• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

2007 is deadliest year in Iraq

tomywishbone

Golden Member
Oct 24, 2006
1,401
0
0
2007 is deadliest year for US in Iraq By LAUREN FRAYER, Associated Press Writer, 41 minutes ago, Tuesday, Nov. 6.

Link


BAGHDAD - The U.S. military on Tuesday announced the deaths of five more soldiers and one sailor, making 2007 the deadliest year for U.S. troops despite a recent downturn, according to an Associated Press count.

At least 853 American military personnel have died in Iraq so far this year ? the highest annual toll since the war began in March 2003, according to AP figures.

The grim milestone passed despite a sharp drop in U.S. and Iraqi deaths here in recent months, after a 30,000-strong U.S. force buildup. There were 39 deaths in October, compared to 65 in September and 84 in August.

Five U.S. soldiers were killed Monday in two separate roadside bomb attacks, said Rear Adm. Gregory Smith, director of the Multi-National Force-Iraq's communications division.

"We lost five soldiers yesterday in two unfortunate incidents, both involving IEDs," Smith told reporters in Baghdad's heavily-guarded Green Zone. Later, the military said four of the soldiers died after an explosion near their vehicle in Kirkuk province, and one was killed in Anbar.

In a third statement, American forces said a sailor died of injuries from an explosion Monday in Salahuddin province, north of Baghdad.

With nearly two months left in the year, the U.S. toll has already surpassed that of 2004, when 850 troops died ? mostly in larger, more conventional battles like the campaign to cleanse Fallujah of Sunni militants in November, and U.S. clashes with Shiite militiamen in the sect's holy city of Najaf in August.

But the American military in Iraq reached its highest troop levels in Iraq this year ? 165,000. Moreover, the military's decision to send soldiers out of large bases and into Iraqi communities means more troops have seen more "contact with enemy forces" than ever before, said Maj. Winfield Danielson, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad.

"It's due to the troop surge, which allowed us to go into areas that were previously safe havens for insurgents," Danielson told the AP on Sunday. "Having more soldiers, and having them out in the communities, certainly contributes to our casualties."

Meanwhile, the U.S. said it planned to release nine Iranian prisoners in the coming days, including two captured when U.S. troops stormed an Iranian government office in Irbil last January. The office was shut after the raid, but it reopened as an Iranian consulate on Tuesday, Iraqi and Iranian officials said.

A military spokesman said Iran appears to have kept its promise to stop the flow into Iraq of bomb-making materials and other weaponry that Washington says has inflamed insurgent violence and caused many American troop casualties.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said last week that Iran had made such assurances to the Iraqi government.

"It's our best judgment that these particular EFPs ... in recent large cache finds do not appear to have arrived here in Iraq after those pledges were made," Rear Adm. Gregory Smith, director of the Multi-National Force-Iraq's communications division, told reporters Tuesday.

Kurdish rebels released another Iranian soldier captured two months ago in northern Iraq. AP Television News showed the soldier being handed over to representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross in the Qandeel mountains near the town of Ilan Shahir.

Among the weapons Washington has accused Iran of supplying to Iraqi insurgents are EFPs, or explosively formed projectiles. They fire a slug of molten metal capable of penetrating even the most heavily armored military vehicles, and thus are more deadly than other roadside bombs.

The No. 2 U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, said last week that there had been a sharp decline in the number of EFPs found in Iraq in the last three months. At the time, he and Gates both said it was too early to tell whether the trend would hold, and whether it could be attributed to action by Iranian authorities. Iran publicly denies that it has sent weapons to Shiite militias in Iraq.

Also Tuesday, the U.S. military said Iraqi troops had discovered 22 bodies in a mass grave northwest of Baghdad over the weekend. The bodies were found during a joint operation Saturday. It was the second mass grave found in the area in less than a month.

After the discovery, U.S. and Iraqi forces launched an operation Sunday, including ground raids and air assaults targeting al-Qaida in the area, the U.S. statement said.

About 30 suspects were detained, it said. Two car bomb facilities and a number of weapons caches also were found, it added.

Iraqi officials were trying to identify the bodies and notify families.

End--------------------------------------------


IMO, the carnage is only going to continue... for many years.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,827
804
126
War kills people. Welcome to reality.

