Dead Americans from war in Iraq approaching number of dead from September 11th

[Phlegmak]

So when we have lost more troops in Iraq than were killed from September 11th, it's like al-Qaeda has hit us a second time and are laughing at us all the while?

Or is this just the birth pangs of victory, to use Condoleeza Rice's terms?

 

[Peri]

Yes it is as regards to your first point. However those who support everything the President says and does will refuse to accept it. As the for the rest of us, we knew this was going to happen months and months ago. What is worse than the death toll is the effect it is having on the military as a whole. It will never be like Vietnam but with many new threats on the horizon is it sensible to have your army stuck in an endless war of attrition? The war on Terror started over 5 years ago and all we have to show for it is a lot of dead and wounded soldiers.

 

[classical_hero]

Well the number of Iraqi's dead by the hand of the "insurgents" is even higher, which proves that they really do not care who they kill as long as someone is dead.

 

[Jawz II]

im still not getting it, why did america attack iraq again? freedom?

 

[Peri]

What has the civil war in Iraq got to do with the war on terror?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So when we have lost more troops in Iraq than were killed from September 11th, it's like al-Qaeda has hit us a second time and are laughing at us all the while?

Or is this just the birth pangs of victory, to use Condoleeza Rice's terms?

The real question would be: how many insurgents and terrorists have we killed /killed themselves since September 11, 2001?

Really, I'm curious. It's got to be in the tens of thousands.

 

[Peri]

But how many of these did we create by our own actions?

 

[classical_hero]

But how many of these did we create by our own actions?

If you take it to the logical conclusion, it is all their fault for starting thi, not us.

 

[Peri]

Not totally getting what you are saying but.... was it really necesary to make it worse for ourselves by spawning new terrorists because of our own incompetence?

 

[JohnRM]

So when we have lost more troops in Iraq than were killed from September 11th, it's like al-Qaeda has hit us a second time and are laughing at us all the while?

Or is this just the birth pangs of victory, to use Condoleeza Rice's terms?

Except that the kill ratio is more like 2:1 in favor of the US, instead of 158:1 in favor of the terrorists.

 

[Rambuchan]

But how many of these did we create by our own actions?

Hey dude, who cares if you created them in the first place or not? Point is, Bush looks damn good and tough killing them.

 

[Peri]

So is this war of attrition is only going to be won when all terrorists are dead?
If so how will you know when you have got them all and how do you stop there being any new ones?

You are right Rambuchan. He is a War President and by god he intends to have a war.

 

[Rambuchan]

He is a War President and by god he intends to have a war.

Undoubtedly he is a War President. Question following: Is this a reflection upon the electorate that voted him in? I mean, are they a 'War Populus'?

If not, better think twice before voting for some tough guy in the future, or better make sure the system doesn't get rigged next time, and definitely think twice in the face of fear mongering that drives people to vote for tough men.

 

[Peri]

I know this is stolen but 'wouldnt it have been a good idea if the voters knew that he was a War President before 2000?'

 

[zenspiderz]

You know it may just be that the estimate of US soldiers may be somewhat underestimated. It is quite usual for propaganda purposes for ANY military adventure that casualties be under estimated, enemy combatants casualties inflated and civillian casualties ignored or under estimated. You know the saying 'the first casualty of war is the the truth'.

For confirmation of this see this link

In additional support of this I have seen a report of a freelance Iraqi journalist Dahr Jamail who claims that he happened to witness an US armoured column being wiped out by anti tank missiles and RPGs that was never reported by the US media or added to the 'score'. If this is true (of course he may be biased) it is quite likely that a great many other combat related fatalities have gone un-reported or put down as 'wounded' which is a count that is usually ignored by the media.

 

[classical_hero]

I know this is stolen but 'wouldnt it have been a good idea if the voters knew that he was a War President before 2000?'

Well I think that war was thrust upon him.

 

[Rambuchan]

I know this is stolen but 'wouldnt it have been a good idea if the voters knew that he was a War President before 2000?'

Good idea from whose perspective? Clearly it was good for a choice few and terrible for many, many others.

But I'm curious, was there any tangible inclination of what was to come prior to the election?

 

[carlosMM]

Well I think that war was thrust upon him.

Can we have this again, please?


The war was WHAT upon him????????? I must have misread you.

 

[classical_hero]

Had the 9/11 attacks not happened then all this will not be happening. Basically war was declared on America by these terrorist and now this is happening. It is a shame that most people do not see this for what it realy is. We are in a war no matter what people want to believe.

 

[MamboJoel]

Except that the kill ratio is more like 2:1 in favor of the US, instead of 158:1 in favor of the terrorists.

Ahem... And what ratio do we have to reach exactly ?