US briefly showed a glimp of their real intentions!

Am I incorrect. I believe that I saw a listing for the second British soldier killed in action today. Perhaps frolic is using the helicopter crash as a killed in action event when it was probably just an unfortunate accident

Where did i mention a helicopter crash as a killed in action event?

I will rephrase.

Question: How many American Soldiers have been killed in action thus far?

Question: How many British Soldiers have been killed in action thus far?

frolic says on Mar. 22nd--"So far the British are taking the most casualties"

I have not seen any evidence that is true.

frolic also appears to be concerned about humanitarian aid.

I dont know if frolic has any experience in this area but when I worked with the Red Cross after a disasterous Missouri flood, I can assure you that it is nothing like the movies. it takes time.

Despite the fact that the harbors were mined, humanitarian aids appears to be coming in today. I hope that meets frolic's expectations and requirments.

You guys are omitting the fact that there is no casus belli here.

And yes, at least 18 British soldiers were killed due to US error: misidentification and shooting of planes (for which you simultaneously need 3 statistically incredible errors), helicopter crashes, British Patriot defense targeting.

Dozens of POWs both British and American.

WHY THIS WAR?

By the way, interpreting the stars and stripes flags on Iraqi soil as young panache is hilarious. What happened to 'just following orders' ? True intent, premeditated by the HQ, it seems indeed.

Iraq -- the 51st of the United States.

Accident-shmaccident....Dead is dead.

... You people scare me when you question frolics' right to have a controversial opinion.
...BTW, did any of you who think his position is so absurd, notice the part in Dubya's 3/19 speech when advised the Iraqi people, "whatever you do, don't set fire to YOUR oil wells"

Killed in action or Killed by accident, even a road accident =>those are all casualties to me. Or how would you call the latter? Collateral damage?

By now its clear the first concern are the oil fields. Its too dangerous for aid suppliers to go into Iraq. Meanwhile some oil Corp. are already working in Iraq to put the fires out and begin exploiting those fields.

A UK spokesman was confident that within 3 months the first Iraqi oil would be sold on the international market.

Meanwhile the aid doesn't get to the people that need it because the supply lines for that aid are not well guarded.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2891069.stm

Like I said, "Dead is dead"

And meanwhile, Booman, 70% of the American people pay fealty to Dictator Dubya, whose eyes would really squint were they caught in the sandstorm in Iraq in recent days. :wink: