Jump to content

U.S. Military Deaths in Iraq Pass 1,000


jamotto
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh PUHLEASE, give me a fricking break.

We freed 50 MILLION people, and have lost less then 1100 soldiers. Give me a fricking break.

We have also killed close to 50,000, yes, 50,000 terrorists.

I am damn proud of our troops, they have done a heck of a job, even with the media playing grim reaper every fricking day.

Here Read this, and tell me that somehow our troops are demoralized because of it.

Again, you guys need to get real and look at the BIG picture, we have lost less then 1/3 in 18 months, of what we lost in 1 fricking day, because of 911. Oh. that's right, 911 is ancient history. Geez, you guys are just too much.

Here's a piece of that article I linked to.

quote:

BAQUBA, Iraq (AFP) - The deaths of 1,000 American troops in Iraq (news - web sites) since the 2003 invasion to topple Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) has only strengthened US resolve to restore security to the strife-torn country, soldiers said.

AFP/File Photo

Dismissing parallels with the 1961-75 war in Vietnam, officers lashed out at the media for playing the grim-reaper over the mounting casualty toll and failing to appreciate the sacrifices made by each soldier.

"It sucks. The newspapers glorify it. Everyday, reporting the numbers going up and up, trying to push a point," said Captain Gregory Wingard, 39, at the 1st Infantry Division's Camp Warhorse near Baquba, north of Baghdad.

"Sad as it is for those 1,000 families and their friends, they're nothing to the number of Iraqis that get killed trying to defend their own families," he added, smoking a cigar with friends under the stars.

Snip

So please, enough of the and get some and going instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see...

In 2003, the FBI reported 598 murders in Chicago, and 514 murders in Los Angeles, and 597 in New York City alone. Where was CNN's ticker then?

Then add in 149 in Atlanta, 270 in Baltimore, 109 in Columbus, 226 in Dallas, 366 in Detroit, 278 in Houston, 144 in Las Vegas, 126 in Memphis, 109 in Milwaukee, 274 in New Orleans, 109 in Oakland, 348 in Philadelphia, and 241 in Phoenix, and you might get the feeling that the USA is more dangerous than Iraq!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

Oh PUHLEASE, give me a fricking break.

We freed 50 MILLION people, and have lost less then 1100 soldiers. Give me a fricking break.

We have also killed close to 50,000, yes, 50,000 terrorists.

I am damn proud of our troops, they have done a heck of a job, even with the media playing grim reaper every fricking day.

Read this, and tell me that somehow our troops are demoralized because of it.

Again, you guys need to get real and look at the BIG picture, we have lost less then 1/3 in 18 months, of what we lost in 1 fricking day, because of 911. Oh. that's right, 911 is ancient history. Geez, you guys are just too much.

Here's a piece of that article I linked to.

quote:

BAQUBA, Iraq (AFP) - The deaths of 1,000 American troops in Iraq (news - web sites) since the 2003 invasion to topple Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) has only strengthened US resolve to restore security to the strife-torn country, soldiers said.

AFP/File Photo

Dismissing parallels with the 1961-75 war in Vietnam, officers lashed out at the media for playing the grim-reaper over the mounting casualty toll and failing to appreciate the sacrifices made by each soldier.

"It sucks. The newspapers glorify it. Everyday, reporting the numbers going up and up, trying to push a point," said Captain Gregory Wingard, 39, at the 1st Infantry Division's Camp Warhorse near Baquba, north of Baghdad.

"Sad as it is for those 1,000 families and their friends, they're nothing to the number of Iraqis that get killed trying to defend their own families," he added, smoking a cigar with friends under the stars.

Snip

So please, enough of the and get some and going instead.


You missed the part

quote:

"I'm scared even to take a shower in case they mortar us. I want to go home and be with my wife and start a family," said Specialist Luis Cruz, 21, from Puerto Rico, also based near Baquba.


Any ways the son of a friend of mine was in the unit that suffered 7 fatalities that pushed the count to over a 1000. No word yet if he is alive or dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamotto,

My condolences. I hope your friend made it. If one has not actually been, in that position...for an EXTENDED amount of time, one cannot possibly understand the consequence to the human psych.

I have been there, and KNOW, the reality of the ADRENELINE..and the fear, and the phsychological crash, when removed from such an UNREAL enviroment, these soldiers find themselves.

It is EASY, for someone, who has experianced WAR, on TV and through others, to cry out for more, and to be disassociated, with the REALITY it entails.

