T Nation

Tragic Milestones in Iraq

We’re approaching two milestones in Iraq, regarding US casualties.

1,000 US servicemen killed in action. We’re currently in the vicinity of 950 American deaths, and will probably go over the 1,000 mark well before the November election.

And in the next few weeks, we will have more Americans killed in action during the “post-handover” period in Iraq, than were killed during the initial invasion phase (major combat operations aka “Mission Accomplished”). Team Bush hoped that handing off “control” of Iraq to the Iraqis would symbolize less US involvement in Iraq… that hasn’t happened.

These rapidly-approaching milestones are causing Team Bush to privately shit bricks. The 1,000 KIA milestone is thought to be a tipping point, when lazy sacks of shit in the American public begin to finally wake up, and start asking the Bush government “WTF”???

That’s why Bushies are spending so much time talking about Swift Boat trivia. Because Iraq is going so poorly, they want to distract attention away to other issues.

1000 deaths in a year and a half of occupying another country? That’s pretty damn good. You’d have to be a moron to get really worked up over that number.

Hey jackass,

My brother is over there fighting for the freedom of that country. Some of those 1000 casualties were friends of his. For someone who’s profile describes themselves as a “couch potato” you really don’t have any grounds to be making light of the deaths of those service men and women. Calling anyone a moron for caring about the lives of those soldiers is completely idiodic and shows a real lack of tact and maturity. 1000 deaths, no matter where or when, is nothing to take lightly.

1000 deaths in a year and a half is pretty damn good? I think that’s rather disgusting that you can just brush it off like it’s nothing.

May they RIP.

I will echo the three posts I just read above. These soldiers have volunteered for service for their country, and each and every one of them is to be commended.

If you’re going to measure from the standpoint that any death is one too many, you are starting from a point that would disallow any military action. While the death of each and every American soldier is a tragedy, the rate of servicemen killed in action in Iraq is historically quite low. Each and every soldier lost is the loss of a true American, and a patriot, but you have to judge a conflict by a standard that is rational pragmatically.

[quote]doogie wrote:
1000 deaths in a year and a half of occupying another country? That’s pretty damn good. You’d have to be a moron to get really worked up over that number.[/quote]

The unholy fuck is wrong with you?

Two of my best friends are over there. Three people with whom I graduated are over there. I get emails from them occasionally, and all of them was friends with one of the “damn good” casualties.

BostonBarrister~
Very eloquently said.

1,000 young Americans dead IS too much and God bless their souls. US involvement there is going on too long and many people who supported it at first are no longer supportive.

Five of my friends are leaving for Iraq in October…four of them have a wife and kids at home, hopefully they’ll all return alive.

Yes a thousand deaths are too much especially when one considers that the war need not have taken place. And what about the needless deaths of the innocent Iraqi civilians. They are people with families as well.

This is why our country is eventually going to collapse. We are at war with people who have no qualms about murdering 3000 innocent civilians in a single day. Instead of celebrating the sacrifice that these 1000 soldiers have made to protect us, we are wringing are damn hands and whining. War sucks. Every single one of those 1000 men and women signed up to defend us. None of them would want to think that people back in America are saying their sacrifice was wasted.

Of course it is tragic that 1000 of our brave men and women have died in the last year and a half defending us. However, in the past we have lost that many in a single day. If we as a country decide that we aren’t willing to suffer this kind of loss (which I still say is not terrible in terms of a year and a half of fighting), we are finished.

And yes, I was in the Army Reserve but never saw any kind of combat.

And I do have many friends who are over there right now. Not one of them would describe the deaths of their fellow soldiers as tragic. Heroic, yes. Tragic, no.

When this war started the American military administration sat down, ran the figures, planned their approach and asked themselves “How many men are we likely to loose?” Then they asked, “Is this acceptable?” if it wasnt, they wouldnt of taken that approach. Despite a few skirmishes, etc im pretty sure the invasion and occupation has gone as planned. You may see your loss of your friends loss “As totally unacceptable” but in terms of your national interests? Im sure your service men were aware of this when they signed on the dotted line.

If the military did the best for their men as they could (and i believe they did, despite some of the media reports), and this situation is still “unnacceptable” then why the hell are you letting your government continue the war?

[quote]Of course it is tragic that 1000 of our brave men and women have died in the last year and a half defending us.
[/quote]

The military is not defending us in Iraq, they’re ‘bringing freedom to the Iraqi people’ or something to that effect.

There’s no guarantee that in the long run, we’ve made Iraq any better off… for example just replacing one ‘strong man’ (Saddam) with another (Allawi).

