1
   

U.S. TROOP DEATHS IN IRAQ ON THE RISE

 
 
Titus
 
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:39 am
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,118 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
doglover
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 08:43 pm
Re: U.S. TROOP DEATHS IN IRAQ ON THE RISE
Titus wrote:
So far this month 38 U.S. troops and two Department of the Army civilians have died, according to the Pentagon's count.

As of Friday, 586 U.S. service members — not including the two civilians —have died since military operations in Iraq began March 20, 2003, according to the Defense Department.


"Mission Accomplished" President Bush.

More American blood planted firmly on your hands.
Mad Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 08:48 pm
That , and the rising suicide/rape/assault rates should tell our leaders something!
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 08:57 pm
Bring 'em on.
Sorry to be blunt but I don't feel many care about this except the families.

When Shrub tells jokes about not finding WMDs the main reason for invasion, it seems that Bushco could give a rat's ass about dead and maimed American troops, not even mentioning Iraqis, who are merely colateral damgage. Let's get real! When the death toll reaches around 50K maybe more people will care.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 09:19 pm
Re: U.S. TROOP DEATHS IN IRAQ ON THE RISE
Titus wrote:
So far this month 38 U.S. troops and two Department of the Army civilians have died, according to the Pentagon's count.
So far this month 900 U.S. Citizens have slipped and fallen to their death.
Titus wrote:
As of Friday, over 12,000 U.S. Citizens have slipped and fallen to their deaths since military operations in Iraq began March 20, 2003. The Flu killed 65,000 in the same period. I post these stats only to lend some comparative perspective. I mean no disrespect to our fallen heroes. These relatively low numbers tell me they're doing an excellent job.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 09:38 pm
Write to the families
Send the famalies of the dead and maimed a nice letter Billy. I am sure they will appreciate that.

Like I wrote: When the death toll is around 50K and the maimed tally is around 100K people may take notice.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 09:43 pm
Just thought I'd rattle your cage a little Pistoff. Laughing Oh, and I forgot to mention; 2 million people have been injured in slip and fall accidents in the last year, too. :wink:
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 09:49 pm
Around 50,000 in Vehicle Accidents
Sometimes I wonder why the USA bothers with nations that have famines and aides. Wouldn't it be better for world population control to let these people die?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 09:57 pm
Re: Around 50,000 in Vehicle Accidents
pistoff wrote:
Sometimes I wonder why the USA bothers with nations that have famines and aides. Wouldn't it be better for world population control to let these people die?
Na, you must have Bush confused with this guy.
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/dictators/kim-jong-il/kim_jong_il_smile.jpgKim, I starve by people to death by the millions, Jong Il.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:07 pm
Relatives in NK, Billy?
Been thinking. Maybe the US should nuke the nuke plant in NK and do a Shock and Awe on all of their military bases. That would give China somethin' the think 'bout, eh?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 10:12 pm
Re: Relatives in NK, Billy?
pistoff wrote:
Been thinking. Maybe the US should nuke the nuke plant in NK and do a Shock and Awe on all of their military bases. That would give China somethin' the think 'bout, eh?
Shocked Laughing Now you're talking my language! :wink:
0 Replies
 
Umbagog
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 11:24 pm
While we are at it, how about nuking Moscow, Beijing, Palestine, and Paris?

The loss of one life where villiany plots is the end of reality and sanity, and the beginning of the long descent into darkness.

When the life lost is over material powers, such as oil, or slaves, or gold, or silver, then a king is not far behind those deaths, or else is actively engaged in expending life so that he may profit.


The loss of life that saves others, that risks life and limb to remove the terror from people's lives, or else stands firm against the hoardes seeking their own wantonness...it is only here that these deaths are honorable and worthy of respect.

Bush's antique plan for the Middle East does not warrant the death of 10 never mind the thousands killed or maimed so far.

Never before in the history of the world has the fate of so many been determined by so few. How it is all going to turn out is far from certain, regardless of where you stand on the war in Iraq.

It looks like Iraq-Nam to me already

1) faulty assumptions.
2) overreliance on technology
3) overwheening pride
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 12:48 am
Umbagog wrote:
The loss of life that saves others... ...are honorable and worthy of respect.
I took the liberty of editing out the parts that were unnecessary or didn't make sense.

I assure you Pistoff wasn't serious about Nuking Yongbyon and neither was I… Conventional weapons will do just fine. His suggestion of simultaneous "shock and awe" type attacks on all of Kim's military installations is a loose quoting of what I truly believe should happen. Kim has killed millions of HUMAN BEINGS. I repeat; MILLIONS. What better justification for an attack is there?