I have seen men, like it so much, they created situations, where they could kill "legitamately", and would get depressed, if there was no action, for more than a week. Others, Ive seen break down and cry, from the ANTICIPATION alone. These were NOT children, but 6'4", 285 lb hardened MEN!

One, cannot anticipate how far they may go, in ANY direction within the human psyche, until they have experianced life's worst possible scenerios, and survived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

Jamotto,

My condolences. I hope your friend made it. If one has not actually been, in that position...for an EXTENDED amount of time, one cannot possibly understand the consequence to the human psych.

I have been there, and KNOW, the reality of the ADRENELINE..and the fear, and the phsychological crash, when removed from such an UNREAL enviroment, these soldiers find themselves.

It is EASY, for someone, who has experianced WAR, on TV and through others, to cry out for more, and to be disassociated, with the REALITY it entails.

I have seen men, like it so much, they created situations, where they could kill "legitamately", and would get depressed, if there was no action, for more than a week. Others, Ive seen break down and cry, from the ANTICIPATION alone. These were NOT children, but 6'4", 285 lb hardened MEN!

One, cannot anticipate how far they may go, in ANY direction within the human psyche, until they have experianced life's worst possible scenerios, and survived.

Thank you Street, still no word on his whereabouts. The 48 hour hold time has expired so if the worst has happened my friend will know soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by jamotto:

It appears my friends son is ok, his name was not present on a list of war casualties according to him.

I thank your friends son for his service, and am glad that he is not on the list of casualties.

Also, I wish you guys to remember this, we lose close to 2000 guys a year to accidents, accidents!! So to lose 1000 in a war zone is INCREDIBLE, just straight up incredible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

I thank your friends son for his service, and am glad that he is not on the list of casualties.


I will pass that along. His unit from my understanding is expected to begin "phase two" of their deployment in the near future which is supposed to be even riskier than what they have been doing. My prayers goes out to his unit and all the units in Iraq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Also, I wish you guys to remember this, we lose close to 2000 guys a year to accidents, accidents!! So to lose 1000 in a war zone is INCREDIBLE, just straight up incredible.


I fail to see anything, at all, incredible about loosing 1000 men, in THIS conflict. I belive, the numbers, to be much higher, than what is being released, but that is, neither here,nor there.

The very fact, that one may witness such an overwhelming devistation, of the Iraqi, with so few casualties.......

Only PROVES, bush is a LIER, in regard to his CLAIM, that Iraq, was EVER such a THREAT to the USA!!!

It amazes me how twisted logic, can be openly accepted, by the, radical and politically biased, warmonger's present within our republican party!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Street, you've been watching to much of the Communist New's Network

For starters, Bush has YET to LIE about ANYTHING

READ THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS, It's stated right in there, back in the year 2000 that Iraq WAS and STILL is a THREAT

Street, I certainly hope you're not voting. Cause if you are then you're illinformed vote will canceal my informed vote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Street, you've been watching to much of the Communist New's Network

LOL Now, this shows, how much you know about me(VERY LITTLE)

quote:

READ THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS, It's stated right in there, back in the year 2000 that Iraq WAS and STILL is a THREAT

I guess, that makes it some kind of unquestionable fact. Sorry, I was THERE!!! I KNOW what kind of threat, they were, and are. The BUSH propaghanda machine, has gone WAY too far, in its irrational presentation of such.

However, SINCE bush's stupidity, it IS more of a threat today, than it was PRIOR to the United States ATTACKING it...but NOT, in the way it is being portrayed.

quote:

Street, I certainly hope you're not voting. Cause if you are then you're illinformed vote will canceal my informed vote


maybe I should vote TWICE, since I have been told, that i am a liberal, and that is what liberals do!!

Nawwww, but I AM voting... absentee (South Carolina)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kalshion:

Bush's stupidity?

Bush wasn't the one who started up a campaign for Saddam back in the 1990

Clinton along with the UN where the one's who made Iraq a bigger threat, NOT Bush

That's why the terrorists would love nothing better than have a democrat in office so they can go about with impunity as they did for eight years under clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by LostInSpace:

quote:

Originally posted by Kalshion:

Bush's stupidity?

Bush wasn't the one who started up a campaign for Saddam back in the 1990

Clinton along with the UN where the one's who made Iraq a bigger threat, NOT Bush

That's why the terrorists would love nothing better than have a democrat in office so they can go about with impunity as they did for eight years under clinton.