If anybody thinks that mission is essential to US interests and is worth 1,000 US casualties, 6,000 US seriously wounded, and 200 billion dollars in taxpayer dollars, then more power to you. I invite you to join the military, and go to Iraq to demonstrate the power of your convictions.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:

The military is not defending us in Iraq, they’re ‘bringing freedom to the Iraqi people’ or something to that effect.

If anybody thinks that mission is essential to US interests and is worth 1,000 US casualties, 6,000 US seriously wounded, and 200 billion dollars in taxpayer dollars, then more power to you.
[/quote]

Of course they are defending us in Iraq. How many thousands of terrorists have poured into Iraq from Syria, Saudia Arabia, and Iran? Burrying those fuckers in Najaf is a million times better than having them blow themselves up on American soil.

zepplin wrote: “that the war need not have taken place.”

Here’s lumpy: “The military is not defending us in Iraq”

Imagine if a family member stumbles across these sort of posts.

The sacrifice of our soldiers and their families were for the noblest of causes: Freedom. Freedom and security for the United States and the rest of the world.

JeffR

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Of course it is tragic that 1000 of our brave men and women have died in the last year and a half defending us.

The military is not defending us in Iraq, they’re ‘bringing freedom to the Iraqi people’ or something to that effect.

There’s no guarantee that in the long run, we’ve made Iraq any better off… for example just replacing one ‘strong man’ (Saddam) with another (Allawi).

If anybody thinks that mission is essential to US interests and is worth 1,000 US casualties, 6,000 US seriously wounded, and 200 billion dollars in taxpayer dollars, then more power to you. I invite you to join the military, and go to Iraq to demonstrate the power of your convictions.
[/quote]

Freedom has a price, it isn’t free. We as Americans have paid the price for over 200 years. Yes it is tragic that people had to die. Do you think they knew what they were getting into when they signed their contract to either enlist or take their commission? I know I did.

Iraq Iraq, IRAQ, It is soooo tragic what is happening…WELL I am going to ask you Lumpy, what about BILL CLINTON AND SERBIA??? Where is the outcry on ALL that happened in that war? WHY was Move.org NOT comdemning Bill Clinton for that War? Why didn’t Michael Moore, give any outcry to that War? Why didn’t the muscians, actors, and actresses, go out in mass and condemn then President CLinton? And yet, and I am going to repeat this to you. Where was the OUTCRY by the left when ALL of this was going on???

Who NATO Killed
Since the Nato airstrikes began on March 24 Serb officials say more than 2,000 civilians have been killed and more than 7,500 wounded. Nato has owned up to bombing raids and missile attacks that have killed 460 civilians, according to a tally by Agence France-Presse. By all accounts, the bombing was indiscriminate, killing farmers, suburbanites, city dwellers, factory workers, reporters, diplomats, people in cars, busses and trains, hospital patients, the elderly and children. Indeed, by our count, Nato bombing raids have killed more than 200 children. Hundreds more will almost certainly perish in the coming months, through environmental factors, such as poisoned water supplies and lack of electrical power to run vital hospital equipment. The following list of civilian casualties is far from comprehensive. We compiled it from daily reports by the Yugoslav Foreign Ministry and wire services, including Agence France Presse, Reuters and AP

http://www.counterpunch.org/dead.html

By Jared Israel
In 1995 the Croatian Army, trained, led and given air support by the Pentagon, launched a blitzkrieg against the Krajina section of Croatia, driving out in a matter of days approximately 250,000 Serbian men, women and children whose ancestors had lived in that mountainous region since medieval times. Thousands were strafed by U.S. planes or slaughtered by Croatian troops as they fled. Afterwards, Croatian President Tudjman went on a tour of celebration. Croatian radio reported that he boasted to cheering crowds:

A Letter to President Clinton
from Montenegrin Writer Yole Stanishich
Mr. President Clinton:

You call your country ‘a peace-loving, civilized,defender of human rights and personal freedoms’, but what you are doing turned it into a monster, the world’s biggest factory of the highest technologies of death.

You speak of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, but what do you and your counsellors know of Kosovo? It is a battle-field sacred to all Slavs, where the destiny of Europe was decided six hundred years ago. It’s the place where Serb epos was born. The people living there have always cherished it and protected it from any profanation. For Kosovo is the Serb Golgotha and the Resurrection. Many Serbs and Montenegrins that for years had lived in the United States often come to the Kosovo field to take a handful of the sacred earth to their temples and homes. Your hopes, Mr. President, for a split in our people and for a victory over them are futile. Today’s Serbs and Montenegrins are the descendants of the fighters that marched to eternity in 1389.

You bombed the Serb city of Kraguevac where the Nazi Germans shot 7,000 people including whole schools of children together with their teachers. Also you were extremely cruel to our sacred places, our cities, our nature and our children. I am sorry for your daughter . She will be horrified by what you have done. Your image is forever disfigured by the crimes you have committed.