His jibe about "That would give China somethin' the think 'bout, eh?" is also a shot at my logic. First Afghanistan, then Iraq and hopefully we won't have to fight North Korea They should see the writing on the wall. (Libya and Pakistan are showing positive signs of being able to read it). If not; we should attack them next. China is the most dangerous of all offenders. But, I honestly think we could alter their behavior with trade restrictions.

I am a warmonger because I believe the despots that fail to recognize human rights have become too technologically advanced to succumb to rebellions from within. Without help from a superior force, these HUMAN BEINGS will continue to suffer without hope untold, horrific fates, day after day forever. To me; killing murderers is more palatable (and humane), than watching from a comfortable distance while they commit their murders.

The U.S., like no country in history, has both the economic AND the military superiority to truly bring human rights (and food for Christ's sake) to every corner of the world. I agree with Pistoff and Hobit that this is not the goal of our leaders, but I submit that it should be. I truly believe if we made world peace our stated goal; the coalition of the willing would become an irresistible force. I further believe that a two-pronged "offer you can't refuse" is the only way to achieve this goal. It saddens me that most people believe world peace is impossible. Terrorism is here to stay. State sponsored terrorism just doesn't have to be.

Consider this: If everyone on A2K were living in North Korea, only a handful of us would survive the State's Scrutiny of our posts. Half of us would be arrested, along with our families, and sent to a camp to be tortured to death for our dissention. Is this not terrorism? If it is; then Kim Jong Il is probably the worst terrorist alive today.

Iraqi's are demonstrating against what they consider injustice without Saddam telling them why for the first time in forever. They may one day have a representative system of government that is fair to all of its citizens. This is a beautiful thing, regardless of Bush's motivation. Saddam's regime killed over a MILLION HUMAN BEINGS. If a few thousand heroes fall fighting to liberate millions of would-be victims and possibly set up an example for all of the suffering HUMAN BEINGS in the Middle East to follow; then I believe their deaths are as meaningful as any who fell before them. Peace, out.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 02:37 am
I understand
I am somewhat agreeing with your stand. I feel that NK is a nation that the UN should convince the other nations to attack. A truely mulit-lateral regime change would not be objectionable to me. If the UN can talk China into participating along with at least 90% of all the other UN Nations I would see it as a positive move.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 02:51 am
Re: I understand
pistoff wrote:
I am somewhat agreeing with your stand. I feel that NK is a nation that the UN should convince the other nations to attack. A truely mulit-lateral regime change would not be objectionable to me. If the UN can talk China into participating along with at least 90% of all the other UN Nations I would see it as a positive move.
Shocked Well I'll be dipped in shi... Laughing I certainly wouldn't object to sharing the expenses (in every meaning of the word). I guess our biggest difference is; I don't much care who kills the murderer to stop the murders, regardless of consensus... This monster needs to be stopped.
0 Replies
 
Titus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 08:53 am
"This monster needs to be stopped." OCCOM BILL

I agree.

And the 'monster' is George "aWol" Bush.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 01:14 pm
Pity you can't see past your hatred to the other side of the equation Titus. Bush is responsible for a small fraction of the deaths Saddam is. I believe history will show the HUMAN death toll went sharply down as a direct result of his actions.
0 Replies
 
Titus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 05:54 pm
History will show the unilateral invasion of Iraq by the US military acting under the guise that Saddam was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks (he wasn't), helped to galvanize far-flung, radical, anti-American Islamic groups, and further worsened the national security interests of not only America, but the world.

The Madrid train station attack proves it.

Mark my words, this is only the beginning.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 06:44 pm
Your words are quite familiar and have been duly noted. We'll just have to wait and see.
0 Replies
 
angie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Mar, 2004 07:44 pm
.

It doesn't surprise me that American deaths in Iraq are on the rise.

The situation in Iraq is at best chaotic and (don't try to make sense of it, but ...) US special forces are leaving.

Rummy has finally re-directed US special forces (the ones that got Saddam) back to Afghanistan to intensify the search for bin Laden. Should have happened long ago, but hey, we had to find those damn WMDs. Well, now that the WMDs have been redefined as irrelevent, we can go after bin Laden, and not a minute too soon - that election is just around the corner !!!


.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » U.S. TROOP DEATHS IN IRAQ ON THE RISE
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/05/2025 at 05:42:57