Nine more twenty more.. doesn't matter to this president and those few left who support him.. and somehow the cons still think they represent Americans.. how dumb is that. They barely represent a quarter of us.
2007-04-28 10:35:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Debra H 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Well the Straight Talk Express is pasing out Rose colored Glasses. The good thing about Rose is that you can't see the blood.
But just measuring the Killed In Action is misleading, as late as the First World War almost half the wounded died. You have to count Killed and Wounded to get an accurate picture.
General Giap explained that in an insurgency a wound is better than a kill. If you kill a soldier his comrades continue to fight. If you wound him they stop to give aid. Five or six wounds can bring an operation to a halt while the wounded are evacuated.
2007-04-28 17:47:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nobody wins in a war. There will surely be casualties on both sides and the news are usually harrowing. There is no truth that war is great because that line is only being used by politicians to deceive the people.
2007-04-28 17:35:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
Thank God we did not have the cowards before World War 2 that we do now. People whine about 9 deaths when we lost over 10,000 in one day at Normandy. Maybe its because they didn't have the media to continually put every negative thing that happens on the front page. Maybe it because the media at the time would never have considered trying to undermine the President in his efforts to be Commander-in-Chief.
I, for one, WILL continue to give the positives of what is happening until the media starts covering it objectively as they should. I WILL continue to support the President in HIS role as Commandr-in-Chief and speak out against Congress in their intrusion and violation of Constitutional law by their attempts to undermine and control the military forces.
2007-04-28 17:43:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Wookie 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
NEWSFLASH: Troops Die In An Armed Conflict
Whoda thunk it?
I'm glad these rectums weren't around during WWII, they'd have been calling for FDR's head after the D-Day invasion based on casualty figures alone.
2007-04-28 17:42:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
It's called war. We lost about 130,000 casualties on D-day. In ten years of fighting in Vietnam, we lost 200,000. Today, we have 30,000, 40,000 casualties (casualties being dead and wounded) in four years. That is half the average per year than we had in Vietnam. And comparatively speaking, since 1200 or so soldiers die every year in traffic accidents when we aren't even at war, I'd say that it is safer there than it would be if they all came home.
2007-04-28 17:43:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Curtis B 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
OH NO! TROOPS DIED IN WAR! GOD FORBID THAT EVER HAPPENS!
Fact:
Saddam and his regime killed 600 his first DAY in office. All executions.
Fact:
Taking out a figure head is nothing. You need to weed out his supporters.
Fact:
His supporters are still there.
Fact:
Most bombs are NOT aimed at US Forces.
Fact:
You need to quit crying over spilled milk. Troops die in war. Get over it.
Fact:
58 Civilians Died in that blast.
You're crying about the US soldiers? Why are our lives anymore important than theirs? Get over yourself.
2007-04-28 17:34:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mopp 3
·
5⤊
3⤋
We all have TVs and can watch the news. You don't have to come on here every few days and give us an update on how many soldiers died in Iraq.
Your crap is old.
2007-04-28 18:06:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Aimee 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Gee, if it keeps up, it just might beat out the number of murders in Florida this week!
2007-04-28 17:34:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Kurdistan is great
Gen. Patraeus says there is progress in the troop surge
2007-04-28 17:33:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by Serpico7 5
·
0⤊
4⤋