Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/24/2017 4:44:23 PM
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/7/2004 11:35:43 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:36:46 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:37:33 AM EST
i think letting them leave the mosque was a mistake should have moabed it.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:38:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 11:39:11 AM EST by mtechgunman]
God rest their souls.





ETA: whoops, wrong animation. sorry. fixed it.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:39:41 AM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:
Any American death is sad and tragic. What was the daily death toll average in WW2 or Vietnam?



Can't tell you that one, but when americans were killing americans in the 1860's the death rate was (on average) over 400 A DAY!
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:40:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 11:41:00 AM EST by fight4yourrights]
Kerry will love dancing in the Blood



1,000 school kids suicide each year.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:43:17 AM EST
No disrespect to the dead, but I think that figure is somewhat misleading.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:46:46 AM EST
In Vietnam for many years it could be around 300 a week during the worst 500+ was not uncommon.

That is little comfort to the families but it is still a remarkable accomplishment that casualties are this low.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:51:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 11:51:56 AM EST by Zaphod]
WOO-HOO!

YES!

LET'S CELEBRATE!

THIS IS AWESOME NEWS!

WONDERFUL!

YAY!



Sorry. Just thinking what the dolts at Duh must be saying right now....
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 11:53:29 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 1:44:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 1:45:25 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By 1911greg:
i think letting them leave the mosque was a mistake should have moabed it.



Which would have lost the entire Iraq operation right then and there, numbskull.

As I've said before we have 2 choices:

Fight for their Hearts & Minds
-or-
LEAVE

If we're not going to liberate them, then we have no business sitting around in their country shooting people - this is war, not blood sport, and the objective of war is to WIN.

When you blow up sites that are of significant value to the civillian population of the entire country, you lose your ability to do this... In short, do what you suggest and those 1,000 troops will have died in vain, because only about 90 of them were killed toppling Hussein, the other 910 or so died to free Iraq.

So, there is no excuse for what you are proposing. If you don't want to expend the resource and yes, the lives, neccicary to create a free Iraq, then take your place with the hippies at the anti-war demonstrations, as that is where you belong. But don't advocate a course of action that will result in even more US troops KIA, while ensuring that they are fighting for an objective that cannot be achieved. If you don't think it's worth it, than cut to the chase and say 'pull out, it's not worth it', but don't be a sick SOB and say we should just be over there to kill for the sake of killing - that's not war, that's mass murder (in war, you kill to advance your objective, not just to up the body count).

We are there to FREE IRAQ, not to KILL MUSLIMS like it's some perverse version of a canned hunt. The first concept serves to help us win the war (one down, 10-20 tyrants left to go), the 2nd only serves to prolong, if not completely clusterfuck it.

Link Posted: 9/7/2004 1:54:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 1:55:18 PM EST by CAMPYBOB]
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 1:56:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
That is little comfort to the families but it is still a remarkable accomplishment that casualties are this low.



Advancement in body armor means many more troops survive, but are crippled. The war on Iraq has several amputees for every death.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:02:48 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
god bless those men and women...each and every one of them!



+1
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:07:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:
Any American death is sad and tragic. What was the daily death toll average in WW2 or Vietnam?



1K Killed in Theater is a sad Milestone

WWII, ~3 years 9 months. (Dec '41 'till Aug '45) ~405K US War Dead.

1365 days by 405k = 296.7 US War dead Per day in WWII.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:08:13 PM EST
Yes, They died for us. Let none of us forget them.

God Bless each and everyone of them.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:24:17 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
god bless those men and women...each and every one of them!


When you blow up sites that are of significant value to the civillian population of the entire country, you lose your ability to do this...

you mean sites like the reichstag?

the brandenburg gate?

monte casino? the clock tower at hiroshima?

bah!

hearts and minds my skinny white ass.

you know the rest...

this is war...

yup.

and a whole bunch of folks ain't got a clue how the dealio goes down. oh well. there's time for learning.



Campy, if you don't care for the interests of the civillian population, then why have US troops there at all?

Since it is obvious that blowing up a national shrine is going to make it alot harder to get the people of Iraq to support our mission, then by assiciation if you support the mission of liberating Iraq you cannot also be for blowing up the shrine

1 of your examples was destroyed by Adolph Hitler, the other a part of the Berlin wall.

The other two are invalid because we were fighting a national government -> different rules.

60-80% of the population, plus the government is on our side, a comparable argument would be blowing up the Washington Monument to kill a bunch of terrorists that had taken up refuge there...

And if you don't support the mission, then you don't support the war. Period. There are no other options. The singular purpose of the US mission to Iraq is to reform the country into a democratic free nation. WE ARE NOT THERE TO KILL AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.

So, do you support the mission?