Here we go again. I'm pretty sure I made a post a long time ago outlining exactly what Clinton did about terrorist attacks during his Presidency. In short, nearly all the perpetrators were caught, tried and convicted, except those that were in countries whose governments refused to extradict them. The USS Cole bombing occured so close to the end of his tenure that he wasn't able to enforce much at the time though some effort was made.

He just dealt with it in a fashion that focused on the criminals instead of the broad "if you're not with us you're against us" approach of the current administration.

Argue his methods all you want, but at least do your homework.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let's take a look at this fact. The first WTC bombing. What happened after? Sure they caught some of the so called perpetrators of this act. What else did the Clinton administration do? Nothing! He had the ball placed in his hand to toughen INS laws and regulation but didn't. The INS system still remained a shambles. He also had the opportunity to bring all agencies together but didn't. Also to beef up Airport security checks and didn't. If only clinton reacted for the first WTC attack the way Bush did for the second attack, 9/11 would have been a hell of a lot harder to pull. The signs were there. Every one knew that these terrorist wanted to take down those towers. But no plan was ever proposed or executed by Clinton to prevent such future attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by LostInSpace:

Well let's take a look at this fact. The first WTC bombing. What happened after? Sure they caught some of the so called perpetrators of this act. What else did the Clinton administration do? Nothing! He had the ball placed in his hand to toughen INS laws and regulation but didn't. The INS system still remained a shambles. He also had the opportunity to bring all agencies together but didn't. Also to beef up Airport security checks and didn't. If only clinton reacted for the first WTC attack the way Bush did for the second attack, 9/11 would have been a hell of a lot harder to pull. The signs were there. Every one knew that these terrorist wanted to take down those towers. But no plan was ever proposed or executed by Clinton to prevent such future attacks.

That's more like it. Yes there was more he could have done and that has only been made more obvious by hindsight. As for airport security, there was really no reason at the time to do so. The only reason they do it now is because the 9/11 terrorists used airplanes as a weapon.

Let's not forget that Clinton was stifled by the whole 6 year scandal and anything he tried to do was met with cries of wagging the dog. Perhaps if the country was more focused on those acts of terror rather than getting Clinton out of office he could have been more effective in this fight.

Now for the current administration, what have they done to get the terrorists who are here now out of our country? (that's what I keep hearing people say anyway, and it's probably true)

Jag has mentioned it many times, "They're here!" Well if they're here and we know they're here then we must know who they are so why don't we get them? Maybe it's not so easy, or maybe they aren't here and by making us believe they are, Bush only fortifies his position by keeping people afraid.

Where's Osama? What are the chances he's planning another attack before the elections? I'm afraid the Bush administration has pulled a Jedi mind trick on the public. "These are not the terrorists you're looking for... Saddam Hussein is the one you want" Yessss...master...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even a child know's that there will always be bad people within his or her living enviroment

Having said that, it shouldn't be to surprising that we have terrorist's in the US they just aren't making a move. Why? Well let's see, for starter's why make a move against a president who has shown the full power of our military? It'd be stupid to do anything to the US right now in that regard

Osama is probably dead, but he's also probably alive. We don't know Grizzle, it's very VERY hard to kill a man who's on the move 24/7

As for attack before the Elections... it's possible, no one said it can't happen. But like I said above, if they do attack they'll go through proper mean's to hide the evidence that it'll come

In other words. An attack is diffinantly possible and I wouldn't doubt it if they did attack

The terrorist's WANT Kerry in office, so the best place to do harm to bush IS at the Elections

By the way Street, a little something that came across my mind. If Bush wanted ot hide the true number of death's he wouldn't have said 1000+ death's in Iraq, that there would've been stupid. He would've made it a much lesser number

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kalshion:

Even a child know's that there will always be bad people within his or her living enviroment

Having said that, it shouldn't be to surprising that we have terrorist's in the US they just aren't making a move. Why? Well let's see, for starter's why make a move against a president who has shown the full power of our military? It'd be stupid to do anything to the US right now in that regard

Osama is probably dead, but he's also probably alive. We don't know Grizzle, it's very VERY hard to kill a man who's on the move 24/7

As for attack before the Elections... it's possible, no one said it can't happen. But like I said above, if they do attack they'll go through proper mean's to hide the evidence that it'll come

