Deaths in Iraq Eqaul 9/11 Death Tolls...

[jeff221]

Well, as of this month (September) the U.S. Deaths in Iraq now equal the Deaths from the 9/11 attacks (5 years later). Still no Osama Bin Laden.

Take a moment and review the 27 pages of photos for all the soldiers who died in this occupation in Iraq:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/iraq/

It gives you some idea of what the people of this great country has lost due to this world.

Now remember, though the numbers are now equal to Iraq & 9/11, the two are completely independant and were not linked prior to the Iraq war. It just gives you some idea of how many deaths have been incurred during the administration of George W. Bush.

[TwoValveKid]

No offense to anyone in the armed services...but that is a drop in the bucket death toll-wise when it comes to wars/occupations.

Yes it's sad to have lost that many, but how many people died under Johnson's arms? How about eisenhower's? Roosevelt? Wilson? Nixon? Sorry, i don't think it can even compare to the "death tolls" you bring up. If you going to criticise GW for an "outrageous" death toll, then be willing to criticise everyone else.

And fix your sig. It just makes youself look bad when your trying to make a point when there are spelling/grammatical errors in it.

Under your understanding, WWII wasnt worth it because we lost 300,xxx people in the war itself compared to the Pearl Harbor number of 2117? How about WWI? That also wasnt worth it under your convention. 128 people were killed by a U-boat, we lost 116,xxx there. Wow...thats outrageous considering our entry was sparked by the deaths of 128 people!

[jeff221]

Originally Posted by TwoValveKid

No offense to anyone in the armed services...but that is a drop in the bucket death toll-wise when it comes to wars/occupations.

Wow.... I don't even know hot to respond to that...

[TwoValveKid]

Quote the rest of the post before you twist my words.


And considering you're just using the death number to get your political view across, why are you trying to point a finger at me?

[jeff221]

Originally Posted by TwoValveKid

Quote the rest of the post before you twist my words.

Oh, when was the rest of the post added? It wasn't there when I responded the first time. Must have been edited. I'll read it now...

[jeff221]

Iraq is not World War I and CERTAINLY not World War II... The compairson to the two is a slap in the face to all those who died in those wars. Iraq didn't attack us, nor did they have the ability too, nor did they have any plans too, nor did we have any reason to attack them... That's why it's different. This isn't Pearl Harbor or a U-Boat.... It was a pre-emptive attack on a country which was NOT a risk to us...

My signature? That's all you have? I'll consider that a win for this discussion.....

And if I bring up something I said in this post, Don't worry I'll just go edit it later so it makes a different point then my orginal point and claim it was always there....

[TwoValveKid]

Originally Posted by jeff221

And if I bring up something I said in this post, Don't worry I'll just go edit it later so it makes a different point then my orginal point and claim it was always there....

Typical.

Originally Posted by jeff221

Iraq is not World War I and CERTAINLY not World War II... The compairson to the two is a slap in the face to all those who died in those wars. Iraq didn't attack us, nor did they have the ability too, nor did they have any plans too, nor did we have any reason to attack them... That's why it's different.

I personally believe if they didnt, someone they supplied would. Much the same with Iran supplying Hezbollah. So the line can be drawn.

Originally Posted by jeff221

U.S. Deaths in Iraq now equal the Deaths from the 9/11 attacks. Still no Osama Bin Laden.

Originally Posted by jeff221

Take a moment and review the 27 pages of photos for all the soldiers who died in this occupation in Iraq:

Originally Posted by jeff221

It just gives you some idea of how many deaths have been incurred during the administration of George W. Bush.

And before you say bringing up the deaths of how many people just to get your view across is not what your doing. I put these in quotes and call a preeminent shenanigans to what im sure your next post will be.

[TwoValveKid]

Originally Posted by jeff221

Well, as of this month (September) the U.S. Deaths in Iraq now equal the Deaths from the 9/11 attacks (5 years later). Still no Osama Bin Laden.

Take a moment and review the 27 pages of photos for all the soldiers who died in this occupation in Iraq:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/iraq/

It gives you some idea of what the people of this great country has lost due to this world.

Now remember, though the numbers are now equal to Iraq & 9/11, the two are completely independant and were not linked prior to the Iraq war. It just gives you some idea of how many deaths have been incurred during the administration of George W. Bush.

Theres the ORIGINAL post before it gets edited

[boater1217]

And lets see, WWI start because someone shot a Duke and his wife, 2 people, millions dead. Jeff221, I see your point, I just don't agree with it. The initial cause of a war is always more than just the deaths that were the trigger. Kind of like "5 die trying to save one child", those type of news stories happen frequently. So do we not try to save the child? Hard questions without easy answers.

[TwoValveKid]

Originally Posted by boater1217

And lets see, WWI start because someone shot a Duke and his wife, 2 people, millions dead. Jeff221, I see your point, I just don't agree with it. The initial cause of a war is always more than just the deaths that were the trigger. Kind of like "5 die trying to save one child", those type of news stories happen frequently. So do we not try to save the child? Hard questions without easy answers.

+1.