If the answer is 'no', then can the 'just kill' bullshit and say what you really mean, which is: It's not worth it, bring 'em home

I, for one, think it IS worth it, and assuming I make it into/thru OCS I'll be over there soon enough...
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:30:57 PM EST
Democrats love this news, like ad-men who just came up with a catchy slogan...



New!

$19.99

Carb Free!

1,000 deaths!
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:37:56 PM EST
i think it's amazing that our KIA is that low considering the environment, political circumstances, and style of fighting we're being faced with. we're writing books on urban warfare as we go along and i feel that we should be proud. respect goes out to the fallen and condolences to those that they left behind.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:41:17 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:43:09 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 2:51:37 PM EST

I, for one, think it IS worth it, and assuming I make it into/thru OCS I'll be over there soon enough...



And you'll be singing a different tune when you do. Some people just need to be killed, in order for our mission to be accomplished. Many Iraqis want these killers dead and gone, ASAP.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:08:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

I, for one, think it IS worth it, and assuming I make it into/thru OCS I'll be over there soon enough...



And you'll be singing a different tune when you do. Some people just need to be killed, in order for our mission to be accomplished. Many Iraqis want these killers dead and gone, ASAP.



Which is what we are doing right now...

They want the terrorists gone... We ARE killing them...

What I am 'singing' about, Bunny, is the fact that Campy & others would throw it all away just for a chance to kill a few more Muslims.

He & similar obviously don'tt care weather the actions taken hurt our chances to win the war, as long as Muslims (terrorist or innocent) are dying...

My point is that the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE is that we win the war.

We cannot do that if we turn the whole country against us.

Vietnam was different, you should know, you were there.

We eventually wiped out the VC (insurgency) successfully using the tactics that were employed... Limited war works just fine on insurgents.

The failure in Vietnam wasn't a failure to kill enough VC, it was a failure to deal with North Vietnam (an actual real live country) harshly enough...

Well, this time there is no North Vietnam. Iraq is under our control right now, and we are fighting a strictly guerilla war. If we were to see the Mahadi/Saddamist version of Tet, with the same results, we'd win.

But, we have as much chance of winning the Iraq war by use of nukes than we did of winning the Vietnam war by nuking SOUTH Vietnam.

THAT is my point.

NOT that we shouldn't kill terrorists. We should kill every last one of them.

BUT that we need to do it in such a way that does not PO the locals and get them to back the terrorists instead of (a) hiding in their homes waiting to see who wins (what most of them do now) or (b) supporting our efforts...

If we're not going to 'do it right' (see above statement), then we should just go home, because we're wasting our time...

See where I'm going?

P.S. Campy, Mac never got the Chinese back to the Yalu. That's why we're stuck on the 37th...
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:20:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Kerry will love dancing in the Blood





You do realize that disrespectfull statements like that make you look like an assclown.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:25:52 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:30:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
I was listening to talk radio on the way home... one day in the civil war... September 17, 1862 IIRC... 23,000 men died that day. ONE FUCKING DAY!

While all death is tragic, lets put it in perspective. A dictator toppled and in custody, his sons dead, freedom grows daily as we nurse it in part of the world that has never known it.



Try telling that horseshit to the familys of the thousand dead Americans. I would not trade one of there lives to free a fucking Iraqi. I thought the purpose of the war was WMD and ties to Al-Qaeda?
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:04:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 4:10:33 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
I was listening to talk radio on the way home... one day in the civil war... September 17, 1862 IIRC... 23,000 men died that day. ONE FUCKING DAY!

While all death is tragic, lets put it in perspective. A dictator toppled and in custody, his sons dead, freedom grows daily as we nurse it in part of the world that has never known it.



Try telling that horseshit to the familys of the thousand dead Americans. I would not trade one of there lives to free a fucking Iraqi. I thought the purpose of the war was WMD and ties to Al-Qaeda?



Well then, VA, I've got a bridge to sell you on the East Coast, and some oceanfront property in AZ....

Liberating Iraq was allways the mission, it's just not the cause used to sell the war. If it was about Saddam and WMD we could have left as soon as we captured him & killed his kids...

Unfortunately, Bush has taken untill now to seriously and directly advocate it (the first time I heard him say it was at his RNC speech)...
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:07:06 PM EST
Jesus, here we go again. The Kerry and Democratic apologists come out of the woodwork, run around like Chicken-Little and say we never should have gone to war, etc.

If we hadn't gone into Iraq and another attack had hit us (perhaps with Bio or Nuc from Iraq or other states) then these same people would be screaming that we should have DONE something.

Dinger - your own boy, Kerry, is on record repeatedly saying that Hussein needed to be taken out, that he had or was developing WMDs, and that he would have invaded Iraq too.

