PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Titan on September 07, 2004, 06:05:31 PM
-
Found this database of the fallen troops in Iraq.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm
-
interesting.
-
Too many of those people are too young.
-
I went to boot camp with 4 of these guys
-
Originally posted by i_killed_ur_dog
I went to boot camp with 4 of these guys
Are you in Iraq now or did you just get back?
-
Originally posted by PS2_-\'_\'-_PS2
Too many of those people are too young.
i agree..that s**t is just depressing...and if we would\'ve let the inspectors do their thing..even kept those sanctions in place & focused on afganastan,(spel) these cats would still be alive with their families..or still alive in the service...
-
Originally posted by clips
and if we would\'ve let the inspectors do their thing..even kept those sanctions in place & focused on afganastan
:rolleyes:
-
^^^easy for you to say...i don\'t have peeps in the military but i still feel for these soldiers that had to have their lives cut short because bush wanted to be a cowboy...
-
Originally posted by clips
^^^easy for you to say...i don\'t have peeps in the military but i still feel for these soldiers that had to have their lives cut short because bush wanted to be a cowboy...
Oh please STFU. No one likes to see anyone die, but our soldiers joined the military knowing what could happen - that is their job and that is the risk they take. Sorry if you can\'t stomach casuality reports - I can just image the whining and the belly aching if we were in a serious conflict that would be coming from people like you.
Yes, we honor these soldiers that have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, but people like you need to get a damn backbone. Sanctions were not working - Saddam repeatedly violated UN resolutions and the terms of his surrender at the end of the first Gulf War and you claim sanctions were working! You claim sanctions were working when it has been proven that UN Oil for Food program was corrupt??!?!?!?!?
We are fighting Islamic fundamentalists now, not the Iraqi army. How can this be a bad thing that we are fighting them over there as opposed to fighting them here? Really... I can\'t fathom how you can either think removing Saddam was a bad thing and/or pulling out of Iraq now will make things better.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Oh please STFU. No one likes to see anyone die, but our soldiers joined the military knowing what could happen - that is their job and that is the risk they take. Sorry if you can\'t stomach casuality reports - I can just image the whining and the belly aching if we were in a serious conflict that would be coming from people like you.
Yes, we honor these soldiers that have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, but people like you need to get a damn backbone. Sanctions were not working - Saddam repeatedly violated UN resolutions and the terms of his surrender at the end of the first Gulf War and you claim sanctions were working! You claim sanctions were working when it has been proven that UN Oil for Food program was corrupt??!?!?!?!?
We are fighting Islamic fundamentalists now, not the Iraqi army. How can this be a bad thing that we are fighting them over there as opposed to fighting them here? Really... I can\'t fathom how you can either think removing Saddam was a bad thing and/or pulling out of Iraq now will make things better.
relax there cowboy...it\'s not the fact that i can\'t stomach losses, but those terrorists that are there now were not there before we invaded...now you have terroists from all over in iraq..and i guess you think the u.s. can defeat them all right? i say use the military only as a last resort...was saddam preparing to attack us? nope...like i said before the brits & u.s. were keepin saddam in check...
yea the oil for food prgm was corrupt..but anything involving money is corrupt..look at the company that was supplying our troops with food..i forgot the name but they was over charging and ruuning up humongous tabs on the u.s...saddam was a bad man but he wasn\'t an immediate threat then and he would not have been one now...you can\'t deny that iraq is more dangerous now than when saddam was in power....
the u.s. has no one to blame but itself for the fiasco in iraq...we went it alone arrogantly then when s*t hits the fan bush ran back to the u.n. (the organization you so richly despise) for help...you need to relise that you cannot hide behind missles and bombs and think that is going to keep you safe...it\'s that same type of mentallity and foreign policy that has smeared the u.s. name across the globe...
-
Originally posted by clips
relax there cowboy...it\'s not the fact that i can\'t stomach losses, but those terrorists that are there now were not there before we invaded...now you have terroists from all over in iraq..and i guess you think the u.s. can defeat them all right? i say use the military only as a last resort...was saddam preparing to attack us? nope...like i said before the brits & u.s. were keepin saddam in check...
yea the oil for food prgm was corrupt..but anything involving money is corrupt..look at the company that was supplying our troops with food..i forgot the name but they was over charging and ruuning up humongous tabs on the u.s...saddam was a bad man but he wasn\'t an immediate threat then and he would not have been one now...you can\'t deny that iraq is more dangerous now than when saddam was in power....
the u.s. has no one to blame but itself for the fiasco in iraq...we went it alone arrogantly then when s*t hits the fan bush ran back to the u.n. (the organization you so richly despise) for help...you need to relise that you cannot hide behind missles and bombs and think that is going to keep you safe...it\'s that same type of mentallity and foreign policy that has smeared the u.s. name across the globe...
