2,000 dead...and counting

[commatosa]

2,000 American kids dead, 2,000 families left wondering what purpose their sons' and daughters' deaths served, millions of friends wonder what the reason for going into this war in the first place actually was, and 1 president completely blissful in his ignorance. We tried, we failed, now let's abort the mission and get the fuck out of there.

[I am all talk]

I don't agree with the war but to pull out now will have catastorphic results. A realistic plan for withdrawl is one thing but to pack up and leave right now would be the biggest mistake in our countries history.

[richter915]

I don't agree with the war but to pull out now will have catastorphic results. A realistic plan for withdrawl is one thing but to pack up and leave right now would be the biggest mistake in our countries history.
the biggest mistake was going in there in the first place

except of course, if you're a major stock holder of Halliburton.

[I am all talk]

the biggest mistake was going in there in the first place

except of course, if you're a major stock holder of Halliburton.
excluding Vietnam, slavery, and internment camps I'd agree but a premature evactuation would be much much worse.

[richter915]

excluding Vietnam, slavery, and internment camps I'd agree but a premature evactuation would be much much worse.
well of course. I meant in regards to this whole situation.

on a side note, I'm just thinking about how the existence of slavery, something so wrong and immoral, helped make us into the world's top super power. Kinda sad.

[radiofriendly]

on a side note, I'm just thinking about how the existence of slavery, something so wrong and immoral, helped make us into the world's top super power. Kinda sad.
slavery was common practice. it built strong economy in several countries around the world at the time. i guess im not sure what you're getting at...

[I am all talk]

well of course. I meant in regards to this whole situation.

on a side note, I'm just thinking about how the existence of slavery, something so wrong and immoral, helped make us into the world's top super power. Kinda sad.
ofcourse. slavery is what made the south so rich. But I would be more than willing to trade being the last remaining superpower if our country was never dependent on slavery.

[ArTkY_]

i wonder how many total casualties there are?

[USAFDave]

do you realize how dirt poor the vast majority of the south was after the civil war? try going into georgia and saying "Sheman" and see what happens. Slavery did not make the US a super power.

This number is a joke. That many would have died in a day in WWII or a week in Vietnam. Its yellow journalism and a "death count" really doesnt mean much to me when we are talking about the liberation of millions from a murderous dictator. And dont think Im not sympathising with the families. I'll be leading troops and I sure as hell dont wanna lose any of my boys. I think it hits us in the military harder than it does anyone else, because EVERY one of those who falls is our brother or sister, not just another notch to make some political point. At this point it doesnt matter why we went in, we have to keep our boys and the millions of innocents here and there safe. Pulling out now would not be in the best interests of the Americans, Iraqis, or the world at large. I dont think that people understand the bloodbath that would result from creating such a power vacuum. Sorry, we cant just pull out now. And thats a military perspective.

[Justin_stacy]

2,000 American kids dead,.

Kids? More like Men and Womyn? But i guess such respectable terms should be unexpected from someone as unrespectable as yourself........

ofcourse. slavery is what made the south so rich. .
actually it was the poorest part of the nation at that time (and still is to a great percentage). Industry creates overall wealth not slavery, and the south had very little industry.

[Elijscott]

do you realize how dirt poor the vast majority of the south was after the civil war? try going into georgia and saying "Sheman" and see what happens. Slavery did not make the US a super power.

This number is a joke. That many would have died in a day in WWII or a week in Vietnam. Its yellow journalism and a "death count" really doesnt mean much to me when we are talking about the liberation of millions from a murderous dictator. And dont think Im not sympathising with the families. I'll be leading troops and I sure as hell dont wanna lose any of my boys. I think it hits us in the military harder than it does anyone else, because EVERY one of those who falls is our brother or sister, not just another notch to make some political point. At this point it doesnt matter why we went in, we have to keep our boys and the millions of innocents here and there safe. Pulling out now would not be in the best interests of the Americans, Iraqis, or the world at large. I dont think that people understand the bloodbath that would result from creating such a power vacuum. Sorry, we cant just pull out now. And thats a military perspective.
Thank you.

[commatosa]

Kids? More like Men and Womyn? But i guess such respectable terms should be unexpected from someone as unrespectable as yourself.........
Well, seeing as how the people who sent the soldiers to Iraq are old enough to be their parents. Then yes, in comparison, they're kids.

[EnderDove]

I think its time for me to make myself look like an ass.

Each one of those 2,000 joined the military on their own. They did it and should've known that if you join you have a strong chance of fighting for your country. They died for the country and I respect that. But dont use numbers just to make a point about this war.