It sucks, but thats reality. We will NEVER EVER have a war free world.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,827
804
126
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
The people who sent them to DIE (Rep and Dem) are all still free and most still in command

AND YOU trust them and give them a free pass to send more troops and more money
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,827
804
126
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
The people who sent them to DIE (Rep and Dem) are all still free and most still in command

AND YOU trust them and give them a free pass to send more troops and more money
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
The people who sent them to DIE (Rep and Dem) are all still free and most still in command

AND YOU trust them and give them a free pass to send more troops and more money
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:
Did I touch a nerve?

World Peace? Who fucking attacked who? Would you have told concerned German citizens who opposed the SS to go sing kumbaya?

 

Rogodin2

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
3,224
0
0
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality.
Learn how to read a post blackbung. Dahunan never mentioned 'world peace' in any of his replies. He is writing about an imperialistic war waged for invalid and untenable reasons.

Rogo
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
But wait, I thought deaths were down in the months of March and October? What do you mean there are other months? I thought we we making progress!? /sarcasm
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: Rogodin2
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality.
Learn how to read a post blackbung. Dahunan never mentioned 'world peace' in any of his replies. He is writing about an imperialistic war waged for invalid and untenable reasons.

Rogo
:thumbsup:
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,093
3,628
126
I would like to point out that the ?surge? did not take effect until halfway through the year. We?ll see how next year stands, hopefully it?ll be as low as the previous month, but realistically I don?t consider ?democracy? something worth securing for a people infected by Islamist ideology.

What we have done these past 6 years was remove Saddam, and attempt to replace his stability with our blood and coin. The effects are not unlike what Musharraf?s fall in Pakistan will mean: the rise of our enemy.

Our impotence at separating violent ideology from these people is a clear signal against our efforts to secure them democracy. For if our current efforts succeed, in their limited scope of securing the will of the people, we will birth a hostile nation who will support the war effort against us.

Is the rise of another Iranian style democracy worthy of our sacrifice? I think not. Nation building may be a noble cause, but we have to ask ourselves who we?re building it for.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
The people who sent them to DIE (Rep and Dem) are all still free and most still in command

AND YOU trust them and give them a free pass to send more troops and more money
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
I'm getting fed up with the fucking idiots who thinks that NOT going to war over everything and nothing means you're a fucking pacifist.

Put your fucking life where your mouth is, get over here right this fucking second, all your mouthiness will be gone in the blink of an eye.

Roll your fucking eyes and pretend like you actually know anything but for the love of god, don't say anything or the'll get how stupid you really are.

Iraq was and is a disaster that will not heal for a LONG time, it's a damned if you do and damned ifi you don't situation now and while you little thugh wanaabes are yapping about it the real enemy is preparing.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would like to point out that the ?surge? did not take effect until halfway through the year. We?ll see how next year stands, hopefully it?ll be as low as the previous month, but realistically I don?t consider ?democracy? something worth securing for a people infected by Islamist ideology.

What we have done these past 6 years was remove Saddam, and attempt to replace his stability with our blood and coin. The effects are not unlike what Musharraf?s fall in Pakistan will mean: the rise of our enemy.

Our impotence at separating violent ideology from these people is a clear signal against our efforts to secure them democracy. For if our current efforts succeed, in their limited scope of securing the will of the people, we will birth a hostile nation who will support the war effort against us.

Is the rise of another Iranian style democracy worthy of our sacrifice? I think not. Nation building may be a noble cause, but we have to ask ourselves who we?re building it for.
If you were an Iraqi you would be easliy led to believe that America is a violent country... true or not true?

Saddam needed to go.. sure.. but our method really didn't do them any favors.. did it?
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I would like to point out that the ?surge? did not take effect until halfway through the year. We?ll see how next year stands, hopefully it?ll be as low as the previous month, but realistically I don?t consider ?democracy? something worth securing for a people infected by Islamist ideology.

What we have done these past 6 years was remove Saddam, and attempt to replace his stability with our blood and coin. The effects are not unlike what Musharraf?s fall in Pakistan will mean: the rise of our enemy.

