Tikamember
106 posts
Location: BC, Canada


Posted:
Another US soldier died and 2 wounded in Iraq. 138 soldiers died in "Operation:Iraqi Freedom", this mornings death marks 139 dead since President Bush said "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended". More soldier have died post war, does that make any sense to anyone? Iraqi civilian deaths range from 6100-7800. We were devasted by the deaths in 9/11 how must Iraqis be feeling about their casualities? Could these attacks on US troops be as simply as avenaging the death of family members?
I hope todays events pressure that US government to share the decisions and resposibilities of rebuilding Iraq. Hopefully things don't have to get worse before they get better.

Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Tika, how long did the actual campain last? A few weeks, how long has the post war efforts been going on? We (as in the US military) should be glad that so few have died, in comparison to the first Gulf War, where 500+ died in the war. There is less than 400 deaths now. I think this shows our capability. Granted when somebody piles 300lbs of explosives into a car and drives it into a check point, there isnt much you can do about it.

Tika, where in the world did you find your numbers, can you back those up, or are you just trying to sound smart when you dont know whats going on?

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"


colemanSILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom


Posted:
jesus ray, do you have no feelings at all?

this thread was not made for you to turn it into another 'i know more about war than you' soapbox.

your points are correct but have little to do with this post - it wasn't about comparing the current capabilities of the us military to what they were in 1995 which under the circumstances is not a very good comparison at all anyway.
the two wars were vastly different - not least in the timespan of the 'major combat operations' - its no wonder more died in the gulf war if the actual war lasted so much longer.

you again are trying to pick a fight on this board - just once could you not say "yes, it is terrible" i mean for f*ck's sake is this not are your fellow servicemen that we're talking about?

"We (as in the US military) should be glad that so few have died"?

i for one am not glad at any number of deaths.
could you please quote where you got your official number for the death toll under which the us military is content that it's done a good job?
or is it just your measurement that if you've fought a campaign somewhere before then if you have lower casualties next time, then you can be happy with the result?

or maybe you are just trying to sound smart when you dont know whats going on...

"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood


Tikamember
106 posts
Location: BC, Canada


Posted:
quote:
Tika, where in the world did you find your numbers, can you back those up, or are you just trying to sound smart when you dont know whats going on?

There are several organizations and news website that are keeping track of fallen soldiers. It's called a search engine learn to use it. The best one I found is https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm
They put a face, name, age, how the person died, ect. I don't know what your problem is and I don't care. All you do is pick fights making harder for others to discuss something intelligently. You don't listen to anyone or bother to learn from anyone therefore what's the point in me or anyone discussing anything with you. There is no point.

Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Tika, I was refering to the 6100+ innocent civilian deaths , I was agreeing with you on the US soldiers death toll.

Gee I'm sorry Coleman, I thought that by now most would understand that when I say it could be worse, that I am also saying damn that is terrible. I try to look on the positive side of things, at times

Granted I was harsh with Tika, but the idea that 6100 frankly is proposterus.


I am not glad that anyone has died, however I am glad that so few have had to pay the ultimate price.

I am expressing my opinion on what we should be glad of, dont read into it any farther than it is.


Ohh and no Coleman, I dont have feelings, they are a waste of time. You know, you just pop a round in the raghead and laugh then piss on him! Is that what you want me to say? I'll tell you one thing man, I dont feel that way, nor have I ever.

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"


Tikamember
106 posts
Location: BC, Canada


Posted:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/iraq/issues_analysis/casualties_postiraqwar.html

https://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htm

https://www.comw.org/pda/0305iraqcasualtydata.html

Maybe you should open your eyes to what's going on or at the very least stop belittling me. I really don't want another 4 pages of "I know more than you" so please be respectful.

colemanSILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom


Posted:
quote:
Originally posted by Raymund Phule:
Ohh and no Coleman, I dont have feelings, they are a waste of time. You know, you just pop a round in the raghead and laugh then piss on him! Is that what you want me to say? I'll tell you one thing man, I dont feel that way, nor have I ever.
i don't want you to say anything you don't mean ray.
nor have i accused you of hating iraqis.

what i would like is for you to stop picking fights with anyone that makes a comment on war or its consequences.
especially when you repeatedly question people's knowledge yet consistently present nothing but your own opinions to back your 'facts' up with.

quote:
Gee I'm sorry Coleman, I thought that by now most would understand that when I say it could be worse, that I am also saying damn that is terrible. I try to look on the positive side of things, at times
in my opinion there is no 'postive side' to a death count of nearly 400 us soldiers and a total loss of over 8000 human lives.
i understand that you see it as an acceptable loss since after all, this is war but as you might rightly say of me, i could never understand that.

as tika said, please be respectful and don't try again to stifle the discussion of the actual issue here.