Any man or woman who joined the military should've knew that they had a strong chance of dying. If they thought they would just do nothing for their two years and then go to college then they should've thought harder.

Im sick of seeing families protesting about how their children are in Iraq. Well maybe you should've protested with them before they joined the armed forces.

[Justin_stacy]

Well, seeing as how the people who sent the soldiers to Iraq are old enough to be their parents. Then yes, in comparison, they're kids.

No you're a fucking ignorant self centered prick. These people aren't "kids" no matter who sent them, they are men and womyn who died for this country, and regardless of whether your simple mind agrees with what they are doing, they don't deserve belittlement from someone like you....

The iraqi war was wrong in my opinion, but unless you can prove otherwise, these are respectable people who don’t deserve disrespect, particularly in death. If you want to belittle someone deserving of it, why don't you start with someone like sheehan who's using her son's death for fame and notoriety. An act like that is certainly deserving of disrespect……

[I am all talk]

Kids? More like Men and Womyn? But i guess such respectable terms should be unexpected from someone as unrespectable as yourself........


actually it was the poorest part of the nation at that time (and still is to a great percentage). Industry creates overall wealth not slavery, and the south had very little industry.
Yes. the majority of souterners did not own plantations but without slavery the south had next to nothing. Free labor is what their economy was based on.

[Justin_stacy]

Yes. the majority of souterners did not own plantations but without slavery the south had next to nothing. .

oh i don't disagree with that at all, but the term "so rich" was out of place, as the majority of the south at that time was greatly impoverished, even by the standards of the time.

[open mind]

i think it's sad that 2,000 of our soldiers are dead, i also think it's sad that the tens of thousands (if not 100,000 plus) of innocent dead iraqis are hardly noted.
we've already created a huge bloodbath going in and occupying, so we obviously don't mind bloodbaths, so the whole "there would be a bloodbath if we leave" stance doesn't work for me.

[I am all talk]

oh i don't disagree with that at all, but the term "so rich" was out of place, as the majority of the south at that time was greatly impoverished, even by the standards of the time.
I did not mean to imply that they were richer than the industrialized North. But it is no secret that those who held the power in the South were slave owners and the common man(white males) agreed with slavery.

[commatosa]

No you're a fucking ignorant self centered prick. These people aren't "kids" no matter who sent them, they are men and womyn who died for this country, and regardless of whether your simple mind agrees with what they are doing, they don't deserve belittlement from someone like you....

The iraqi war was wrong in my opinion, but unless you can prove otherwise, these are respectable people who don’t deserve disrespect, particularly in death. If you want to belittle someone deserving of it, why don't you start with someone like sheehan who's using her son's death for fame and notoriety. An act like that is certainly deserving of disrespect……what's with everyone spelling women "womyn"? Anywho, who the hell said that they're not respectable for what they've done? These are kids my age dying. If only 1 soldier died then they died for a shitty reason. But since 2000 soldiers died, that really boils my blood. The soldiers don't even know what they're fighting for. We originally went into Iraq thinking Saddam was an imminent threat and he had ties to al-qaeda and WMD's. Wrong and wrong. Now the dumb-fuck admistration conveniently changed their reasoning for going into war by saying "we wanted to liberate Iraq." If Bush would have said that from the beginning, no one would have supported it. Why the FUCK should we sacrifice 2000 lives of our soldiers so that Iraq could have their independence. Would they have done the same for us? No way. Would any country be so fucking stupid to do something like that? No. This war should have never taken place. And don't put words in my mouth. I never belittled the soldiers. I never once said they weren't honorable for what they did. God, what fucking balls George W. Bush has. I want him to look every single parent of a soldier that died in the eye and say "your child died for a good cause." I wish that people could see that these 2000 soldiers died for a gut feeling that Bush had which turned out to be false. I'm sure Saddam Hussein is happy. We risked 2000 of our soldiers just to get rid of him. Fucking bullshit. Open your eyes war supporters. What's the real reason why we're there? Quit eating up every shitty excuse the administration feeds you. They're all a bunch of liars, but the only difference between a lie that they tell and a lie that you and I tell is that when they lie, people die.

[Justin_stacy]

Anywho, who the hell said that they're not respectable for what they've done? These are kids my age dying. .

You did by belittling their deaths. And the fact is these are not “kids” your age, no kid can sign up for the army, as a kid can not sign a contract in this country.

The average age of a soldier who gave his life in Iraq is 27, well above anyone’s standard of adulthood.

If only 1 soldier died then they died for a shitty reason. But since 2000 soldiers died, that really boils my blood. .

