It really is a shame that the US military finds itself stuck in Iraq with no legitimate goal and no sensible exit strategy.
At this point, they might best serve their country by being killed or wounded, if that would increase the chances of having Bush voted out in the next election. Not the current steady drip, drip, drip of casualties we are currently enjoying. Let’s see some dramatic losses, if that would galvanize opposition to this unnecessary wasteful policy, and its proponents.
Lest anyone wish to characterize me as heartless and bloodthirsty, I’ll remind you that my preference was to not commit the military on this fool’s errand in the first place. Under my preferred course of action – inexpensive and proven effective containment - we could have avoided all of the casualties unnecessarily incurred so far.
I kinda see the logic but don’t think this thread will end well.
What kind of levels are you talking about? Couple of hundred in as many days, more? Would it lead to the US pulling out? If things got that hot in Iraq wouldn’t the soldiers be more needed to protect the civilians that need their protection.
The US and allies unfortunately kicked this thing off and without the UN in control (this would most likely still mean a lot of US soldiers) they are stuck there IMO. If they pulled out because of high casualties I’d have even more animosity against the Allies than I do now.
Please make this your sig. I think it will make it clear to everyone what your moral compass looks like, and will serve as evidence when others say that cretins like you don’t exist.
I agree with yojimbo that this won’t be well received. And I don’t think you need to exert yourself too much in the casualty line. There will be plenty of them anyway without such help.
For starters, I think you’re going to have a hard time finding volunteers for your idea.
While it is true that horrific losses would galvanize the public against the war, the same could be said for any policy or situation. A stock market crash would galvanize the public against whatever the current administration might be, a rash of high school suicides would galvanize the public against pressures in school, etc. This is not what you want to wish for.
You seem to be hoping for a dramatic turn of events so that your position will become clearly the correct one without all those unpleasant shades of grey getting in the way. But that is the nature of things in the real world. Things are not black or white, right or wrong, good or bad, and to hope for the worst case scenario simply to prove you are right is, well, wrong.
Hoping for a massacre on US soldiers for the effect it might have on Bush’s re-election chances, eh? No, can’t imagine how anyone in their right mind would characterize that as heartless or bloodthirsty – or idiotic and sick either for that matter
Are you for fucking real?
This is one of the most pathetic idiotic OP’s I’ve read during my stay at SD. Also weren’t insinuations that some posters were calling for just something like this one of the straws that broke the esteemed December’s back? Life imitating December? Have you considered you might best serve your country by putting a bullet in your head?
Unless Kerry proposes an immediate and swift withdrawal from Iraq (which I don’t believe he does), I don’t see how large casualties would improve anybody’s lot. It fairly disturbs me to see you viewing deaths as a means to distort public opinion in favour of your views. Bush’s policies should stand or fall on their own merits; to wish death on fellow countrymen because you don’t believe they’re dying enough to prove you right is… well, it’s not right.
Like it or not, the USA is engaged in Iraq now; what possible replacement for Bush do you envisage who will unilaterally withdraw at this stage? There is no “net benefit” to be achieved by your mass casualties; merely a change in government. This may or may not be a good thing, but I doubt it is worth the price you seem to want to pay.
… But since your prefered course of action was not chosen, we should hope for increased casualties to prove a point? Can we ask the casualties (and their families) if they agree that is a good idea… :rolleyes:
OK, I know that is not what you are saying exactly, but the thing is, we are there so now we need to deal with that.
I’m no fan either, but I hope that this event (standing as it is) will reflect poorly on Bush and on his administration’s lack of forsight.
Of course, I would have thought the same four years ago, without this event…
Let’s see if we can calculate how many innocent Americans are dying every day, who are losing their jobs, who are receiving inadequate health care and education. Now how might their situations have been improved with the expenditure of - say - $100 billion or so domestically. Or with the focus of national/worldwide attention not being unnecessarily drawn to Iraq.
Heck, at least members of the military knew (or should have known) that in signing up they ran the risk that an amoral commander in chief might consider their lives so worthless that he would commit them to a cause such as this. The citizens back home being disadvantaged by this administration’s compassionate, uniting policies didn’t volunteer. Of course, I guess the victims of the current administration aren’t actually innocent. They are largely guilty of being poor, uneducated, unhealthy, or similarly disadvantaged. As such, they’re expendable.
The current level and rate of military losses are being widely met with yawns. I do not understand why people are not outraged by the human and economic costs of this action - as well as the costs of the undefined “war on terror.” If someone could propose something else that will wake the public up, I’d love to hear it.
Well, I can’t see how this thread could possibly end happily.
However, in a less inflammatory way, if I may take a stab at it (no pun intended), Dinsdale, are you in some sense trying to say that a comparatively small number of U.S. military lives would conceivably be traded in this manner for a potentially much larger number of Iraqi lives that will be lost if the status quo continues?
If so, under what potential scenarios?
Hey, I was certainly no fan of the invasion to begin with, and I think the U.S. has botched things very, very badly thus far; there’s got to be a better way. What would it be? Because no matter how vehemently I opposed the invasion, I can’t see things turning into anything but a bloodbath if the U.S. unilaterally pulled out right now, without a solid followup plan in place, and preferably a much more multilateral one than anything I’ve seen on the table so far.
“If ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ were candies and nuts, we’d all have a very merry Christmas.”
I understand your frustration with Bush in regards to this matter. However, it is callous and highly insensitive of you to wish death on people in order to vote him out of office.
Either request that this get moved to the Pit or shut up and let it die.
Your casual wish for death and injury among the coalition forces in Iraq is a wish that my nephew, who recently completed a tour in Iraq, should die or be injured.
Of course, he is neither poor, unhealthy, uneducated, or similarly disadvantaged. He is also not such a detestable asshole that he would wish for others to die so that he could make a political point.
Have you considered setting yourself on fire as a public protest? Or are you limiting yourself to wishing death on strangers, and lack the moral courage to experience for yourself what you are hoping for others?
I am assuming this is an attempt at suicide by mod, since you don’t wish to pay your subscription fee. Or else you seriously believe the hateful sewage you put into your OP. In neither case are you worthy of being part of a civilized debate.