First, we didn\'t go alone - yes we are by far the largest force there, but to say we went alone is incorrect. Countries like France oppose our foreign policy only because of their own growing insignificance in world politics.
I can say that Iraq is less of a danger to us now than it was when Saddam was in power. Is it more dangerous for the residents of Iraq? Probably, but I don\'t care about them. Saddam had the ability to acquire more WMD\'s if he didn\'t still have them so he was a threat. He had a grudge against the US since the first Gulf War and what would have prevented him from eventually sponsoring terrorist attacks on US soil? After all he was already rewarding the families of suicide bombers in Israel with checks. Fighting terrorists on their soil is preferable to fighting terrorists on our soil is it not?
-
basically we are going it alone those other useless armies are insignificant..polish?...japan?.. some other 3rd world country that i have never heard of?...if he had a grudge on us since the gulf war he must have had a grudge against france russia & china who was all with us in 91...i\'m not even gonna get into him giving suicide bombers money to their families...you\'ve schooled me a great deal on that subject but ultimately i feel both sides in that situation are wrong...
as far as fighting terrorists on their soil instead of ours? yea i agree 100% but focus on one group at a time...don\'t aggrevate the situation by launching out in all directions...what i mean by that is don\'t look at iran and make threats..don\'t look at syria and make threats,..but then you look at n.korea & make no threats at all...when they were poppin s**t all over the place...it\'s true that when all is said and done these muslum countries are the ones that don\'t like us, but making threats to them specifically just makes it seems like you pointing them out...terrorists comes in all shapes and forms..not just muslims..*remebers okalhoma city bombing*
also add to the fact that the u.s, in reality cannot fight the war on terror in any more fronts,...our only true option now is to negoiate since our military is stretched way too thin anyhow....
-
You didn\'t say negotiate with terrorists did you? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
You didn\'t say negotiate with terrorists did you? :rolleyes:
not with the terrorists..i meant countries like n.korea, iran,syria..the u.s. say it can fight the war on four different fronts..but the reality is that it really cannot sustain that type of strain financially & humanely...so it\'s only option at this point is to negoiate..with those countries and come to a common solution...
-
Iran and Syria are terrorist states. N. Korea sells stuff to terrorist states.
You can\'t negotiate with any of those three.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Iran and Syria are terrorist states. N. Korea sells stuff to terrorist states.
You can\'t negotiate with any of those three.
now you\'re just bein silly..i we got into before over n.korea and you even stated not exactly like this but it was along these lines"hey we can\'t bomb n.korea if there\'s a chance they might have nukes..we have to deal with each country differently"...i believe that is the stance you took...
i was bein critical of the u.s. for bombing iraq when it wasn\'t really sure if saddam had weapons or not..n.korea on the other hand was makin\' threats all over the place and the u.s. responds with.."we\'ll deal with n.korea diplomatically" :rolleyes: yes ultimately it makes sense not to call a countries bluff and i realise that but surely you must agree that you must negoiate with at least iran & n.korea...they both have formiable armies and neither is as weak as iraq...
-
While North Korea may be the most "open" to discussions - the other two are not - to believe they are is just naive. Also - don\'t overrate Iran militarily - their army would collapse almost as quickly as Saddam\'s.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
While North Korea may be the most "open" to discussions - the other two are not - to believe they are is just naive. Also - don\'t overrate Iran militarily - their army would collapse almost as quickly as Saddam\'s.
so you really think the u.s. can do another pre-emptive strike on iran?..and syria for that matter? even if they wanted too..it would cause so much uproar in the muslim community and in the international world that i believe that these rogue countries might actually find an ally in russia, france or germany...
what i mean is that these countries might secretly supply those rogue countries to fight us...the point i\'m making is that i don\'t feel that the world is gonna sit back while the u.s. pre-emps on anyone it seems fit...regardless of how big france\'s army is or russia army is..i believe action of some sort would take place if the u.s. did that...possibly world war?
this is all of course hypothetical...but what i know for a fact is that the u.s. in it\'s current condition cannot fight a war on four fronts...
-
So you are willing to sit around and wait to be attacked again. Our military is more capable than than you think.
The fact is what is the rest of the world going to do about it if we pre-emp? Nothing. Russia has already stated to some degree they will do the same thing.
-
How many Iraqi "terrorists" have died so far?
The civilian number is somewhere around 13000?
War has gone far, in the old days thousands of soldiers would be killed in a few minutes.
-
And how have those 13000 or so died? Lets see - killed by fellow Iraqis, car bombs, mortar attacks, robberies and those caught in the cross fire between militants and US forces.
I would say it looks like they are reaping what they sow.