In other words. An attack is diffinantly possible and I wouldn't doubt it if they did attack

The terrorist's WANT Kerry in office, so the best place to do harm to bush IS at the Elections

By the way Street, a little something that came across my mind. If Bush wanted ot hide the true number of death's he wouldn't have said 1000+ death's in Iraq, that there would've been stupid. He would've made it a much lesser number

Thanks Kal and I only have two minor quibbles. I would argue that using the full force of our military has only inflamed the terrorists. This is fairly evident in the rise of the number of terrorist attacks worldwide since we blasted Afghanistan and Iraq. Now this may be a good thing in that it's rustled them out of their hiding places so we can get a clear shot at them, or we could have opened pandora's box.

As for terrorists wanting Kerry, that's hyperbole, I don't think they care who is in office. It's not a dems vs. reps thing because they attacked us under Clinton and Bush both. Any attack they might possibly attempt wouldn't be to make Bush look bad, it would be just another attack because they hate us and that's what they do. If anything they would have more to fear from Kerry because he would no doubt form the worldwide coalition against them that Bush failed to form. Imagine the US, Russia, Asia and the entire EU united against them, that's something they should fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grizzle, like Street, you're missing the point

Kerry is another Clinton, Clinton allowed the UN to get involved in ANY thing's

The UN are cowards, once a man get's killed they FLEE

Kerry already said he was going to get the UN involved

If Kerry is elected, we lose this war, because he'll get the UN involved

THAT'S why the Terrorist's want Kerry in office

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

That's why the terrorists would love nothing better than have a democrat in office so they can go about with impunity as they did for eight years under clinton.

I love the way, these rightwingers are so confused...one statement concerning IRAQ..goes right into some conglomerated issue concerning WORLD TERRORIST.

Until the issues can be intelligently DIVIDED, as they rightfully should be, there is no common ground which these issues can be intelligently discussed.

quote:

Grizzle, like Street, you're missing the point


Sorry, I missed no point, except by discussing these things with people who ARE CONFUSED, as to where these two distinct issues really are.

The crap going on in IRAQ, due to the BUSH igorance, HAS inflamed terrorist worldwide, but

the Act of invading that country initially had little to do with fighting TERRORIST, until AFTER we attacked, and gave them a unified cause.

THAT was very STUPID. Bush, in fact, created a COMPOUNDED danger. A DANGER, we cannot ignore, now that our IDIOT leader has set the wheels in motion.

This does NOT justify his actions, and does not rationalize, bush's methodology, AT ALL.

quote:

THAT'S why the Terrorist's want Kerry in office

and this REPEATED rubbish, that the TERRORIST want Kerry as our president is absurd!!!

Kerry supporter's ARE AMERICAN PATRIOTS, who dispise terror.

And the REST of the WORLD leaders want kerry, over bush, because bush is NOT rational, nor is his international policies WORKING for any BUT the terrorist.

All bush did, in iraq, was CREATE a place, where all those willing to fight the infidels, for ALLAH, can do so. Meanwhile, they sit outside IRAQ,in safety and proliferate in relative safety.

Bush is NOT fighting terrorist, he is fighting one side of a CIVIL war, created by the occupation, which draws a number of radical muslims from time to time. These are the ONLY terrorist, we are killing in Iraq, and they are equally killing our soldiers.

I would say we have killed LESS than 2000 actual TERRORIST. and to this BIG deal. we have killed many thousands of the baathist side of the revolution.

Bush is such a snake, and a lier, he has almost EVERYONE so confused, the issue CANNOT be intelligently discussed.

If this is the kind of leader you support, wait until he starts getting involved with your personal lives, with his arrogant methodology, in saving you from HIS "CREATED" TERROR campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Where's Osama? What are the chances he's planning another attack before the elections? I'm afraid the Bush administration has pulled a Jedi mind trick on the public. "These are not the terrorists you're looking for... Saddam Hussein is the one you want" Yessss...master...

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Nomad. You heard me

Cowards

My firm belief is that it was a mistake to form the UN, there cowards... It was the UN that GOT Saddam to where he was

The UN was responsible for allowing Saddam to get so much money, they didn't have the courage to stop it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THe Iraq war and the war on terrorism are one and the same.

The facts are there, you just have to face them, and you can't. Because if you do, then your hate Bush emotional rhetoric will have to go out the window.

Poor Street, have to keep them separate so that his logical thinking skills won't have to kick in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...