English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

if not..soon... I imagine... with Bush's decision to send more !

2006-12-13 09:22:01 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Other - News & Events

12 answers

YES. THE WAY THE SITUATION IS BEING HANDLED OVER THERE RIGHT NOW BY THE BUSH ADMIN. THERE WILL BE MANY, MANY MORE DIE. LET THE MILITARY DO THE JOB THEY WERE TRAINED TO DO, AND THIS MESS WILL BE OVER WITH SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. THIS WILL END UP LIKE THE FALL OF VIETNAM UNLESS THE MILITARY IS GIVEN THE REINS TO DO THEIR JOB. OTHERWISE, ALL THE TROOPS WHO HAVE DIED, WILL HAVE DIED IN VAIN.

2006-12-13 10:54:27 · answer #1 · answered by richard b 1 · 1 1

First of all it's not correct to directly correlate the reason for the Iraq War with 9/11... I'm not sure if you're implying that. And yes more have died in Iraq=

Sept 11= In addition to the 19 hijackers, 2,973 people died; another 24 are missing and presumed dead.

Iraq War=The icasualties.org [11] website reports the death toll since the invasion in March 2003 as being 2,927 American lives (as of December 9th, 2006). There have been a further 247 deaths among the troops of other coalition nations: Australia 2. Bulgaria 13. Denmark 6. El Salvador 5. Estonia 2. Hungary 1. Italy 33. Kazakhstan 1. Latvia 1. Netherlands 2. Poland 18. Romania 2. Slovakia 4. Spain 11. Thailand 2. Ukraine 18. United Kingdom 126.

2006-12-13 09:25:14 · answer #2 · answered by M C 3 · 0 1

To put things in better perspective,
5,000 children and infants were dying PER MONTH
in Iraq during the sanctions, which failed to resolve political conflicts with Iraq's corrupt government and officials.

Not to mention the Iraqi and Kurdish people killed in mass.
Over a period of 10-30 years that the Iraqi people have suffered under oppression and conflict, the death toll is in the millions.

It seems the people counting the "American" lives forget to count the Iraqi people who died before the war, and the ones who will die afterwards if the troops leave prematurely.

Personally, I feel that if both Bush and proponents of military action and war in Iraq AND the opposing groups who call for peace are SERIOUS about helping the Iraqi people, they would quit fighting against each other and work together to invest in real reconstruction and rebuilding of the Iraqi social structures.

It seems both sides are wasting valuable time, energy, words, and resources fighting politically instead of focusing on solutions.

The last person who seemed sincere about avoiding military intervention and seeking cooperation was Colin Powell, who bowed out after constant disagreements with Bush and Cheney.

It seems if anti-war advocates believe that terrorism can be better addressed by resolving conflicts through diplomatic negotiations, they should be able to communicate and cooperate with fellow leaders across political lines, to demonstrate the true peacemaking process. If we cannot even achieve peace here in America, where we have the freedom to assemble, speak and petition freely and civilly, how can we possibly ask for or achieve peace in Iraq?

From the very beginning an equal investment of civilian resources was required in Iraq so there is not a one-sided focus on military reinforcement. But the coalitions who claimed to be for peace seem too busy criticizing Bush and the military instead of stepping in themselves to provide the support they advocate.

That is what is missing here.

If all the protestors and peace advocates organized and went to Iraq themselves, and formed coalitions with the Muslim people and clergy who are also asking for peace, they can successfullly enforce the change in policy they equally believe in.

How convenient, but useless, for opponents to criticize from a position of comfort and safety here in America, while complaining that Bush is sending others off to fight a war. Why not go there themselves, as Sean Penn and also the Christian Peacemakers Team have, to promote and establish true peace.

Until I see more people put their words into actions, it seems just as superficial as the "war for oil" blamed on Bush.

2006-12-13 09:55:45 · answer #3 · answered by emilynghiem 5 · 0 0

Close. It's within 33 of the 9/11 total as of last night. There is likely a narrowing of that gap since then. U.S. Death toll at 12/12/06 9:45pm ET was 2,940. The number killed on 9/11 was 2,973.

352 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan.
22,229 U.S. Service members have been wounded according to a Defense Dept. Tally (per the source listed below).

2006-12-13 09:27:56 · answer #4 · answered by Mickey Mouse Spears 7 · 1 0

Yes, someone else probably will provide the exact numbers but the number killed in Iraq surpassed the number killed on 9/11 in the past month or two. On 9/11 slightly less than 3,000 died and more Americans than that have died in Iraq. As far as I know, no one is exactly clear how many Iraqis have died but it is generally agreed it is many tens of thousands more than Americans.

2006-12-13 09:26:43 · answer #5 · answered by Terry 3 · 1 0

Getting close...only this total didn't occur over an hour and a half like the 9/11 total did. Very important difference there.

2006-12-13 10:41:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Technically its no longer even a warfare...there hasn't been an authentic warfare because the end of international warfare II. Congress has to declare warfare for it to technically be a warfare. for the duration of a time of declared warfare a number of our problem-free freedoms get taken away, alongside with our freedom of speech because something reported adversarial to u . s . of america for the duration of those circumstances ought to nicely be tried as treason. examine it out in article a million section 8 lower than the powers of congress. purely because the president sends troops to a unique u . s . doesnt recommend its a warfare. And yet another element that you had written so some distance about our nationwide shelter being over there, nicely our nationwide shelter isnt over there. nationwide shelter is for the countries protection. the human beings over seas are many times marines, military, military, air stress...and so on. purely imparting you with some suggestion to speak about sorry if it appeared like a rant.

2016-11-26 01:30:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yes, they already have already been more people killed in the war then by the actual attack. from 200-500 people. Diffrent places give u diffrent #, and the gov. has not made public all deaths and never will.

2006-12-13 09:25:16 · answer #8 · answered by AC 3 · 0 1

American's die EVERY DAY over there. I think it was like 25-50 a day.

****** up, take em outa there!

2006-12-13 10:19:01 · answer #9 · answered by Skyleigh's Mom :)™ 6 · 0 0

Yes. But don't worry. Lots more innocent people will no doubt be slaughtered in future attacks. Will that make you happy?

2006-12-13 09:32:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers