Five U.S. troops killed in Iraq

2456789

Comments

  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Are people really trying to argue that someone who signs up for the military is oblivious to the possibility of seeing combat? I mean, unless you have a serious cognitive deficit, how can that be, especially the American military, in this day and age?
    I agree with the poster who said that Bush is a cunt, but probably didn't know how bad things were going to get. Gross negligence. Not some hidden desire to kill Americans. And also, can we stop treating the Iraqis as if they are sunhumans who have no ability to stop killing one another? Cripes. People hate Bush so much that they wind up reducing the whole situation down to him. The Iraqis can take some steps to reduce the killing too. Its not all about the Americans.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    inmytree wrote:
    how do you know...?


    common sense
  • Abuskedti
    Abuskedti Posts: 1,917
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Are people really trying to argue that someone who signs up for the military is oblivious to the possibility of seeing combat? I mean, unless you have a serious cognitive deficit, how can that be, especially the American military, in this day and age?
    I agree with the poster who said that Bush is a cunt, but probably didn't know how bad things were going to get. Gross negligence. Not some hidden desire to kill Americans. And also, can we stop treating the Iraqis as if they are sunhumans who have no ability to stop killing one another? Cripes. People hate Bush so much that they wind up reducing the whole situation down to him. The Iraqis can take some steps to reduce the killing too. Its not all about the Americans.

    Is oblivious the only alternative to knowing they were going to be invading Iraq and occupying it for 5 years as hundreds of thousands are killed for absolutely no reason?

    And sure.. many people maybe could stand up and help correct the horror created in Iraq - at the risk of being killed by any number of possible enemies in that war zone.. hopefully one day that will happen, but not likely while America is still there blowing up whomever they choose. If that lessons the burdon for you - well then yes it is true

    You often site hate for Bush... how is it you are obsessed with that thought - when perhaps its hate for all the murder.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Abuskedti wrote:
    Is oblivious the only alternative to knowing they were going to be invading Iraq and occupying it for 5 years as hundreds of thousands are killed for absolutely no reason?
    .

    based on the wars of the past, every solider knows what is possible.
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    Abuskedti wrote:
    wont be long before Bush surpasses Osama in killing Americans

    He is already recognized as a far more prolific killer of non-Americans.

    I'd like to see when the death toll of American soldiers in Iraq reach 3,000, if it will be a big deal since that's how many people we lost on 9/11.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jlew24asu wrote:
    common sense

    hmm...common sense...perhaps your right..."common sense" would said prior to invading another country, every angle and possible outcome would have been explored..."common sense" would had dictated the need to have body armor and proper equipment...."common sense" would have meant an exit plan would be in place....

    yes, yes...apples to oranges....I guess my point is: "common sense" is a rather subjective term that can be interpreted in different ways...
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Jeanwah wrote:
    I'd like to see when the death toll of American soldiers in Iraq reach 3,000, if it will be a big deal since that's how many people we lost on 9/11.


    the number of dead soliders has already passed the number of dead from 9/11. where have you been

    but its good to know you are waiting for it to happen, just to see if "its a big deal"
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    inmytree wrote:
    hmm...common sense...perhaps your right..."common sense" would said prior to invading another country, every angle and possible outcome would have been explored..."common sense" would had dictated the need to have body armor and proper equipment...."common sense" would have meant an exit plan would be in place....

    yes, yes...apples to oranges....I guess my point is: "common sense" is a rather subjective term that can be interpreted in different ways...


    no I used common sense to know that soliders are aware of the possibility of going to war and dying.
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    jlew24asu wrote:
    the number of dead soliders has already passed the number of dead from 9/11. where have you been

    but its good to know you are waiting for it to happen, just to see if "its a big deal"

    No, it hasn't, oh "smart one". USA Today reported that it's in the 2,750 mark, and a neighbor of mine has been using his acreage to plant yellow flags for each U.S. soldier that has dies over there. And, he posts the number, changing it as the death toll increases.

    ETA: http://www.icasualties.org/oif/default.aspx
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003

    The number is up to 2,810.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Abuskedti wrote:
    Is oblivious the only alternative to knowing they were going to be invading Iraq and occupying it for 5 years as hundreds of thousands are killed for absolutely no reason?

