8052

[imported_Dutch]

killed and wounded. someone explain why it will be worth it?

American Military Casualties in Iraq
List last updated 09/13/04 5:02 pm EDT
Date Total In Combat

American Deaths
Since war began (3/19/03): 1012
Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03) 873
Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 552
Since Handover (6/29/04): 155
American Wounded
Total Wounded: 7040
Latest Fatality September 12th, 2004

[Norske3]

ALL FOR ONE LOUSY BUM!..who ends up in a rat hole! :mad: ...who couldn't even shot straight/deliver in Israel...his "WMD".............Talk about "OVERKILL"...talk about swinging a bat at entire nation to kill a few "fly cells"!....while the "Big Fly " wasn't even in town!

[ 09-14-2004, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: Norske3 ]

[LeeG]

I'll try.

To show the other countries in the region the effectiveness of US military. To secure oil consuming countries access to steady supplies of oil.

Pre-position heavy US material with trained soldiers before Saudi Arabia and Iraq become more unstable.

It's called the Fly Paper Theory,,put it out and something will stick to it.

[Norske3]

HOMES FOR OUR BATTERED TROOPS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>www.homesforourtroops.org

[Shang]

http://www.homesforourtroops.org/

Just a darned minute...

(from the above site)
"We are a 501 (c)(3) non profit organization committed to helping our troops and their families...
...Our mission is to build specially adapted homes for our severely disabled soldiers and their families. Since we started this organization, we have had an outpouring of support from all across America. From monetary donations, donations of building materials and equipment and fundraisers being hosted in our benefit, people everywhere have embraced our effort as their own and we want to thank everyone who has donated to this charity..."

I don't mean to get into a rant, but
what's wrong with this picture...?
The government is spending MASSIVE amounts of tax dollars in Iraq to pursue a war and to pay for the rebuilding, but U.S. soldiers who are being crippled in the process need to rely on a charity...?

Anybody know anything about this organization?

[LeeG]

well it's not the soft bigotry of low expectations.

[Puddintane]

" don't mean to get into a rant, but
what's wrong with this picture...?
The government is spending MASSIVE amounts of tax dollars in Iraq to pursue a war and to pay for the rebuilding, but U.S. soldiers who are being crippled in the process need to rely on a charity...?"

My sentiments exactly.

[LeeG]

imagine one of the Saturday Night Live comedians copying Donald Rumsfield: "well gee, it's a free country, if some people want to help their fellow Americans then what can possibly be wrong with THAT?"

[Shang]

...Landstuhl [Army Medical Center] is a high-tech way station, a place soldiers go for a few weeks of intensive treatment before they're transferred somewhere closer to home, such as the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington. Landstuhl's permanent staff of 120 Army and Air Force doctors, plus reservists brought in for the Iraq war, see a daily parade of young service members with missing limbs, severe shrapnel wounds and horrible burns.
Landstuhl also treats deployed soldiers who've been hurt in accidents or are sick, with illnesses from kidney stones to pneumonia. As of Nov. 20, [2003] 8,093 military personnel had been flown from Iraq to Landstuhl for treatment, said Marie Shaw-Fievez, the hospital's Belgian-born chief spokeswoman.
It takes a toll.
"Very few of the people that I see will actually be back to what they used to be," said Capt. Justin Barratt, a native of Phoenix who got his medical degree at Temple University in 2000.
"Imagine a kid who has lost both arms, asking how he is going to provide for his family," Shaw-Fievez said. "It's gut-wrenching."

[ 09-14-2004, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: Shang ]

[Bruce G]

Better to have the extremists fighting us over there than here. 'Nuff Said!!

[Mrleft8]

Originally posted by Bruce G:
Better to have the extremists fighting us over there than here. 'Nuff Said!!Clearly you'll never have to worry about this in Spring, TX., BUT....... I wouldn't be so sure about your statement if I were you..... "They"'re "here", and "they"'re going to hit us "here" again.

[Shang]

"Better to have the extremists fighting us over there than here. 'Nuff Said!!

It appears that the Iraqis are not fighting to get over here, they seem to be more concerned with our being over there.

[imported_Dutch]

but U.S. soldiers who are being crippled in the process need to rely on a charity...? nothing new there. meanwhile the familys of 9-11 victims get over $1 million a piece simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I need that one explained too

[LeeG]

Originally posted by Bruce G:
Better to have the extremists fighting us over there than here. 'Nuff Said!!actually BruceG from Spring Texas I'd rather fight them over here. We'd have home advantage.
Imagine how motivated your average American would be seeing extremists attempting to take over control of the Whitehouse.

[Shang]

"...Imagine how motivated your average American would be seeing extremists attempting to take over control of the Whitehouse..."

Hmmm...considering that there is already an extremist in the Whitehouse, I think you may be onto something...

[George.]

To show the other countries in the region the effectiveness of US military.
And how said effectiveness is nullified once "major combat" ends and the politicians take over...

[Shang]

Here's a modest proposal:
How about declaring a "Halliburton For a Day" celebration, and donating one day's worth of Halliburton's war profits to injured soldiers.

Last I heard Halliburton Corp. and its subsidiaries were clearing about one billion dollars a month from this war.
Cheney, according to reports, scrapes by on a paltry million dollars a year from his interests in Halliburton.

[swanko]

follow the money:

200 billion for the Iraqi operation

divided by

25,374,691 Iraqis (less every day)

equals

$8,000 per Iraqi

Israelis only get $500 per capita in US aid, think they are jealous?

[LeeG]

Originally posted by George.:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

To show the other countries in the region the effectiveness of US military.
And how said effectiveness is nullified once "major combat" ends and the politicians take over...</font>[/QUOTE]that's one of those quandaries,,,is it poor leadership to not consider that the dissolution of the Baath Party and entire security infrastructure would require a much larger force? With the wholesale avoidance of contrary info from State Dept analysts, academics/middle east experts, all the way to Generals like Shinseki. or is chaos a desired consequence, like 'terrism' in order to accomplish the occupation. Is the threat of chaos in a post war environment a more effective example in that we really aren't extending ourselves as a country,,yes the reserves and ground troops are, but we can stir up a mess and still get 47kinds of jam at the supermarket with fewer casualties than is normal for commuting to work in a country of 280million?

actually the politicians initiate the military action,,they're never out of the loop. So Franks complied with the parameters set down by Rumsfield/Wolfowitz. Abu Ghraib deals with the troops available to run a prison. David Kay gets to run a program with $100millions to find WMD. oops,,guess it does matter whether the intel is acccurate. If the reality disconnect can be that big,,where else can it be disconnected at the top?

Another variation of the "He lied about sex..!" theory,,if the president and his advisors can be so wrong about the threat of WMD after ten years of sanctions, inspections,destruction,,with a host of tainted experts from Chalabi channeled by Rumsfields advisor Perle proving the possible imminence of potential realities,,,well golly what else could they be misunderestimating?

[ 09-15-2004, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: LeeG ]