you think they are pulling out though, huh?

American troops dying at rate of over one per day in Iraq

Well-Known Member

WinJace

Senior Member

WinJace

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Remnant

Senior Member

Remnant

Well-Known Member

Remnant

Remnant

Well-Known Member

Buttercup Atheist

Similar threads