    And sure.. many people maybe could stand up and help correct the horror created in Iraq - at the risk of being killed by any number of possible enemies in that war zone.. hopefully one day that will happen, but not likely while America is still there blowing up whomever they choose. If that lessons the burdon for you - well then yes it is true

    You often site hate for Bush... how is it you are obsessed with that thought - when perhaps its hate for all the murder.

    It doesn't lessen the burden, Iraq is still a bad, bad situation either way. But its a true statement, in sync with reality. The U.S. kicked a hornet's nest and set things off, but it didn't make a bunch of otherwise peaceful hornets ornery. Not trying to dehumanize with this analogy, by the way. Just trying to make the point that sectarian hatred is the fuel that keeps the fire burning, along with an American presence.
    And yes, I often site hatred for Bush ... Without trying to argue that this hatred is unjustified. I think you still have me pegged as a Bush supporter. Nope. I just do not wish to simplify the situation too much.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Jeanwah wrote:
    No, it hasn't, oh "smart one". USA Today reported that it's in the 2,750 mark, and a neighbor of mine has been using his acreage to plant yellow flags for each U.S. soldier that has dies over there. And, he posts the number, changing it as the death toll increases.

    ETA: http://www.icasualties.org/oif/default.aspx
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003

    The number is up to 2,810.


    my mistake, it surpassed the number of dead from new york, not 9/11 as a whole, your right. I apologize
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    ah ah ah ...well soldiers that sign up know there's a chance to die in war...so they knew what they were up against when they sign up....hmmmmm...yea well that would be fine and good...till they were sent to fight a war that was a waste...a lie....remember weapons of mass destruction? remember imminent threat? remember Al Quaida in Iraq? remember nuclur weapons capabilities? remember???? so I'm cool with soldiers being sent to protect our country..but thats not what they're being sacrificed for. There was a great post on page one that said Georgy and co didn't know it would turn out like this....and I regretfully agree...but they are ultimately responsible (and all those that voted for him the second time, I'll give you the first..you didn't know better) and should pay the price. This will go down as the biggest fked up policy in US history.

    ah ah ah...but the soldiers knew what they were in for...sad.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    callen wrote:
    ah ah ah...but the soldiers knew what they were in for...sad.


    sad but true
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    jlew24asu wrote:
    sad but true

    exactly...it is true that its sad people try to justify their position with this agrument.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    I read in the paper last week a quote from Cheney..."We're not working on an exit strategy, we're working on a victory".

    Definately some sort of dimented reality he lives, if he thinks there's still a chance of that!!
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jlew24asu wrote:
    no I used common sense to know that soliders are aware of the possibility of going to war and dying.

    fair enough, but allow me to take it a step farther...a person signing up would practice good "common sense" in believing they would be be given the best possible equipment to keep them safe...and that there leaders would not incite the ememy with statements like "bring 'em on"....
  • PaperPlates
    PaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    inmytree wrote:
    fair enough, but allow me to take it a step farther...a person signing up would practice good "common sense" in believing they would be be given the best possible equipment to keep them safe...and that there leaders would not incite the ememy with statements like "bring 'em on"....


    Yeah, because their whole beef with us is all caused by "bring it on". If only GW hadn't said "bring em on", they would have given up and lived peaceful lives.
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    PaperPlates wrote:
    Yeah, because their whole beef with us is all caused by "bring it on". If only GW hadn't said "bring em on", they would have given up and lived peaceful lives.

    nice use of absolutes...anyway, perhaps you're right, I forgot the hate our "freedom" and "our way of life"....
  • PaperPlates
    PaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    inmytree wrote:
    nice use of absolutes...anyway, perhaps you're right, I forgot the hate our "freedom" and "our way of life"....

    Like I'm the only one around here who deals in "absolutes". Every argument made here on your side of the equation starts and begins in unrealistic 'absolutes'.
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    PaperPlates wrote:
    Like I'm the only one around here who deals in "absolutes". Every argument made here on your side of the equation starts and begins in unrealistic 'absolutes'.

    every argument, huh...? if you say so...

    they still hate us for our "freedom", right...and if "they are not with us, they are against us"....right...we can't "cut and run", right...

Categories