Then you attack the war, the administration, the congress or the voting public…..but you don’t resort to attacking or belittling the troops without cause. Soldiers don’t choose their battles, they go where told and they fight where told, that’s the job they chose. And the very fact that they are willing to give their lives in the name of this great nation, alone, deserves respect and admiration, unless personal actions show otherwise.

The soldiers don't even know what they're fighting for. .

Bullshit, prove it……and I would like to point out that you are really in no position to comment on anyone else’s intelligence.

We originally went into Iraq thinking Saddam was an imminent threat and he had ties to al-qaedas and WMD's. Wrong and wrong. Now the dumb-fuck admistration conveniently changed their reasoning for going into war by saying "we wanted to liberate Iraq." .

Dumb fuck Britain’s, French, Australian’s, Syrian’s, Egyptian’s, Russian’s, European Union, Clinton Administration, New York Times, Washington Post, United Nations….etc. Everyone thought he had “WMD’s,” and if it wasn’t for corruption and payoffs, America and England wouldn’t have been the only ones defending UN resolutions. Money was the only reason other, major, nations and the UN didn’t support the war and that’s a proven fact.

And your example is weak too, the purpose of many battles change as time moves on. The Civil War, for example was not started, nor intended, to free blacks, but was developed into such cause as time wore on, and this is also, now, seen as the defining act of the wars outcome.

It was also more then clear that bringing down Saddum was always one of the reasons for the war.

If Bush would have said that from the beginning, no one would have supported it. Why the FUCK should we sacrifice 2000 lives of our soldiers so that Iraq could have their independence. .

That’s a valid point, and your right going in with just that as an excuse probably wouldn’t have flown. But then again neither would have, “were only going into destroy “WMD’s”, not to bring down the dictator or controlling party.” Everyone knew that part of the battle was deposing Saddum. Was it the major rallying cry to begin with, no. So you do have a valid point, but it does not justify any attacks on the soldiers themselves…..

Independence for an oppressed people is also a point validation for most of America’s war related excursions. So for argument’s sake, what makes Iraqi’s any less deserving of freedom or our help then the numerous other nations we’ve helped over the years?

This war should have never taken place. And don't put words in my mouth. I never belittled the soldiers. .

Yes you did, labeling adults as kids is belittlement. Saying their chosen actions are equal to the acts of children, is belittlement….whether or not you understand the weight “your” words carry, does not mean I’m putting words in your mouth. You could have easily ended this, admitted that your wording was in poor choice, and been done. People make mistakes. But giving a bullshit excuse like, “the people who sent them are old enough to be their fathers, so therefore the kids claim is valid,” is just ignorant. Many of the Generals are in their upper 60’s, so if they sent a man to war who was in his late 30’s, would it be justifiable to label this solder as a kid? The General is obviously old enough to be the soldier’s father.
See your excuse was just stupid, your wording was disrespectful, and I put nothing in your “mouth”…..

[I am all talk]

You did by belittling their deaths. And the fact is these are not “kids” your age, no kid can sign up for the army, as a kid can not sign a contract in this country.

The average age of a soldier who gave his life in Iraq is 27, well above anyone’s standard of adulthood.



Then you attack the war, the administration, the congress or the voting public…..but you don’t resort to attacking or belittling the troops without cause. Soldiers don’t choose their battles, they go where told and they fight where told, that’s the job they chose. And the very fact that they are willing to give their lives in the name of this great nation, alone, deserves respect and admiration, unless personal actions show otherwise.



Bullshit, prove it……and I would like to point out that you are really in no position to comment on anyone else’s intelligence.



Dumb fuck Britain’s, French, Australian’s, Syrian’s, Egyptian’s, Russian’s, European Union, Clinton Administration, New York Times, Washington Post, United Nations….etc. Everyone thought he had “WMD’s,” and if it wasn’t for corruption and payoffs, America and England wouldn’t have been the only ones defending UN resolutions. Money was the only reason other, major, nations and the UN didn’t support the war and that’s a proven fact.

And your example is weak too, the purpose of many battles change as time moves on. The Civil War, for example was not started, nor intended, to free blacks, but was developed into such cause as time wore on, and this is also, now, seen as the defining act of the wars outcome.

It was also more then clear that bringing down Saddum was always one of the reasons for the war.



That’s a valid point, and your right going in with just that as an excuse probably wouldn’t have flown. But then again neither would have, “were only going into destroy “WMD’s”, not to bring down the dictator or controlling party.” Everyone knew that part of the battle was deposing Saddum. Was it the major rallying cry to begin with, no. So you do have a valid point, but it does not justify any attacks on the soldiers themselves…..