Yole Stanishich

During the first month of the war on Yugoslavia, the NATO planes and cruise missile made over 10,000 attacks. More than 2500 cruise missiles were launched and over 7,000 tons of explosives were dropped. The following list is based on information provided by the Yugoslavian Foreign Ministry.

After the demolition of the Petrovaradin bridge, Novi Sad and Petrovaradin were cut of water supply (600 000 citizens) since the main and city pipeline was constructed into the bridge. About one million citizens, according to Yugoslav sources, are short of water. About 500 000 workers became jobless due to the total destruction of industrial facilities all around the country. Two million citizens have no means for living and cannot ensure the minimum for existence. Overall material damage is enormous. Preliminary estimates indicate that NATO air strikes have incurred damages in excess of 10 billion dollars. In the territory of the northern province of Vojvodina alone, damages have been estimated in excess of 3,5 billion dollars.

T R A F F I C

The road and railway networks, especially road and rail bridges, most of which were destroyed or damaged beyond repair, suffered extensive
destruction. The targets of attacks were such communications as:

ECONOMIC AND CIVILIAN TARGETS, PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS

The air strikes have so far destroyed or damaged several thousand economic facilities and dwellings. In the Leskovac region alone, over 3,500 industrial facilities and dwellings were either destroyed or damaged. The devastation is particularly bad in Pristina, Novi Sad, Aleksinac, Djakovica, Prokuplje, Gracanica, Cuprija, etc. Housing blocks on the outskirts of Belgrade - Kijevo Knezevac, Batajnica, Jakovo, Borca, as well as the area around Pancevo have been under attack.

  1. INDUSTRY AND TRADE:
    The NATO attacks have targeted the factories and industrial
    facilities which directly cater for the needs of the population, among
    which are:

SCHOOLS (MORE THAN 200 FACILITIES)

Over 2000 schools, faculties and facilities for students and children were damaged or destroyed (over 25 faculties, 10 collages, 45 secondary and 90 elementary schools, 8 student dormitories, as well as a number of
kindergartens), including:

. PUBLIC AND HOUSING FACILITIES (TENS OF THOUSANDS

http://www.counterpunch.org/serbia.html

So you talk about the tragic milstones in Iraq… What about these??? Don’t any of these count??? And this War is still going on today…And is still a powder keg…

Joe

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Of course it is tragic that 1000 of our brave men and women have died in the last year and a half defending us.

The military is not defending us in Iraq, they’re ‘bringing freedom to the Iraqi people’ or something to that effect.

If anybody thinks that mission is essential to US interests and is worth 1,000 US casualties, 6,000 US seriously wounded, and 200 billion dollars in taxpayer dollars, then more power to you. [/quote]

Thank God you and your love bead wearing friends weren’t around when Ike made the call to invade at Normandy.

Doogie -

I agree with you 100%. War is hell. The main objective with any of our armed forces is to kill people and break things.

In the course of carrying out that objective, there will be those brave patriots who give the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

Death is part of the equation. It can’t be separated out, or ignored. The best we can do is minimize the death toll on our side. To have only lost 1000 patriots in a year and a half of war is a good thing. Saying this does not minimize the loss of any patriot - it is drawing attention to the fact that our brave men and women fighting in Iraq are so well trained.

Why is everyone getting so worked up over someone saying 1000 deaths isn’t all that high for a year and a half over there. It’s the truth! I have relatives over there as well but to be honest more people die here at home by un-natural causes in a few weeks than all of the men and women we have lost over there. Yes any death is tragic, but what is more tragic is lumpy trying to use our heroes’ deaths to make a political statement by pulling on our heartstrings. These people did not go over and risk their lives so that opponents of the war could trash them by using thier deaths as fodder fo an election. That is B.S.!

Vegita ~ Prince of all Sayajins

Lumpy:

I was going to rip into you for that one, but so many others beat me to it, it would be like kicking a man when he is down.

I will make just one comment: Let’s not politicize the deaths of those brave soilders!

Thank you,

Zeb

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
1,000 US servicemen killed in action. [/quote]

The current Iraq occupation has lasted about as long as WWI, in which there were well over 50,000 casualties. So we might have expected about 50,000 casualties.

WWII produced over 400,000 US casualties, roughly 75% of them in combat, over a period about four times as long. So we might have expected about 75,000 casualties.

The Korean war produced over 33,000 casualties in about twice as long. So we might have expected 16,000 casualties.

The Vietnam conflict produced some 47,000 casualties over about seven times as long. So we might have expected about 7,000 casualties.

It seems to me that there is a trend here, because the number of casualties over time seems to drop drastically from conflict to conflict after WWII; with less than 1,000 casualties so far, I suggest that we have made yet another advance.