I know I’m in the minority here, but these recent casualties don’t faze me in the slightest. And frankly I write off anyone who gets too upset about them as a naive soul.
Good Jeezus, this is (notice I did not write “was”) a war. Soldiers die in wars. That’s an unavoidable aspect of the job they signed on to. I’m not happy about it, but I expect and accept it.
OK,I give up. Which one of you is the real Baghdad Bob?
You make a poignant statement. Indeed soldiers die in war… But, did not GWB say the major hostilities were over… Oh, I’m sorry he must have meant the hostilities were over where we killed others. Not when our boys/girls were dying.
Sir, I am not asserting that soldiers do not die. I am asserting that the casualties mount in the course of a ill-fated “Nation building” mission that GWB opposed in his campaign.
Also, I am horrified by our presidents ability to “write-off” these casualties and go on with his re-election campaign. A true leader would be espousing this reality to the American people and allowing them to understand why their sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers and friends are dying.
For the record, what is the death toll at now. Can anyone tell me? Or do we care anymore?
Writing off a certain level of casualties comes with the territory. Surprise, surprise, occupation means costs. Iraqi deaths, American deaths, British deaths.
What should be most worrisome is the poor level of planning shown to date and the inability of the Administration to come up with realistic plans on getting things jump started. I note for the record, for example, that there are still no investment guarantee facilities or the like ready, and from what I hear from insiders, none are likely to be in place anytime soon as the Admin had not planned for the current scenario.
What then should be worrisome more than some soldiers dying is the incoherence of Admin policy, the lack of realism on cost and from what I see, the constant pressure to try to do things on the cheap rather than face up to fairly staggering costs.
201 as of yesterday, confirmed deaths, of which 63 are post 1 May cessation of major combat.
I am sad to say my fears that I expressed in a review of “BlackHawk Down” in re inappropriate cycle of tit for tat and revenge are coming to pass.
I really wonder if the USA public are willing to put up with this daily drip for several years with local stations showing the families grieving etc. I have my doubts.
Well, they bloody well better, else we have a very large Afghanistan.
and we cannot let go! My solution:
-appoint a transitional Iraqui government
-get Parvez Musharref (Pakistani dictator) to send in muslim troops
-declare our muission accomplished and GET OUT!
You won’t be too upset, then, if you take up Baghdad street patrol with that hardened heart of yours. After all, being upset about death is naivete, right?
I can remember when the unacceptable number of American soldiers being used for target practice was 19, in Somalia. Oh yes, of course, 9/11 changed that, with Saddam Hussein destroying the towers, yep, yep. Nevermind me, memory’s too long.
Ralph
Perhaps you should not offer solutions.
Appointing an Iraqi (no “u”) government is not so bloody simple. Were it so simple, it would have been done. Short termism is a severe danger here.
Given the protests against such a move (generally sending troops) and given the weakness of the Pakistani government, this is a rather absurd suggestion. A contribution may be in order, but Pakistan does not have the resources to police Pakistan, let alone Iraq.
See my message above. Bugging out now is the worst of all.
Simply put, time to pony up the money, resources and people necessary - and that includes cutting deals with the UN etc.
Hold on, Barton, don’t use twisted logic here and expect not to get called on it.
No, I’m not taking up any street patrols in Baghdad. Nor should any American non-military personnel. But soldiers do soldiers’ work.
There are no forced conscripts in the US military. When you join, you buy into the following deal: we give you free room, board, medical services and a salary, and you follow orders. Those orders may put you on some tropical base for 4 years where the only thing shooting at you are the goony birds; or they may put you in the middle of a hellish firefight in some lawless, forgotten corner of the globe; you may die – that is part of the deal.
As an American civilian whose tax dollars pays for this arrangement, I do not begrudge those lucky US soldiers who while away their enlistments under the palm trees when there are no hostilities. But by the same token, I do not think twice to put those soldiers in harm’s way when they are needed. And I do not expect them all to survive the fighting. Being a soldier is a crapshoot (frankly, with pretty good odds these days – compare it to prior wars and you’ll be stunned). If they want no part of this bargain they should not have signed up.
I suspect the Republican Party will complain very loudly about the continuing American presence in Iraq – but only after a Democrat takes the White House.
Thanks stuyguy,that’s well said.
“rjung”, You let your guard slip and the truth came out… You actually consider this whole subject as a political football.
I’ll be sure and pass that along to my aunt and uncle if one of my cousins comes home in a body bag. :rolleyes:
SimonX, if your cousin is killed in action your family will be rightly inconsolable. But are you suggesting we steer the ship of state based on your aunt and uncle’s grief? If you are, then I will call you naive and roll my eyes at you! (And when it’s my turn to play Prez For A Day, wait til you see what I have in store for you bastards in Jersey. Ha-ha.)