Our impotence at separating violent ideology from these people is a clear signal against our efforts to secure them democracy. For if our current efforts succeed, in their limited scope of securing the will of the people, we will birth a hostile nation who will support the war effort against us.

Is the rise of another Iranian style democracy worthy of our sacrifice? I think not. Nation building may be a noble cause, but we have to ask ourselves who we?re building it for.
If you were an Iraqi you would be easliy led to believe that America is a violent country... true or not true?

Saddam needed to go.. sure.. but our method really didn't do them any favors.. did it?
Absolutely correct. When people in our countries make clear their hatred for the American army they are labeled terrorists. They tend to think might is the answer to everything and that will be the reason for their failure. The deaths in Iraq were needless. A million deaths for nothing and we still haven't seen Bush tried for war crimes.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,827
804
126
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dahunan
What did they die for? Is it a Neocon dream or is there some greater good or?
:roll: you guys are really, really dense. Another "What are we doing there thread?"

/sigh
The people who sent them to DIE (Rep and Dem) are all still free and most still in command

AND YOU trust them and give them a free pass to send more troops and more money
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
I'm getting fed up with the fucking idiots who thinks that NOT going to war over everything and nothing means you're a fucking pacifist.

Put your fucking life where your mouth is, get over here right this fucking second, all your mouthiness will be gone in the blink of an eye.

Roll your fucking eyes and pretend like you actually know anything but for the love of god, don't say anything or the'll get how stupid you really are.

Iraq was and is a disaster that will not heal for a LONG time, it's a damned if you do and damned ifi you don't situation now and while you little thugh wanaabes are yapping about it the real enemy is preparing.
heh touched a nerve I guess. boo hoo hoo. It's a messageboard chill out man.

Oh, and there are travel restrictions to Iraq. So wont see you there.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


I'm getting fed up with the fucking idiots who thinks that NOT going to war over everything and nothing means you're a fucking pacifist.

Put your fucking life where your mouth is, get over here right this fucking second, all your mouthiness will be gone in the blink of an eye.

Roll your fucking eyes and pretend like you actually know anything but for the love of god, don't say anything or the'll get how stupid you really are.


Iraq was and is a disaster that will not heal for a LONG time, it's a damned if you do and damned ifi you don't situation now and while you little thugh wanaabes are yapping about it the real enemy is preparing.
Says the "soldier" who said: (see sig)
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Originally posted by: Genx87
We have come a long ways in 60 years. Lost about 110,000 a year in WWII.
Are you really comparing the army of Iraq to the combined forces of Germany, Italy, Japan, and all the countries under their rule, in the 1930s and 1940s? Are you actually surprised in the least that a war named World War II had more casualties than a skirmish involving one superpower and one third world country? How intellectually dishonest could you be to draw any parallel between the death counts of World War II and Iraq?

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
How is it shocking that a thread about soldier death counts would lead people to reflect on the purpose of those deaths? The natural thing to do when dealing with death is to try to rationalize the death in the grander scheme of things. In this case, dahunan posits that perhaps had we not gone to war, these men and women might still be alive. If that is to be believed, then we must naturally ask ourselves if the goals of the war were worth the lives of the men and women lost so far. In dahunan's mind they are not. You may feel that the deaths have not been in vain, and it is your right to think and say so. But to jump down someone else's throat for his view that he would prefer our troops be alive is asinine.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1

Oh, and there are travel restrictions to Iraq. So wont see you there.
Sign up and receive a free ticket complements of 'Uncle Sugar' with a complimentary 15-month visit in the cradle of civilization. Enjoy a new culture - meet new people . . .

And kill them.

 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,827
804
126
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: Genx87
We have come a long ways in 60 years. Lost about 110,000 a year in WWII.
Are you really comparing the army of Iraq to the combined forces of Germany, Italy, Japan, and all the countries under their rule, in the 1930s and 1940s? Are you actually surprised in the least that a war named World War II had more casualties than a skirmish involving one superpower and one third world country? How intellectually dishonest could you be to draw any parallel between the death counts of World War II and Iraq?