"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood


King Of Bongoaddict
522 posts
Location: Berlin


Posted:
tika, ignoring the last few posts and going back to your first one...
I think that unfortunately there will be many more deaths before this is over- the war in iraq is not over, it has merely been driven underground. Sadam loyalists and anti-american jihad fighters from surrounding countries will carry on fighting with the only means left to them- guerilla and terrorist (suicide, hit&run) tactics.
I think the current attacks on the occupying forces may be a combination of both people wanting revenge and professional fighters
- you have to remember that lots of people were, in their own eyes, better off under saddam (ie running water, electricity, steady jobs, home not bombed, family/friends not dead) even despite the opression, so some of them may have turned against the US in the wake of the war.

however as long as the interim government is established despite the attempts to destroy it and democratic elections take place I believe eventually there may be a success story at the end of it. So answering your question, yes, I reckon it is going to get worse (and possibly/probably a lot more messy) before it gets better. If the americans finally come true on their promise to free iraq (and not enslave it) then I think there is hope left.

Your life is ending one minute at a time...
So live it.


Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Where in the world did you see me picking a fight?

And sorry, I know too many bleeding heart liberals that want to up the numbers. Please note that not one of your sources came dirctly from the US government.

Sorry but the Iraibodycount .com is as reliable as a soup sandwich. 600+ deaths- cause of death, variable. 200+ Loss of electricity

778+ deaths, no reason at all holes, all of these are holes. I mean if I wanted to make something look really bad, I would throw in a few extra 1000 deaths and have no way to explain it.

I have an idea, why dont you look at the 500,000 deaths caused by Sadam? hrm?? Remember when he gassed the Kurds? 100% civilian casualties. Geoncide!

Your last source, the best in the lot, the others were very vauge, still had holes. They told a little about what happend in individual cases. However they arnt very clear as to why things happend. They are trying very hard to make it sound like Americans are just shooting anyone that looks at them funny.


Terrible things happen in war, civilian deaths one of them.

Though I can and will agree that they can add up, espcially when power plants are bombed, that causes hospitals to loose power, like when people refuse to stop at roadblocks. Iraqi ammo dumps going off. Military troops hiding next to hospitals and schools, in Mosks.

Look at the way the Iraqis are fighting, they are purposly putting innocent civilians in harms way. Why? So that people will cry foul.

Yes, it is a tragidy, Sadam was givin his chances, the blood of his people is on his hands and his hands alone.

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"


colemanSILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom


Posted:
thank-you for your closing comments ray.

"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood


Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Frosty, that isnt even worth a responce.

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"


colemanSILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom


Posted:
frosty - what ray was trying to point out was that saddam killed lots of people over five years ago.
according to the us and the british he was going to do it again soon (his huge arsenal of wmd being their evidence for this).

however, there was a war over the genocide and saddam was not removed from power then.
it seems this time around he had no weapons left, but the us and british went in to remove him from power, just in case he felt like shooting some civilians again.
so this war prevented over 490,000 civilian casualties didn't it?

ray, please don't compare war to genocide or terrorism unless you are happy with us doing the same.

"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood


Tikamember
106 posts
Location: BC, Canada


Posted:
quote:
you have to remember that lots of people were, in their own eyes, better off under saddam (ie running water, electricity, steady jobs, home not bombed, family/friends not dead) even despite the opression, so some of them may have turned against the US in the wake of the war.

Don't know if anyone heard but we had a major power outage in the east coast (US/Canada). While there was no mass panic attacks people on the news were complaining how they had no running water, electricity and phones and that was just one day. I can't even imagine being months without water, electricity, ect.. While I would be glad Saddam was not in power, hunger, dehydration, increased crime and the US not willing to ask for help would definately piss the hell out of me. I think that anger could drive more to join Sadam loyalists and jihad fighters.
If the Coalition decides to share their responsibilities then I can see a positive outcome but considering how the US is being received there seems to be no trust to build upon.

Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Sorry Coleman, that had nothing to do with what I was saying. Nice try at putting words in my mouth though

Who ever said that more deaths were okay? Hmm... nobody!

Coleman, I dont know what this war prevented. Personally they should have finished the job 13 years ago, but the past is the past and cant be changed.


Tika, you do realise that any Iraqi cought speeking out against Sadam got killed right, not to mention their families?

So no, of course nobody is going to say they dont like Sadam.

I wonder, how many innocent civilians would have died if the US had done nothing. 490,000 well I dont know, but between Sadam and his two sons, I'm sure they could put a serius dent in that figure. I could garunte that there would be more than 7,000.

Things are unstable right now. Nobody is trying to deny that. However, when things are back up and running there will be an immence improvment.

You act as if the US isnt doing anything to try to improve the conditions.

The war is over, but there is still fighting going on, give those guys a break, its hard to climb a telephone pole when your getting shot at!

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"


Tikamember
106 posts
Location: BC, Canada


Posted:
quote:
Tika, you do realise that any Iraqi cought speeking out against Sadam got killed right, not to mention their families?

So no, of course nobody is going to say they dont like Sadam.

When did I say anything about speaking out against Saddam? I don't think that was any of my points but thanks for telling me something I already know.

Raymund Phule (Fireproof)Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California


Posted:
Your absolutly right Tika, that was my point, not yours!

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"



Similar Topics Server is too busy. Please try again later. No similar topics were found
      Show more..

HOP Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...