On a more generally directed note, I suspect a lot of fretting over recent casualties is nothing more than disguised anti-Bushism and anti-warism. If you hate Bush or the war, fine. Just say so. Don’t pretend that there’s an American bloodbath happening in Iraq (there isn’t), or even worse, that no one is supposed to die, dammit, no one is supposed to DIE!
You are, of course, welcome to suspect whatever you like. Simply keep in mind that your suspicions, unless directly attributable to actual information, are in no way superior to the ordinary prejudices and ignorance so many of us steer ourselves by.
As difficult as it may be, I do attempt to keep my political opinions neutral. I consider that the great majority of Fearless Misleaders actions vary from the misguided to the ill-advised, with occassional detours into the perfectly ludicrous. I try not to allow my opinion that he is a puffed up mediocrity with delusions of leadership affect my judgement. You will appreciate the difficulty, being, as you are, afflicted with your own groundless suppositions as to the motives of others.
WTF? How the hell did you get this idea?
There are places where you can stick your straw man.
If you can’t think of any, let me know and I’ll suggest one for you.
You said:
Since you seem oblivious, I am going to tell you that your statement is, at best, reprehensible, callous, short-sighted, small-minded, cavalier and naive.
It’s sad that human death doesn’t “faze you in the slightest.”
This is not a game of Risk. Those who die are real people.
Some people are genuinely concerned that the American deaths are not justified by the, (still), potential benefits. Some people believe the chairman of the NIC’s prediction that the invasion of Iraq, (as it occurred), has increased the number of potential recruits for al Qaeda et al. The increase in recruits will serve to strengthen these organisations and consequently lead to more terrorist activities. To some, this isn’t an outcome that justifies the actions taken to create it.
I’m going to assume for the moment that you just did not give careful consideration to your word choice and didn’t actually intend what your words connote.
Simon you win. You have waltzed me down your stupid path of logical perfection to prove that I would be callous prick if I believed that your family should not be upset by your cousin’s death. You are 100% correct that, taken literally, my statement implies that. You were right. There, I admit it.
Now, let me rephrase the statement:
“…And frankly I write off anyone who gets too upset about them, except those who knew and loved them personally, as naive souls…”
Okay?
The heart of the matter is this, soldiers die doing their jobs. It is part of their jobs. This is not a game of Risk, but it is how wars are waged and international statesmanship is enforced.
Now, as for this statement: “…Some people are genuinely concerned that the American deaths are not justified by the, (still), potential benefits…”
I agree that that sentiment is out there. But in my opinion, those people are the naive ones. (Or the ones who hate Bush and/or this war and use the distaste of American deaths as a disguise for their true opinions.) They have no clue that the Allied deaths of this conflict have been miniscule compared to prior wars we have fought. The price we are paying to fight this war in terms of blood is tiny (granted, not to their loved ones). If you want a cite, search for a Sunday NY Times article a few months ago that showed a month-by-month American casualty tally of all the wars we have fought in since WWI. Some months the bars on the graph, for WWII, especially, shoot up the page, maybe 8 or more inches – and WWII went on for 4 years, remember. IIRC, the casualities on this war were so tiny by comparison, the bars were often wider than they were tall.
As for the “(still) potential benefits,” some of them may be huge and some of them may be nonexistant; and yes, some of them may actually backfire in our faces with more anti-Americanism – the verdict probably won’t be in for years, but such is the case with most wars. (Did they foresee WWII after WWI?) Wars, like soldiering, are crapshoots too.
But we DO know that Saddam is toppled and the thousands of Iraqis who suffered under him are better off today than they were a year ago. That much is undeniable.
Well, whoop-de-fuck-a-doo!
I don’t give the legendary rat’s ass how the numeric scoring of this debacle compares with other wars. One American life was too many
In addition, we have committed what may well prove to be the first truly major geopolitical blunder of the 21st Century. We’re #1! With a bullet. Further down the list of potentially disastrous consequences is the growing awareness that we have attached Count Iraqula to our fiscal jugular: we are going to be spending billions upon steaming billions, pissing it away in a golden stream gushing into the Godforsaken Desert and disappearing without so much as a damp spot.
So a miserable little pissant tinpot tyrant, whos military machine would probably be bitch-slapped by Belgium in a fair fight, this dreadful threat to our securty, is no more. And the Iraqi people may very well be marginally better off, in the right light, and if you squint a little.
There are some remarkably thick-witted people in positions of great importance in America. If possible, we should do something about that.
Well that’s easily taken care of. Just eliminate whatever taxes we haven’t already eliminated and the occupation will pay for itself.
Lord God, Minty don’t give them any ideas! You knew, didn’t you, that december is under consideration for a State Dept. posting? That the SDMB is under constant surviellance by the Forces of Darkness…excuse me, there’s somebody at the…
…should listen gratefully to The Leader. The Leader is wise and good, the Leader is like your Father, only smart. Go back to sleep, everything is fine, go back to sleep…