Independence for an oppressed people is also a point validation for most of America’s war related excursions. So for argument’s sake, what makes Iraqi’s any less deserving of freedom or our help then the numerous other nations we’ve helped over the years?



Yes you did, labeling adults as kids is belittlement. Saying their chosen actions are equal to the acts of children, is belittlement….whether or not you understand the weight “your” words carry, does not mean I’m putting words in your mouth. You could have easily ended this, admitted that your wording was in poor choice, and been done. People make mistakes. But giving a bullshit excuse like, “the people who sent them are old enough to be their fathers, so therefore the kids claim is valid,” is just ignorant. Many of the Generals are in their upper 60’s, so if they sent a man to war who was in his late 30’s, would it be justifiable to label this solder as a kid? The General is obviously old enough to be the soldier’s father.
See your excuse was just stupid, your wording was disrespectful, and I put nothing in your “mouth”…..
While I agree with many of your points, those who enlist are indeed the children of a mother and a father. They have parents and therefore are kids. The are not young children, they are not teenagers and while you say 27 is beyond anyone's standards of adulthood it is also well short of anyone's standards of age for death.

[commatosa]

You did by belittling their deaths. And the fact is these are not “kids” your age, no kid can sign up for the army, as a kid can not sign a contract in this country.

The average age of a soldier who gave his life in Iraq is 27, well above anyone’s standard of adulthood.



Then you attack the war, the administration, the congress or the voting public…..but you don’t resort to attacking or belittling the troops without cause. Soldiers don’t choose their battles, they go where told and they fight where told, that’s the job they chose. And the very fact that they are willing to give their lives in the name of this great nation, alone, deserves respect and admiration, unless personal actions show otherwise.



Bullshit, prove it……and I would like to point out that you are really in no position to comment on anyone else’s intelligence.



Dumb fuck Britain’s, French, Australian’s, Syrian’s, Egyptian’s, Russian’s, European Union, Clinton Administration, New York Times, Washington Post, United Nations….etc. Everyone thought he had “WMD’s,” and if it wasn’t for corruption and payoffs, America and England wouldn’t have been the only ones defending UN resolutions. Money was the only reason other, major, nations and the UN didn’t support the war and that’s a proven fact.

And your example is weak too, the purpose of many battles change as time moves on. The Civil War, for example was not started, nor intended, to free blacks, but was developed into such cause as time wore on, and this is also, now, seen as the defining act of the wars outcome.

It was also more then clear that bringing down Saddum was always one of the reasons for the war.



That’s a valid point, and your right going in with just that as an excuse probably wouldn’t have flown. But then again neither would have, “were only going into destroy “WMD’s”, not to bring down the dictator or controlling party.” Everyone knew that part of the battle was deposing Saddum. Was it the major rallying cry to begin with, no. So you do have a valid point, but it does not justify any attacks on the soldiers themselves…..

Independence for an oppressed people is also a point validation for most of America’s war related excursions. So for argument’s sake, what makes Iraqi’s any less deserving of freedom or our help then the numerous other nations we’ve helped over the years?



Yes you did, labeling adults as kids is belittlement. Saying their chosen actions are equal to the acts of children, is belittlement….whether or not you understand the weight “your” words carry, does not mean I’m putting words in your mouth. You could have easily ended this, admitted that your wording was in poor choice, and been done. People make mistakes. But giving a bullshit excuse like, “the people who sent them are old enough to be their fathers, so therefore the kids claim is valid,” is just ignorant. Many of the Generals are in their upper 60’s, so if they sent a man to war who was in his late 30’s, would it be justifiable to label this solder as a kid? The General is obviously old enough to be the soldier’s father.
See your excuse was just stupid, your wording was disrespectful, and I put nothing in your “mouth”…..
okay, I apologize for saying that they're kids. However, you misinterpreted what I meant. "I am all talk" pretty much nailed it on the nose. Their parents are still alive and, yes, they are WAY too young to die.

[Justin_stacy]

okay, I apologize for saying that they're kids. However, you misinterpreted what I meant. "I am all talk" pretty much nailed it on the nose. Their parents are still alive and, yes, they are WAY too young to die.

If you meant it as he said, you should have responded as such to my original comment, instead of Well, seeing as how the people who sent the soldiers to Iraq are old enough to be their parents. Then yes, in comparison, they're kids..........which just made you sound stupid. Fair?

I hate to be so confrontive, but "kid" can be a very loaded word.......