3,684 soldiers have been killed in Iraq over the past four years. Oh yeah? How about this:?

Question

Let's say for the sake of proving a point that 3,700 soldiers have been killed in Iraq in four years of fighting. FOUR YEARS.

Okay, let look at this:

September 11, 2001:

2,993 Americans were killed in two hours.


Those 3700 soldiers are dying for you, so they can ensure that another 2993 won't die in two hours.

So please, to all of those people complaining, please stop. I know people over there, and many of you do, too. We aren't making their lives any easier.

PS.

I do believe in this War, for those wondering.
Please excuse the numbers, they were gained from Wikipedia, and we all know that website is not always correct.

People don't understand, do they?

WE ARE IN IRAQ TO END TERRORISM AS WELL AS SET UP A DEMOCRACY, TO HELP END TERORISM IN THE LONG RUN!

YOU DON'T THINK THAT THERE ARE TERRORISTS IN IRAQ?

They haven't done anything to prevent an attack?

Have you seen an attack since the 2001 invasion?

I think not.

I read the 9/11 report. I'm not wrong.

Answer 1

I fully agree with your every word.

God bless those who have made the ultimate sacrifice on our behalf.

Answer 2

Well only 1,864 service members were killed in the first 4 years of Vietnam.

If infact that this war is the most important war we have ever fought, then why wasn't the war taken more seriously by the Commander in Chief. 160,000 troops to secure a whole country? See we won the war but we are losing the occupation. Petraeus isn't even follwing his own doctrine that he set forth in FM 3-24.

I whole heartedly supported this war when it started, however I see the plan and how it is being carried out and there has to be a change, a serious change, I just think that window of opportunity has closed.

Most of my guys are or have been over there. No one is questioning the job they are doing, the questions are landing at the door step of the President and the Secretary of Defense, they lacked the will power to do this war right from day one, when he announced "Major Combat Operations have ended", the occupation began and he should have taken that alot more seriously than he did.

See, the problem with idealogues is that they are convinced by their views so much that they fail to plan. Just as they teach every new NCO at PLDC (I think its called Warrior COurse now) that "if you fail to plan then plan to fail". The wet dream of a NEO-CON Marshall Plan is a failure.

Answer 3

Considering that the Iraq conflict cost somewhere between 150,000 and 1 million (extreme non-US estimates) Iraqi lives and the coalition had about 150,000 soldiers stationed in Iraq (fairly stable since 2003, tapering down after 2008 to hardly any in 2012), with typical 15 month tours. A lower limit estimate would be (minimal tours, don t take tapering troop numbers into account, assume 150k casualties) be an average of 0.125 kills per soldier. An upper limit estimate would (maximum repeat tours, take tapering troop numbers into account, assume 1M casualties) be an average of 8.2 kills per soldier. Note that these are calculated averages, but that seems a fair answer for "kills per ordinary soldier". It doesn t say there weren t snipers or bombers with 100 s of kills and people on frequent combat missions in high activity areas will of course get higher numbers than a medic at a base (hopefully), but that s the thing with averages.

Answer 4

I have a question for you. Do you believe EVERYTHING that you government tells you? Then think about what they were planning to do with Cuba in the 1960's...which was top secrete until a few years ago.

And as far as IRAQ goes, it has nothing to do with 9/11...how many Iraqi's were on those planes? Not one. Saddam did not like Bin Laden and did not let him into Iraq. Bush even states this. So, if Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11 why are you trying to make a connection there where there is none?

Answer 5

DEAD ON!!! The fact is, liberal democrats don't want this war to continue because they'd rather have more money to help save the trees or the rainforests or to help stop Global Warming or whatever the hell they think needs saving. And the people who say that we are evil, cruel, and selfish human beings for "interfering in other people's business"....yes, how DARE we go and kill those terrorists...how DARE we set up a democracy....how DARE we let the Iraqi people have an elction....how DARE we keep defending them against more terrorists who want to kill them....how DARE we build schools and offer medical aid. What, its fine if we do it in Africa where there ARE no terrorists, but if its in a middle eastern country with oil then it MUST be all about oil and not that we actually CARE about the innocent people in Iraq.

Sorry, I know I was kind of on a tirade there, but I'm sick and tired of these idiotic anti-war protests.

Answer 6

Actually, the numbers are greater. A soldier killed on the battlefield counts as a casualty. If you get shot in combat – a clock goes off. If you die in transit to a hospital out of Iraq such as Ramstein in Germany, you are not an official Iraq casualty. The same holds true if the troops out of the country die 24 hours after they were hit in Iraq. The official troop death number is just those that have died in action on the ground. The number dead is more like 15 - 17,000.

Answer 7

There are many levels of terrorism. The war in Iraq is wrong. The war anywhere is wrong. And most soldiers could be friends if politicians would leave goodwill to all people. Stop the war, that's all we need, just stop the war.

Politicians greed create wars. Leadership in any form that leads a nation is prone to propaganda and chaos to continue the greed and to reap just a few - their wealth.

Answer 8

There has also been up to 25,000 "serious" casualties... these are soldiers that can not go back to combat service. These injuries include people that have lost limbs but more have been head trauma injuries. We have a great battlefield medicine technology that can save so many lives... but we can't return these victims their lifestyles that they once had. We will be taking care of these soldiers for a long time. Please acknowledge this stat too.

Answer 9

I do NOT believe in this war, but STOP with the "if I don't believe in the war, I don't support the troops" garbage. The troops are giving their valued lives for a farce of a war that bush started, not the terrorists. The terrorists who started this ARE IN AFGHANISTAN. We should have focused our attention there. Even you agree with the fact that on 9/11, almost 3000 people were killed. Why are the people responsible STILL WALKING AROUND FREE WHILE WE ARE IN IRAQ?

The troops need to be out of Iraq NOW...

EDIT: Guess what? There were no terrorists in Iraq who were bothering us until AFTER WE INVADED. bin laden is from Saudi Arabia, and Hussein and bin laden HATED each other because Iraq and Saudi Arabia HATED each other. Since the invasion, there has been more chaos, and "Rummy" disbanded the Iraqi soldiers. We continue to spend more and more money, and WHO DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO PAY FOR THAT LATER? This country is going to end up bankrupt, and we will end up in financial trouble. By the way, isn't that what bin laden stated he was going to do?

EDIT #2: There were no more terrorists attacks because OUR COUNTRY IS PAYING ATTENTION NOW. Just because we are going out for wars all over the world doesn't mean that is the reason they are not committing terrorism in America. If you take a look there are still terrorist acts in Europe, so obviously, going into Iraq did not stop anything, did it?

EDIT #3: ...and, of course, the gov't doesn't LIE, do they?

Answer 10

They are fighting the wrong people. How many times do you need to hear it? Iraq had nothing to do with the 2993 Americans who died on 9/11. And this war is making it MORE likely that another attack will be made. For every person killed over there - we increase the hatred. We have created thousands upon thousands of new terrorists. And the idea that we are fighting them over there so we dont have to fight them here is ridiculous. It took 19 people to bring down the twin towers. Now tell me they can't afford to send 19 more over here because they are too busy over in Iraq.

Answer 11

If President Bush had not stood up for us, and fought back, Bin Laden would not have stopped with 9/11--there still would have been a war, but it would have been here, on our turf. Pull out your Bibles and read about Isaac and Ishmael, 2 brothers in the Old Testament. Isaac's descendants are the Jews and Ishmael's descendants are the Arabic. These 2 lines have been fighting/bickering for forever. This is all part of this war. Keep reading the Bible to see how all this ends. (BTW, AMEN to Dez604).