Korean Job Discussion Forums

[diablo3]

Well .. almost. Above 1990 now anyway.

This is a high number considering that the war was declared over a long time ago.

CNN has a breakdown of the dead in this website.
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

Other websites will have a slightly different number of dead US soldiers.

Any opinions about the situation/war/whatever it is?

[VanIslander]

If history has taught us anything it's that the number of dead is always highly than governments are willing to admit - until a long time after a conflict is over.

[itaewonguy]

STILL history has taught us humans nothing!!
there needs to be sacrifices as they say!! whatever!!

on another note.. seeing that this war is not gonna end anytime soon
I dont see America pulling out anytime soon..

I think its time some other countries got in and we doubled the number of soldiers in there and try to end this more quicker!! I mean just lock down the nation for 1 or 2 years.. go door to door use all the technology we got and end this BS!! whats done is done!! america is in the war. we might as well go with it and move on.. once america wins then its over.. until then keep reading the headlines!!!
you might as well support it!!!
becuase its not gonna go away for sometime!

[Yu_Bum_suk]

[desultude]

[diablo3]

If the number of coalition fatalities exceeded 2000, then I wonder about the truth of the number of dead US soldiers.

Also, about the Iraqis, a number of 30,000 comes to mind, whether that is the number of civilians and/or soldiers, just not sure about that.

[itaewonguy]

[antoniothegreat]

Itaewon guy, you make a good point, and your numbers seem pretty accurate as far as my knowledge of history goes, but I want to know, who are you attacking? you talk about the blood on america's hands, then redirect it to the media for stating outrageous claims.

I agree with the media overdoing it, as they are often anti-Bush, anti-conservative, and anti-Republican (for those who want to dispute that, look at the media coverage, or lack of, for the 2004 Washington State Gubernatorial race...for those that dont know, the Republican, Dino Rossi, won the initial count by a mere 150 votes out of 3 million cast, state law calls for a recount, the recount slims his lead to 50 votes, the democrats request a hand recount, all 30 something counties report about the same number, usually either giving both candidates more votes, or both less, excpet King County, home of Liberal Seattle, and King County somehow discovers 50 more votes, oh wait, not enough, so they find some more, still not enough, well, King county "finds" more votes on 7 occasions, sometimes these votes were not locked, nor even able to be accounted for, and wow, after all the other counties have certifiedtheir votes, Kng County finally finds enough votes (even though no other single country found votes...) to give the election to Gregoire, the Dem candidate. of course, when Bush wins Ohio by 500,000 votes, the media hints at fraud, but an election decided by 20 votes...oh, nothing was wrong there.)

anyways, Itaewonguy, if you are attacking Bush and America for the blood on our hands, do you have any numbers for the amount of people killed in the Iran Iraq War (started by hussein, which i think is between 3,000,000 and 5,000,000) the First Gulf War (started by Hussein) and all the civlians killed during Hussein's reign of terror? Weren't 30,000 Kurds killed when he got mad and decided to drop some chem bombs on his own people?
and really, can the USA be held responsible for the casualities inflicted on Iraqi citizens by international terrorists that target schools, churches, police stations and other Iraqi civil centers? If some lunatic from Syria comes in and blows himself up near a hospital full of children, well, that isn't Bush's or my fault, that is the fault of that insane man, his parents for being bad parents, and the lifestyle that he grew up in.
My opint is, unless the US drops a few nukes on Baghdad, anything we do will be better than the best that Hussein did to rape and pillage his own country and people. and let's not forget, It was he that denied the UN access to search for WMD as agreed by in the treaty ending the First Gulf War, signed by Iraq and the UN, he refused to follow this treaty for a decade. I can't stand it when people say Bush acted to quick, it was a decade. If he says no for 10 years, how long must the world wate for him to abide by that treaty?

[BigBlackEquus]

Itaewonguy does have a very valid point.

In the history of armed occupation and conflict, the entire Iraq war has been one where, by comparison, very few military AND civilian deaths have happened.

In fact, it's nowhere near the numbers of any other war.

I think who Itaewonguy is telling this to are the anti-Iraq war people who have been calling this a major failure since before the first days they invaded. They want this to go down as a self-fulfilling prophecy. A failure no matter what happens.

It doesn't matter that the fewest number of civilians died in any war this long to-date. It doesn't matter that the Iraqi people have held their first democratic election in the region. Any accomplishment be damned.

The funniest thing, when you consider the media, is the numbers of soldiers dead. Like 2000 is a large number, as far as war is concerned? It's tiny. The American press hates Bushee, and has with a vengance since the day he 'stole' the election from Gore. They've been out not only to get him, but to make his presidency the worst they possibly can. It's an all-out witch hunt. Anyone with half of a brain can see that. Even Bill Clinton has, and has made comments not far from such.

Like Bush or not, and I don't, it should be quite obvious what's going on. I am left-wing, and so is much of the press. I just don't like the way they try to dictate politics. The Dan Rather incident couldn't be more telling. I really dislike Bushee, but I hate the press even more. I wish Katie Couric would just shut the hell up and run for office. She might as well.

This war will be a failure because certain people will never call it anything but that. It's polarizing like the abortion issue.

[itaewonguy]

im not attacking america as a country.. I love America
I am attacking anyone who things 2000 people is too much and rant about how this war is costing to many lives..

2000 people is nothing even if the death toll comes to 20.000 is still low.
200.000 then we might have some issues if we havent gotten further to the objective.. but 2000 please cry me a river..

1,000,000 - Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988)

100,000 - Gulf War (1991)

5,000–7,000 - Halabja poison gas attack (Halabjah, Iraq, 1988)


you can look through the numbers here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_toll#War_and_military_action

[BigBlackEquus]

That's right.

And it's all about attitude and perception.

The press is trying to poison the attitudes and make the perception of bush and the iraq war as negative as possible. It has been their goal from the onset, and will continue to be.

They, as left-wingers, had to do something. The USA was taking a massive shift to the right, not only after Bush was elected after a successful Clinton presidency, but after he was re-elected, and many more congressional seats taken by the republicans.

The press is trying it's very best to spoil Bush and the right-wing via long, slow, anti-war, show-the-death-of-every-person reporting. Day after day after day. Drill it into peoples' heads: War BAD! MORE DEAD! MORE DEAD! 1,000! 1,500! 2,000!

They had to do something. The liberals can't put their own party together, much less win anything back.

Times are ripe for a 3rd party candidate. Such a shame �t's so difficult for American 3rd parties to get going.

[desultude]

I agree that it is self-indulgent to fret about the 2000 U.S. deaths from the war, or the 3000 or whatever it was in the World Trade Center. But the U.S. is a self-indulgent nation, and if its citizens were to be seeing the pictures of body bags and flag draped coffins on a daily basis (the average of 2000, understated as it is, would provide multiple such images on a daily basis for several years) the demand for an end to the war and an accounting of the administration's actions would be loud and clear.

Here are some death figures that actually should be sobering, as they are all preventable. They come from an article titled Terrorism in Context, http://www.jimpix.co.uk/words/terror.asp#starvation:

[desultude]

[Wangja]

I am very surprised that Americans are so distressed at 2,000 military deaths overseas since March 2003 yet seeminlgy ignore the 70,000-odd civilian gunshot deaths at home in the same period.

[desultude]