Time to buy Dinar. It’s a good investment.
BroonAmex
I thought 4 deaths in Iraq were three too many.
Several points:
First, I have to side with TC that the OP was a politically motivated post. One could argue until the moos came home about which Iraqis were “innocent” to begin with…and then there is the whole question of “Why is 3000 so important?” or the equally distasteful argument which compares how many died in Vietnam or Afghanistan in the same amount of time.
Secondly, are deaths caused by US troops, or US troops themselves more worthy of note than say the dead in Darfur or Somalia? If I put up a post about the number of kids killed in swimming pools, how many hits would it get? Why are these deaths “worth” more?
Third, IF TC is implying that Stray Dog is celebrating the death toll, I have to say I feel that he is way off the mark. I do not get that feeling at all.
From a movie I can’t recall the name of:
Badguy: Why are you chasing me?
Copper: Because you’re running. Why are you running?
Badguy: Because you’re chasing me.
If it’s political to say that I think war should be a very, very last resort, because of the suffering it causes, then I agree that my post was politically motivated.
Is there another angle I’ve missed?
You tell us. I am sure that you are plagued by them all the time.
Quick point. When I told TC to check for sarcasm, I was referring to Sandman’s post not yours.
Yes, I support that war fully and without hesitation. I disagree that 100,000 innocent Iraqis have been killed though. I put that at 55,000 or so which is the most widely accepted. And why use “innocent” to preface the Iraqis killed? Are the Americans “guilty?” Also, many of these deaths include terrorists and insurgents. Innocent?
What is too many deaths? too few? It is irrelevant to the person dying how many others are dying so what’s your point except to engage in tedious demogoguery and soap box moralism. The point is whether the cause that we are fighting is a valid one or not. I say it is. I doubt that you would agree. This leads me to believe that the cause is even more worthwhile. Take what inferences you may.
Well, then we can both revel in the fact that neither of us is “good at” certain things. I will give up guessing what others views might be. You should give up on having views. Deal?
Is that the best response you got?
You and TC sit there clapping your hands in glee and jerking each other off at the thought of another US invasion and then have the nerve to accuse those of us opposed to war of being the ones not thinking of the poor soldiers and civilians dying for a cause that, to most of us, is blurry to say the least.
Despicable. And no shame on your part either. Despicable.
No, but what is the point of wasting the best that I have on you?
Are we clapping because of deaths American or otherwise?
Nice… BUT what if invading Syria and Iran is not about “jerking off” and more about ending this conflict once and for all. I happen to believe that we are in a regional and to some extent global struggle. I see no reason why Iran and Syria should serve as home bases for terrorists and not be affected. I thought Bush was against this as well, but apparently you are either with us or against us has lost its full meaning.
The only thing blurry here are the reasons for the opposition to this war held by you and others of your ilk. I respect your right to dissent but don’t pretend that you have a full grasp of the issues here. If you do, then I would suggest to you that you are not very good at articulating them.
Yes, I am all for death and I want to have as much of it as possible? Is that the argument that you are making? Or are you suggesting that neither TC nor myself nor anyone who supported this war had any valid reason for doing so? It was all about imperial strutting, controlling Iraq’s oil, showing the world who is boss, testing out new weapons or just venting violence that has built up from playing too many video games? Just what is it that YOU are trying to suggest here? At least, I have been able to articulate exactly and under what circumstances I want this administration to act. Can you? Have you? Will you?
If it’s political to say that I think war should be a very, very last resort, because of the suffering it causes, then I agree that my post was politically motivated.
Is there another angle I’ve missed?[/quote]
I’m sure there are lots of angles with which to approach a certain number of deaths in any situation; you didn’t actually write anytihng in your original post to clarify YOUR angle, did you?
3000 US deaths: That’s it?
3000 US deaths: Disgraceful!
3000 US deaths: More to come!
3000 US deaths: Ahead of the game!
You see? There are lots of angles. Don’t get uppity when someone assumes too much because you posted too little. 
a bad thing
a good thing
Utterly ridiculous.
Thread title: “You know you’ve been in Iraq too long when …”
OP: “U.S. soldier death toll reaches 3,000.”
And you say that I’m not clear on the angle?
I don’t want to sound uppity again, but how much clearer would you like it to be? 
Who’s “you?”
The troops? The insurgents? Who’s been there too long? The troops, as they have incurred 3000 fatalities; the insurgents, as they have ONLY caused 3000 fatalities?
You didn’t have ANY text in your original post bud; if I were anal, I’d tell you that that is contrary to the rules. 
How is that different from any other post?
How is that different from any other post?[/quote]
Well, look. It is not a crime that people are upset about the death toll. I am too. I am not much at ease when I find the numbers are lower than other conflicts in similar lengths of time.
I happen to feel it is worth it. History is often written in human blood. That is how it is. I didn’t make the rules. I don’t like the rules. Right now, in this place (Iraq) I feel the costs are worth the desired outcome. SD does not, and that’s ok with me. I respect his opinion, and I do see his point. Too many people are suffering.