Stop being such a hypocrite.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:09:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 4:09:41 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By Greywolf2112:
Jesus, here we go again. The Kerry and Democratic apologists come out of the woodwork, run around like Chicken-Little and say we never should have gone to war, etc.

If we hadn't gone into Iraq and another attack had hit us (perhaps with Bio or Nuc from Iraq or other states) then these same people would be screaming that we should have DONE something.

Dinger - your own boy, Kerry, is on record repeatedly saying that Hussein needed to be taken out, that he had or was developing WMDs, and that he would have invaded Iraq too.

Stop being such a hypocrite.



I hope you realize that my posts are not anti-war...

They're anti-lose-the-war-to-kill-a-few-more-Muslims....

As I said, LIBERATE or LEAVE

Then again, I'm no Kerry apologist...
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:11:11 PM EST
Oh no, Dave, my little spouting was NOT directed at you at all.

I'm pretty much in total agreement with most of what you have posted.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:12:31 PM EST
Hell, my brother is over there right now training their officer and NCO corps. Says we ARE doing the right thing, that it WILL make the world a safer place, and that if we had sat on our hands and done nothing (like Clinton did) we'd have a LOT more 9-11s happening to us.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:17:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 4:22:32 PM EST by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
I was listening to talk radio on the way home... one day in the civil war... September 17, 1862 IIRC... 23,000 men died that day. ONE FUCKING DAY!

While all death is tragic, lets put it in perspective. A dictator toppled and in custody, his sons dead, freedom grows daily as we nurse it in part of the world that has never known it.



Try telling that horseshit to the familys of the thousand dead Americans. I would not trade one of there lives to free a fucking Iraqi. I thought the purpose of the war was WMD and ties to Al-Qaeda?



Well then, VA, I've got a bridge to sell you on the East Coast, and some oceanfront property in AZ....

Liberating Iraq was allways the mission, it's just not the cause used to sell the war. If it was about Saddam and WMD we could have left as soon as we captured him & killed his kids...

Unfortunately, Bush has taken untill now to seriously and directly advocate it (the first time I heard him say it was at his RNC speech)...




Are you a member of the Presidents cabinet? It looks like nothing more than a BS cover story to hide the fact that NO WMD have been found or PROVEN ties to Al-Qaeda. LIKE I SAID, I WOULD NOT TRADE THE LIFE OF ONE AMERICAN TO FREE A FUCKING IRAQI. I would have disagreed with the war even harder if that was the presidents stated reason for war.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:43:55 PM EST

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:
LIKE I SAID, I WOULD NOT TRADE THE LIFE OF ONE AMERICAN TO FREE A FUCKING IRAQI.



Well, you're not in a position to do so anyway, so STFU.

I'm getting pretty sick and fucking tired of all these asshats basically saying that these men died for NOTHING. THEY knew what they were doing and they BELIEVED in it, else they would have gone AWOL.

To say their deaths were meaningless is an insult to their memory. They died liberating a nation that was a cesspit of terrorist activity aimed against US. By liberating that nation's population and removing the tyrant, not only was the threat from that country against us eliminated, the other terrorists of the world got sidetracked trying to make our liberation fail, AND we put them on the defensive by beginning to install a democratic and U.S.-friendly government right smack in the middle of their bunch of penny-ante dictatorships which, in case you happen to have forgotten, sit astride the majority of the oil reserves on earth.

So, we've liberated several million people, we've deflected terrorist activity away from our shores, we've put the enemy on the defensive, and we've helped secure the energy sources we need.

Tell me again how these men died for NOTHING?
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:51:30 PM EST
I guess Dinger and his ilk wouldn't trade one American to save or liberate Europe, or the Jews, during WW 2.

Link Posted: 9/7/2004 6:27:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 6:27:58 PM EST by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
THEY knew what they were doing and they BELIEVED in it, else they would have gone AWOL.



Who in the hell said there deaths were meaningless? Don't put words in my mouth during one of your rants. I also see by the statement above that you have never been the military yourself. Soldiers follow orders, end of story.
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 1:59:04 AM EST
So, would you have kept us out of Europe and the Far East during WW 2?
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:54:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/8/2004 2:54:44 AM EST by Cincinnatus]
It's so simplistic and ignorant to think of this in Dinger terms.

We are there.
We are also in Afghanistan.

We will HAVE to deal with Iran, Syria, and others over there... SOON.

So now we have troops sitting on TWO of Iran's borders.
One of Syria's borders, and in the Med.

Where are there terrorists training in large organized camps?
Not Afghanistan. Not Iraq.
Was it worth it?

If we had acted "pre-emptively" in Afghanistan prior to 911, would it have been "worth it"?

Stop thinking like a sound-bite or a talking point.
The world is too complicated to be seen with such a dim bulb as yours.



Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:18:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/8/2004 2:21:35 PM EST by Zaphod]

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
THEY knew what they were doing and they BELIEVED in it, else they would have gone AWOL.