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
How is it shocking that a thread about soldier death counts would lead people to reflect on the purpose of those deaths? The natural thing to do when dealing with death is to try to rationalize the death in the grander scheme of things. In this case, dahunan posits that perhaps had we not gone to war, these men and women might still be alive. If that is to be believed, then we must naturally ask ourselves if the goals of the war were worth the lives of the men and women lost so far. In dahunan's mind they are not. You may feel that the deaths have not been in vain, and it is your right to think and say so. But to jump down someone else's throat for his view that he would prefer our troops be alive is asinine.
Unfortunatly most of the anti-war crowd feel the only justified war is if a country, not an organization, physically attacks the US i.e. Pearl Harbor.

Well, this is naive and realistically very unprobable.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Unfortunatly most of the anti-war crowd feel the only justified war is if a country, not an organization, physically attacks the US i.e. Pearl Harbor.

Well, this is naive and realistically very unprobable.
Were as the Pro War crowd believes that they don't need a justification to go to war. Pro War = FAIL
 

Firebot

Golden Member
Jul 10, 2005
1,476
1
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
We have come a long ways in 60 years. Lost about 110,000 a year in WWII.
One is a global war fought across 2 oceans, was a reactive war, a war to defend America's sovereignty, against conventional armies on two fronts, with little way to project military power other then by having infantry doing the dirty work, and where defeat meant the loss of American freedom, and millions more civilian deaths.

The other is a pre-emptive and meaningless war that was considered 'won' 4 years ago, on the other side of the world with no threat to American sovereignty, where the main danger is IED's, suicide bombers, and the odd ambush by poorly armed and untrained locals, in an age where the military can bomb or kill the threat long before human lives need to be put in danger. But, numbers are lower then WWII so it's great news:confused:. Hurray for Bush for keeping the numbers low compared to a world war.


The number should be 0.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


I'm getting fed up with the fucking idiots who thinks that NOT going to war over everything and nothing means you're a fucking pacifist.

Put your fucking life where your mouth is, get over here right this fucking second, all your mouthiness will be gone in the blink of an eye.

Roll your fucking eyes and pretend like you actually know anything but for the love of god, don't say anything or the'll get how stupid you really are.


Iraq was and is a disaster that will not heal for a LONG time, it's a damned if you do and damned ifi you don't situation now and while you little thugh wanaabes are yapping about it the real enemy is preparing.
Says the "soldier" who said: (see sig)
You're continuing to parade that sig around without asking me about it, cool, it's just to prove a point for you i guess, you do not comprehend.

I've already explained this shit to your dumb extremist Taliban loving arse but you still don't get it.

YES those who are the Talibans today are the remnants of the Mujahedeen that once fought the Soviets, are you fucking daft or don't you know shit about the situation?

You're the one who likened me to Nazis and Hitler while defending the child rapings of the Talibans, if you're representative of the Pakistani population, then the child raping pillaging murdering scum will take over without a problem.

Talibanwhores like you are a dime a dozen,
 

Firebot

Golden Member
Jul 10, 2005
1,476
1
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: Genx87
We have come a long ways in 60 years. Lost about 110,000 a year in WWII.
Are you really comparing the army of Iraq to the combined forces of Germany, Italy, Japan, and all the countries under their rule, in the 1930s and 1940s? Are you actually surprised in the least that a war named World War II had more casualties than a skirmish involving one superpower and one third world country? How intellectually dishonest could you be to draw any parallel between the death counts of World War II and Iraq?

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Go preach your bullshit, unrealistic world peace message while singing kumbaya somewhere else. At least some of us try and deal with reality. :roll:

This had potential to be a good thread /wave
How is it shocking that a thread about soldier death counts would lead people to reflect on the purpose of those deaths? The natural thing to do when dealing with death is to try to rationalize the death in the grander scheme of things. In this case, dahunan posits that perhaps had we not gone to war, these men and women might still be alive. If that is to be believed, then we must naturally ask ourselves if the goals of the war were worth the lives of the men and women lost so far. In dahunan's mind they are not. You may feel that the deaths have not been in vain, and it is your right to think and say so. But to jump down someone else's throat for his view that he would prefer our troops be alive is asinine.
Unfortunatly most of the anti-war crowd feel the only justified war is if a country, not an organization, physically attacks the US i.e. Pearl Harbor.

Well, this is naive and realistically very unprobable.
No one in Iraq attacked the US. What organization do you speak of which was based in Iraq?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY