Milestone of 1,000th U.S. Death in Iraq Looms for Bush

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DLR'sCock
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    • Jan 2004
    • 2937

    Milestone of 1,000th U.S. Death in Iraq Looms for Bush





    Milestone of 1,000th U.S. Death in Iraq Looms for Bush
    By Alan Elsner
    Reuters

    Thursday 12 August 2004

    Washington - The United States faces a painful moment probably next month when its military deaths in Iraq are expected to surpass 1,000. It will also be a crucial moment for President Bush, who faces a presidential campaign in which Iraq is a central issue.

    "Unfortunately that day will likely arrive next month and it will be a fulcrum event that may change many people's views of what we're doing in Iraq," said David Birdsell, a political scientist at Baruch College in New York City.

    "It's a gripping number, a large number, a tragic number and it will be a pivot to revisit Bush's reasons for fighting the war and his premature declaration last year that the mission had been accomplished," he said.

    According to the most up-to-date Pentagon figure, which usually lags events on the ground by a few days, the United States has lost 931 military personnel in Iraq since the war began in March 2003.

    In July, the first month after an Iraqi interim authority took office, U.S. deaths totaled 55, compared to 42 the previous month. So far this month, they are running at a similar or possibly slightly higher rate.

    Compared to past wars, this is a relatively low figure. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. lost 1,363 soldiers in the month of March 1968 alone and more than 58,000 for the entire war. But it is still a higher rate than for any military conflict the United States has fought since Vietnam.

    "The Iraqi body count hurts the president. Already less than half of respondents in my polling say the war was worth fighting and the 1,000 casualty will be a milestone that will be page one news and put a lot more focus on it," said pollster John Zogby.

    Republican political adviser Keith Appell agreed that the 1,000th death would be an "awful milestone" but argued that it would not change anything in the presidential campaign.

    "The Republicans will be on defense for a couple of days but I don't expect the Bush campaign to back off anything it is saying. He needs to stand resolute, to promise to stay the course until victory and to argue that we have no choice but to fight this war," he said.

    Kerry May Keep Quiet
    Conversely, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's best strategy may be to confine himself to expressions of sorrow and comfort for the families of the fallen.

    "Kerry may just keep quiet. The media will probably do the job for him," said University of Michigan political scientist Vincent Hutchings.

    The moment will likely arrive around the time when the candidates are preparing for their crucial debates, tentatively scheduled for late September and early October.

    From the perspective of Bush's campaign, University of Georgia political scientist Brad Lockerbie said, better the number is reached in September than in October.

    After the handover of power to the Iraqi interim government, Iraq seemed to fade from the front pages of the U.S. media, although the death toll continued to rise.

    Now, with U.S. forces engaged in a bloody battle against radical Shi'ite cleric Moktada al-Sadr in the holy city of Najaf in which more than Iraqi 360 militiamen and five U.S. servicemen have been killed, it is back in the headlines.

    Polls indicate that the domestic economy and Iraq are the two top issues in the Nov. 2 election and Bush seems vulnerable on both. But Lockerbie said opinions on Iraq had largely crystallized.

    "This will be a big deal for a short period of time but those who have decided Bush made the right decision in going to war won't change their minds," he said.

    -------
  • DLR'sCock
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    • Jan 2004
    • 2937

    #2
    Soon to be 1,000 US soldiers killed...
    Over 12,000 US casualties...
    Over 15,000 Iraqi children, women, and men killed...
    And UNKOWN number of Iraqi soldiers killed...
    Thousands and thousands of Iraqi casualties...
    Over 150 Billion dollars spent...


    tick tock...

    Comment

    • wraytw

      #3
      1,000 isn't too bad... considering it's a war.

      Comment

      • FORD
        ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

        • Jan 2004
        • 58789

        #4
        Originally posted by wraytw
        1,000 isn't too bad... considering it's a war.
        A war based on lies that had absolutely nothing to do with America.

        So how many 1,000's does it need to be before it's "too bad"?
        Eat Us And Smile

        Cenk For America 2024!!

        Justice Democrats


        "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

        Comment

        • LoungeMachine
          DIAMOND STATUS
          • Jul 2004
          • 32576

          #5
          Originally posted by wraytw
          1,000 isn't too bad... considering it's a war.
          If only you could be one of them

          Just how long ago was it when skippy hopped up to the podium in front of the "mission accomplished" banner and declared an end to "major combat''? How many lives since then? For what?

          We haven't "won" anything.

          No WMD
          Abu Grahib
          No OBL
          No security
          No peace
          Beheaded Hostages

          The puppet regime is going to be picked off one by one

          The "coalition of the willing" is unraveling like a cheap sweater

          Halliburton is showing the world what we're made of

          We are unable to gain control of places like Falluja and Najaf

          Not too bad considering it's a war?

          Your standards for sacrificing human lives are just a little below mine I'm afraid.

          We haven't even been told the truth about the 10s of 1,000s of civilian lives.

          Too bad rummy, wolfie, and the rest didnt listen to the experts warning of the dangers of ignoring the need to win the peace as well.

          Not too bad?

          I wonder at what number you'll change to "aw, that's too bad"
          Originally posted by Kristy
          Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
          Originally posted by cadaverdog
          I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

          Comment

          • DLR'sCock
            Crazy Ass Mofo
            • Jan 2004
            • 2937

            #6
            So I though Al Qaeda attacked us right??? So shouldn't we be at war with Al Qaeda?

            Comment

            • ELVIS
              Banned
              • Dec 2003
              • 44120

              #7
              This thread is so gay, It should be merged with the dick sucking Jersey governor thread...

              Comment

              • Viking
                Veteran
                • Jan 2004
                • 1774

                #8
                Considering that the rat's nest of insurgents over there is infested with the same ilk that killed THREE THOUSAND of us in a few minutes, I'd say the scoreboard still tilts against us. We need to speed up the ass-kickings before another 9/11 happens again. And they WILL try again within 90 days.

                Mark my words.

                Comment

                • Viking
                  Veteran
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 1774

                  #9
                  LOL Elvis, that just reminded me of Frank Zappa's song, 'He's So Gay'.

                  Frank Zappa rules.

                  Comment

                  • Sgt Schultz
                    Commando
                    • Mar 2004
                    • 1268

                    #10
                    “Just how long ago was it when skippy hopped up to the podium in front of the "mission accomplished" banner and declared an end to "major combat''? How many lives since then? For what?”

                    It was mission accomplished. It was the end to major combat. All of Iraqi organized military forces were obliterated. The Iraqi government was either in hiding, captured or dead. If you read military history you’d know that. Why do you think the carrier was back in the United States? Apparently you think we should still have around the clock flight operations from carriers in Iraq? The left thinks that we should just be still flying dangerous missions enforcing the “no-fly-zone” in northern and southern Iraq, Saddam and his cronies and family pocket the “oil for food” money, whilst Iraqis endure REAL torture, death and repression. Amazing.

                    “We haven't "won" anything.”

                    No? Tell that to the people in the military who would beg to differ. Saddam’s in prison. The heirs to Saddam’s Iraq are dead. Freedom of speech, assembly and the press and elections to be held in 2005.

                    “No WMD”

                    Really?

                    “Polish soldiers in June of 2004 recovered munitions containing the nerve agent cyclosarin.” – Source, Reuters

                    "Chemical munitions found by Polish soldiers were being pursued by terrorists. Polish troops had been searching for munitions as part of their regular mission in south-central Iraq when they were told by an informant in May that terrorists had made a bid to buy the chemical weapons, which date back to Saddam Hussein's war with Iran in the 1980s, Gen. Marek Dukaczewski told reporters in Warsaw. 'We were mortified by the information that terrorists were looking for these warheads and offered $5,000 apiece. An attack with such weapons would be hard to imagine. All of our activity was accelerated at appropriating these warheads.' Dukaczewski refused to give any further details about the terrorists or the sellers of the munitions, saying only that his troops thwarted terrorists by purchasing the 17 rockets for a Soviet-era launcher and two mortar rounds containing the nerve agent for an undisclosed sum June 23," – Source, AP

                    “The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.” – Source - UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission Report to the UN Security Council
                    Link to UN Report here

                    World Tribune Article

                    “Over the last few months, the U.S. intelligence community has received new evidence a sizable amount of Iraqi WMD systems, components and platforms were transferred to Syria in the weeks leading up to the U.S.-led war in Iraq, reports Geostrategy-Direct, the global intelligence news service.” – Source, Geostrategy-Direct.com

                    And since you and so many others keep conveniently forgetting that WMDs were ONE reason for going to war, here are one of the other reasons.


                    "After Sept. 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, the Russian special services, the intelligence service, received information that officials from Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States and outside it against the U.S. military and other interests," Putin said, according to RIA Novosti, the Russian news agency. "American President George Bush had an opportunity to personally thank the head of one of the Russian special services for this information, which he regarded as very important," the Russian president told an interviewer while in Astana, capital of Kazakhstan. – Source, Washington Post
                    Washington Post Article

                    "Iraq intelligence probes prove Bush, Blair weren't fibbing"
                    Chicago Sun Times Article

                    “Abu Grahib”

                    Overblown to the extreme. Plus, the Senate, and actually everyone, WERE informed by military officials of some alleged prisoner abuse as early as January of this year.

                    “concerned parents of an accused soldier informed 16 members of Congress - top Democrats such as Sens. Hillary Clinton, Teddy Kennedy and John D. Rockefeller - and the governor of Virginia of the burgeoning [Abu Grahib ] scandal as far back as Feb. 26.
                    Moreover the U.S. Central Command told the media of an investigation into abuses on Jan. 16, just days after a report by a whistleblower. “ – Source, NY Times
                    New York Times Article
                    On March 20, 2004, Central Command "announced not only allegations, but they listed the types of abuses."

                    “No OBL”

                    And you seem to think that the U.S. is not trying to kill or capture OBL? What is your point here? That the U.S. could have used troops now in Iraq to capture OBL? This argument makes no sense. Besides, do you think terrorism will stop if OBL is killed?

                    “No security. No peace"

                    How many terrorist attacks have there been in the U.S. since 9/11/01? Leftist’s definition of PEACE is an absence of war. I suppose the U.S. could be “at peace” now if it were not engaging terrorists worldwide, right?

                    “Beheaded Hostages”

                    What’s the point here? This is somehow GWB’s fault? Should we do as the terrorists say so a few are not murdered now so that many thousands may be murdered at a later time?

                    “The puppet regime is going to be picked off one by one”

                    What would be your choice – hold elections in June of 2004 – or – have an interim govt. for awhile and then have elections? Is this “puppet regime” installed in perpetuity? Is this notion of them being picked off "one by one" a prediction? A hope? Why is it that every setback we have in Iraq makes leftists gleeful? Interesting.

                    “The "coalition of the willing" is unraveling like a cheap sweater”

                    Nice try. Spain has withdrawn 1,400 troops. This is your proof of the unraveling of the coalition? This list just isn’t good enough for libs, because it doesn’t include Germany and France.

                    USA 130,000
                    United Kingdom 9,000
                    Italy 3,000
                    Poland 2,460
                    Ukraine 1,600
                    Netherlands 1,100
                    Australia 800
                    Romania 700
                    Bulgaria 480
                    Thailand 440
                    Denmark 420
                    El Salvador 361
                    Dominican Republic 302
                    Hungary 300
                    Japan 240
                    Norway 179
                    Mongolia 160
                    Azerbaijan 150
                    Portugal 128
                    Latvia 120
                    Lithuania 118
                    Slovakia 102
                    Czech Republic 80
                    Albania 70
                    Georgia 70
                    New Zealand 61
                    Moldova 50
                    Macedonia 37
                    Estonia 31
                    Canada 31
                    Kazakhstan 25


                    “Halliburton is showing the world what we're made of”

                    I didn’t know Cheney was still working for them.

                    “We are unable to gain control of places like Falluja and Najaf”

                    Yet every other city is stable.This is just plain ignorant of the situation. U.S. forces are completely ABLE to control these two cities. But, taking a cue from leftist peacenicks, for some reason, U.S. forces pound these forces into near submission when suddenly these forces call for a truce. Being “nice guys” we back off and talk truce for awhile. While this is going on the terrorists regroup and refit. Then when they are ready they end the cease-fire they do so. PC thinking in the military and administration is the only reason U.S. forces have not been ALLOWED to conquer these two cities. We wouldn’t want to damage a mosque now would we?

                    Comment

                    • JCOOK

                      #11
                      60,000 in the nam started by another JFK

                      Comment

                      • Satan
                        ROTH ARMY ELITE
                        • Jan 2004
                        • 6664

                        #12
                        Originally posted by JCOOK
                        60,000 in the nam started by another JFK
                        Not true. Vietnam began under the Eisenhower administration. Ike was the first, and unfortunately the best, of the BCE presidents. Kennedy wanted out of Vietnam, which is among the reasons they killed him. Couldn't shut down that Golden Triangle drug smuggling operation, ya know.
                        Eternally Under the Authority of Satan

                        Originally posted by Sockfucker
                        I've been in several mental institutions but not in Bakersfield.

                        Comment

                        Working...