Who in the hell said there deaths were meaningless? Don't put words in my mouth during one of your rants. I also see by the statement above that you have never been the military yourself. Soldiers follow orders, end of story.



Hey, asshat, go look up what USNA means, then get back to me with an apology.

Also, I'll remind you that many soldiers DID go AWOL, both in Vietnam and now. One of them just got sent up the river in Miami a few months ago. It happens.

If you say that not one soldier's life is worth freeing a single Iraqi, and THAT's what the troops are doing, then you are saying that they died for a worthless cause. I didn't put words in your mouth, but you've certainly put your foot there...
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:23:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
I was listening to talk radio on the way home... one day in the civil war... September 17, 1862 IIRC... 23,000 men died that day. ONE FUCKING DAY!

While all death is tragic, lets put it in perspective. A dictator toppled and in custody, his sons dead, freedom grows daily as we nurse it in part of the world that has never known it.



The worst day ever! Americans have never died like that since.

Bilster
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:24:40 PM EST
First two weeks of WWI, the French lost 250,000 men.
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:28:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
First two weeks of WWI, the French lost 250,000 men.



I'm afraid I'm not really "up" on WWI trivia.

ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 2:45:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/8/2004 2:51:55 PM EST by eodtech2000]

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
First two weeks of WWI, the French lost 250,000 men.



WWI was bloodbath!!! edited:The Battle of the Somme, 60,000 casualties in the first day, 20,000 dead!


Here is a real bloodbath, couldn't imagine the press today.


Battle of the Somme: 1 July - 13 November 1916

Intended to be a decisive breakthrough, the Battle of the Somme instead became a byword for futile and indiscriminate slaughter, with General Haig's tactics remaining controversial even today.

The British planned to attack on a 24km (15 mile) front between Serre, north of the Ancre, and Curlu, north of the Somme. Five French divisions would attack an 13km (eight mile) front south of the Somme, between Curlu and Peronne. To ensure a rapid advance, Allied artillery pounded German lines for a week before the attack, firing 1.6 million shells. British commanders were so confident they ordered their troops to walk slowly towards the German lines. Once they had been seized, cavalry units would pour through to pursue the fleeing Germans.

However, unconcealed preparations for the assault and the week-long bombardment gave the Germans clear warning. Happy to remain on French soil, German trenches were heavily fortified and, furthermore, many of the British shells failed to explode. When the bombardment began, the Germans simply moved underground and waited. Around 7.30am on 1 July, whistles blew to signal the start of the attack. With the shelling over, the Germans left their bunkers and set up their positions.

As the 11 British divisions walked towards the German lines, the machine guns started and the slaughter began. Although a few units managed to reach German trenches, they could not exploit their gains and were driven back. By the end of the day, the British had suffered 60,000 casualties, of whom 20,000 were dead: their largest single loss. Sixty per cent of all officers involved on the first day were killed.

It was a baptism of fire for Britain's new volunteer armies. Many 'Pals' Battalions, comprising men from the same town, had enlisted together to serve together. They suffered catastrophic losses: whole units died together and for weeks after the initial assault, local newspapers would be filled with lists of dead, wounded and missing.

The French advance was considerably more successful. They had more guns and faced weaker defences, yet were unable to exploit their gains without British backup and had to fall back to earlier positions.

With the 'decisive breakthrough' now a decisive failure, Haig accepted that advances would be more limited and concentrated on the southern sector. The British took the German positions there on 14 July, but once more could not follow through. The next two months saw bloody stalemate, with the Allies gaining little ground. On 15 September Haig renewed the offensive, using tanks for the first time. However, lightly armed, small in number and often subject to mechanical failure, they made little impact.

Torrential rains in October turned the battlegrounds into a muddy quagmire and in mid-November the battle ended, with the Allies having advanced only 8km (five miles). The British suffered around 420,000 casualties, the French 195,000 and the Germans around 650,000. Only in the sense of relieving the French at Verdun can the British have claimed any measure of success.

Link Posted: 9/8/2004 3:10:57 PM EST
"It looks like General Haig is about to make another gargantuan effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer to Berlin..."
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 3:20:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/8/2004 4:01:16 PM EST by OLY-M4gery]
In that same time

70,000 people in the US dies in traffic crashes.
24,000 people in the US were murdered.


Aren't 1,000 WW-II veterans dying every week?

EDIT: veterans.house.gov/hearings/schedule105/feb98/hearing2-12-98/amvets2-12.htm

36,000 per month estimated
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 3:54:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
In that same time

70,000 people in the US dies in traffic crashes.
24,000 people in the US were murdered.


Aren't 1,000 WW-II veterans dying every week?



Sadly, it's more than likely PER DAY....
Top Top