Hello all,
I’ve been a bit out of the loop lately, I was wondering if someone could give me the most recent numbers of US Troops who have died in Iraq.
Thanks.
Last I heard it was just over 1,600 of our bravest that have perished so far in the Liberation of the Iraqi people.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/
Looks up to date.
As of today 1.690. Seven from Southern Colorado. Five Marines were killed in a car bombing today.
As of today, June 10th – 1,690.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/06/10/iraq.main/index.html
Over 1700 now…and for what?
freedom!
I’ve lost a friend to this war. He died for his country. He left a loving wife and kids to support the goals of our nation. To support America!
Staff Sgt. Patrick Lee Griffin Jr.
I remember you!!! Godbless…
OD
[quote]StevenF wrote:
freedom! [/quote]
Oh, of course. Is there a reason that we aren’t planning the same for other countries immediately? I personally wish people would quit acting like we rolled into Iraq to “save the people”. It may be what the mission has turned into, but that was not what many died for.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
StevenF wrote:
freedom!
Oh, of course. Is there a reason that we aren’t planning the same for other countries immediately? I personally wish people would quit acting like we rolled into Iraq to “save the people”. It may be what the mission has turned into, but that was not what many died for.[/quote]
Affirm. While invading Iraq solved a lot of problems for the Bush administration, freeing the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein was not on that list.
In the first place, starting that war more or less sealed Bush’s second term, since Americans historically don’t like to change horses in the middle of wars. Mr. Bush was very happy to become a wartime president; he chortled gleefully about winning the trifecta, if memory serves.
In the second place, whatever threat Saddam Hussein was or wasn’t, he was basically bad news for the world petroleum industry (and by extension, to all the petroleum dependent economies of the world). Iraq has the second largest set of proven reserves in the world, and there was no way to get at the stuff in meaningful volume because of the sanctions. And after Kuwait, Hussein was seen as a potential threat to the oil fields on the gulf, just by reason of having a large army, never mind nuclear weapons. Note that there is not a lot of petroleum production headroom left, so when anything goes wrong (like Venezuela) oil prices get spastic and this is not good for commerce in general.
But neither of those reasons is going to fly in open debate when it comes to shedding American blood, so out comes the WMD boogie man hand puppet. Notice that at this point, still nobody is talking about spreading democracy in the world, because that line would have gotten laughed out of Congress.
But once Congress is locked into a bad proposition, the line works just fine. The mission, however, is in a desperate mess. I think probably the only viable political solution for Iraq may be partition. The Turks won’t like that, but after their recent show of support I say if they can’t take a joke, TS.
RSU,
“Over 1700 now…and for what?”
Try this:
The Iran-Iraq War of 1980 to 1988
Pro X,
From that same Resolution:
“Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime…”
[quote]Professor X wrote:
StevenF wrote:
freedom!
Oh, of course. Is there a reason that we aren’t planning the same for other countries immediately? I personally wish people would quit acting like we rolled into Iraq to “save the people”. It may be what the mission has turned into, but that was not what many died for.[/quote]
Why Iraq and not Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, Egypt, Saudia fucking Arabia, Sudan… all countries run by questionable regimes. Why not bring them freedom too? Some of them even actually HAVE WMDs!
No offense, but support efforts should not be read as send the entire military in and achieve it ourselves.
This is where the Kurds should have been supported after the first war. Or, internal splinter groups could have been funded and given clandestine aid.
Support efforts.
Is that what you think a full scale invasion with severall follow up years or war represents? Imagine if they had said something a bit more forceful than simply to support efforts.
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year.
[quote]Todd S. wrote:
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year. [/quote]
Thank you for that. Could you please enlist now so that you can be safer in Iraq?
Endgamer, excellent post. The whole boogie man WMD bullshit is what sickened me. You are right their argument would not have flown had they been honest.
Vroom, excellent post. I agree with the clandestine support that should have been given instead of the full scale invasion.
[quote]Todd S. wrote:
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year. [/quote]
What if you or one of your family were one of “hey it happens every day car wreck victims,”? What if you were one of the thousands who are severly disabled armless, legless, sightless.
Would you still be so cavalier in your attitude?
[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
Todd S. wrote:
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year.
What if you or one of your family were one of “hey it happens every day car wreck victims,”? What if you were one of the thousands who are severly disabled armless, legless, sightless.
Would you still be so cavalier in your attitude?[/quote]
That was way too nice. That is like me excusing the WTC tragedy because several people die of heart related ailments every year. His statement deserves severe flaming.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Elkhntr1 wrote:
Todd S. wrote:
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year.
What if you or one of your family were one of “hey it happens every day car wreck victims,”? What if you were one of the thousands who are severly disabled armless, legless, sightless.
Would you still be so cavalier in your attitude?
That was way too nice. That is like me excusing the WTC tragedy because several people die of heart related ailments every year. His statement deserves severe flaming.[/quote]
I was not trying to dismiss it as a meaningless number… It is sad that people die over there. I still feel it is an important mission. I would prefer that no one had to die to get the job done. They are also killing dozens of their own country men who are trying to help for every one of us they get. I don’t claim to understand their thinking but I do think it needs to be put to an end. I think it should have happened a long time ago.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Elkhntr1 wrote:
Todd S. wrote:
I don’t want to imply that 1700 dead is not alot, but in PA alone, about 1500 die in car wrecks every year.
What if you or one of your family were one of “hey it happens every day car wreck victims,”? What if you were one of the thousands who are severly disabled armless, legless, sightless.
Would you still be so cavalier in your attitude?
That was way too nice. That is like me excusing the WTC tragedy because several people die of heart related ailments every year. His statement deserves severe flaming.[/quote]
I’m not sure, I think what he was trying to do was show how politicised this whole thing is. A lot of you on the left are crying wolf about the loss of american lives, and that what we are doing isn’t good enough for those people to “waste” thier lives on. While in reality our soldiers are doing the most noble death worthy job one can possibly do. Stop bad people from running amok and attempting to bring peace to a war torn torture torn fear driven society. Granted we viewed them as a threat and rightly so, Saddam did pay $5,000 to palestinian famalies who had a member suicide bomber. Trust me, these are heroes, regardless of if you think the war was right or not. A hero’s life is never “wasted”.
In any event, I was driving home from golf last weekend and a kid in a supped up crx came over a hill in a 30 mph zone, he was doing at least a 100 and all four of his tires came off the road. He was dead center in the middle of the road and only missed my car by a few inches in the air, luckily for whatever reason I was over to the right a little bit, as i’m paranoid about such situations. If he hit me we both would have died, no seat belt or air bag is going to help when 100+ and 35 meet head on. Neither of us were doing anything to further any movement, help any other person or any other such noble good acts. I was tired and wanted to go sleep, he was screwing around probably having fun. Which lives would be more wasted? Add to that the fact that many many more people a year die in car accidents than will ever die in iraq. This is the point he was trying to make and agree with it or not, there are plenty of other things we do that waste lives and I really have never seen any of you start a post about how many people die a year in car accidents and ways to lessen that number. Have your reasons for why the war is a bad idea, please don’t insult the soldiers over there by claiming the loss of thier lives somehow makes the war unjustifiable.
And on that note… if not one us soldier had died to this point, would any of you feel the war was justifiable?
V