However, in the LONG run…the very long run…I think it is better that we push through this thing now.
Live Free or Die. IF the Iraqis seriously get together and as a whole demand the US git the hell out, we will I’m sure. Until that happens, I will continue to believe that they want to live freely, and need a little help getting there.
Let me rephrase. How is Stray Dog’s post without any text any different from any of HIS posts haha. Being sarcastic, don’t you know.
Fred
How is that different from any other post?[/quote]
Well, look. It is not a crime that people are upset about the death toll. I am too. I am not much at ease when I find the numbers are lower than other conflicts in similar lengths of time.
I happen to feel it is worth it. History is often written in human blood. That is how it is. I didn’t make the rules. I don’t like the rules. Right now, in this place (Iraq) I feel the costs are worth the desired outcome. SD does not, and that’s ok with me. I respect his opinion, and I do see his point. Too many people are suffering.
However, in the LONG run…the very long run…I think it is better that we push through this thing now.
Live Free or Die. IF the Iraqis seriously get together and as a whole demand the US git the hell out, we will I’m sure. Until that happens, I will continue to believe that they want to live freely, and need a little help getting there.[/quote]
That is the most intelligent post on here so far (next to mine).
I read the respones from TC and FS and can’t help thinking that I could have made a better argument in support of their position than they did. Well done jd for putting together a thoughtful response.
Tc and FS, these topics are far too serious to reduce to playground debating methods, which are disrespectful to those who are dying to support your argument.
Fine Stray Dog:
Why don’t you tell us under what conditions US and allied forces should fight and give us the timeline and the milestones that should determine each and every move until troops are pulled out with success assured or success so unassured that we should pull out no matter what the consequences. Do be sure and let some of that intelligence shine brightly.
Fred
You mean the one with the link? 
[quote=“fred smith”]Fine Stray Dog:
Why don’t you tell us under what conditions US and allied forces should fight and give us the timeline and the milestones that should determine each and every move until troops are pulled out with success assured or success so unassured that we should pull out no matter what the consequences. Do be sure and let some of that intelligence shine brightly.
Fred[/quote]
Fred, your attempts to draw fire and throw smoke screens might work on someone of your own intellectual ability, but let’s raise the level here shall we.
We should not be there. Full stop. If you want intelligence, try not committing to situations you can’t handle in the first place.
[quote=“fred smith”]TC:
I think you missed the sarcasm in the above post. Please read again. As to Stray Dog and his concern for US soldiers… Well, it is nice to see such sympathy if in fact it is genuine but I have my doubts…[/quote]Fred -
If you are referring to Sandmans post, I did miss his sarcasm if it was present. I don’t do sarcasm and tried to respond in a honest manner. I meant no offense to him.
[quote=“stray dog”]Is that the best response you got?
You and TC sit there clapping your hands in glee and jerking each other off at the thought of another US invasion and then have the nerve to accuse those of us opposed to war of being the ones not thinking of the poor soldiers and civilians dying for a cause that, to most of us, is blurry to say the least.
Despicable. And no shame on your part either. Despicable.[/quote]
Not sure where a comment like this is coming from…locker room…playground…steam bath…?
Stray Dog, if you want to post things like this as part of a discussion regarding your posts and resulting comments, then you have nothing. Your air of superiority is merely posturing and fakery.
A person with sincere pacifistic attitudes and opinions about this war, or any other war, would show quite a bit more depth and compassion in their debate. You seem stuck in the kiddy pool depth-wise. I, and I think about everyone else, have a respect for those who oppose war with sincere and well thought out reasons and conviction. I’ve have known, and do currently know, several individuals such as this - sincere, reasoned pacifists - and i have to tell ya they make a lot better argument for their beliefs than the offensive and agressive comments coming from you.
So you get called on you posts. That happens here. Then you squeal and start tap dancing for attention rather than responding with statements of your position.
Looks thin to me…but thats just my opinion.
I hate war and the resulting carnage and savagery more than a person like you could ever know. But its gonna happen; always has, always will.
If it does and my country is involved I will support the troops and their mission whether I agree with it or not. If I don’t agree with it…I have a very powerful weapon to show my dis-agreement.
Its called the vote.
[quote]We should not be there.
[/quote]
But we are; now what?
Something funny here.
You see, this is where differing opinions clash. No matter how many articles I throw you about the improving Iraqi economy, the improved effectiveness of the Iraqi Army and Police Forces…in fact ANY positive thing at all is shit on by the left as spin. Anything negative is shit on by the right (although IMHO a lot of the Right’s spin is more grounded in fact and less grounded in emotional vitriol.
The post-war has not gone as was not planned. Er, yeah, actually that’s pretty accurate. There are several “wins” under the Iraqis belt though: Saddam’s regime removed; elections; consitution; more elections; Saddam captured, tried and executed; foreign investment; oil revenues.
There are losses too, but one of them is NOT that “we” should have done all of this much quicker and been out by now. The situation has not been handled “well” but it has not been a complete catastrophe either.
If it were so bad, that death toll would really be much much higher, don’t you think?