The Associated Press
BAGHDAD, Iraq--At Sheik Omar Clinic, a big book records 10,363 violent deaths in Baghdad and nearby towns since the war began last year--deaths caused by car bombs, clashes between Iraqis and coalition forces, mortar attacks, revenge killings and robberies.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
So you are willing to sit around and wait to be attacked again. Our military is more capable than than you think.
The fact is what is the rest of the world going to do about it if we pre-emp? Nothing. Russia has already stated to some degree they will do the same thing.
hmmm..i know our military is capable,..but at some point the air campaign eventually turns to a boots campaign..with all the superior air power the u.s. has eventually you\'re going to have to send in troops to clean up the mess and that is where it gets ugly...now times this scenario by four or five...yea that\'s alot of american lives and that\'s something i guarantee the u.s. citizens would not put up with..add to the fact that we would probably do this alone...
i never said sit back and wait..but you can\'t just go around attackin\' countries who you feel MIGHT attack you...that\'s just bein a paranoid maniac...adjust some of those foreign policies a bit...that\'s where they need to start..and focus on afganastan...the plan here is to get along..even if we don\'t like each other there should be policies in place that even if we don\'t like this country or that country there are policies in place to keep the peace on both fronts....
-
Paranoia is just a heightened state of awareness.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
And how have those 13000 or so died? Lets see - killed by fellow Iraqis, car bombs, mortar attacks, robberies and those caught in the cross fire between militants and US forces.
I would say it looks like they are reaping what they sow.
The Associated Press
BAGHDAD, Iraq--At Sheik Omar Clinic, a big book records 10,363 violent deaths in Baghdad and nearby towns since the war began last year--deaths caused by car bombs, clashes between Iraqis and coalition forces, mortar attacks, revenge killings and robberies.
Yep.. and a few US bombs/missiles here and there.
The triggering factor for the 13 000 dead was.. oh, an invasion.
-
And a just one at that.
-
I dont need to see all the fallen Marines I\'ve known to have been KIA, I know who they are and I will always remember.
Good thread though. Dont forget.
RIP Sgt Cook
LCpl Burke
Cpl Salas
-
To reply on North Korea. They aren\'t as big of a threat as they say they are. They know they can\'t face us in a war. Their economy is on the verge of collapse. Just a few months in a war, the whole country would go bankrupt. They know this and so do we so we feel they aren\'t a threat to us, even though they continue to threaten. Iraq, however, has a more stable economy with a ruler that we know has chemical weapons, was a threat to countries around him, and had weapons that were capable of reaching US Allied countries. Doesn\'t it make more sense to attack a country that is a threat to the region and more stable than a country that is on the verge of collapse?
-
i have to respectfully disagree with you there titan..n.korea was a threat to s.korea our ally,...the u.s. is not really sure if they have nukes or not..plus any pre-emp strike by us on them might get china involved since n.korea is kinda under their wing...now the u.s knew it could take iraq..their army was nothing..and the missles that were found..were old as hell and inoperative...
they totally did a 180 when it came to n.korea..while n.korea was makin threats..iraq was letting inspectors in..bush stated it was too late and to prepare for the shock & awe campaign :rolleyes: what the hell is shock & awe?! an awesome display of the u.s. superior military might?..that was extreme arrogance on the u.s. part and now are reaping was they sew....
-
Originally posted by Titan
Are you in Iraq now or did you just get back?
I\'m in Japan, but they got sent to Iraq....Truth be told I\'d rather be out there too.
-
Originally posted by i_killed_ur_dog
I\'m in Japan, but they got sent to Iraq....Truth be told I\'d rather be out there too.
You mean you\'d rather be in Iraq fighting?
-
Originally posted by Titan
You mean you\'d rather be in Iraq fighting?
Yeah. I woeld rather be out there fighting than doing what I\'m doing over here.
-
Originally posted by i_killed_ur_dog
Yeah. I woeld rather be out there fighting than doing what I\'m doing over here.
No, you really dont. You\'re 100% better off where you are. Trust.
-
Originally posted by Proud To Be
No, you really dont. You\'re 100% better off where you are. Trust.
Combat Experience, another ribbon and extra money in my pocket? Why wouldn\'t I wanna go....other than the fact that I\'d be getting shot at 24/7, but I\'m used to that.
-
It\'s common sense to know we\'re better off being away from conflict, but why waste an entire enlistment and see nothing? At least in Iraq you can gather the experience (and the money, if that\'s your thing) -- We\'ve already signed our lives away for the next few years, might as well lend a hand to the cause and share in the misery that everyone joined for.
-
^^
What he said.
-
Originally posted by 182Ways
It\'s common sense to know we\'re better off being away from conflict, but why waste an entire enlistment and see nothing? At least in Iraq you can gather the experience (and the money, if that\'s your thing) -- We\'ve already signed our lives away for the next few years, might as well lend a hand to the cause and share in the misery that everyone joined for.
That is so true man.