How many American soldier's deaths are acceptable to the 28%'ers ?

Question

for this unnecessary war of choice ?

Answer 1

Well according to the Bushbots, as long as we don't lose more than we lost in Vietnam, then it's acceptable. So we have a ways to go yet.


JB quit it already with the dramtic how many of you have served. You guys act like serivng in the military is this remote thing that less than 1% of the country has done. I'm sure many people answering the question are veterans including myself. That has nothing to do with our objection to this stupid asss war. Geesh!

Answer 2

It's not based upon the number of lives taken from our brave military, it's trying to figure out what the course is. Iraq did not attack us and there were no wmd.

So I am very concerned about why our soldiers are there in the first place. Is this just another Vietnam war? The middle east has been at war for thousands of years. Why does the Bush administration and Congress think we belong there?

Our military is the best in the world and our soldiers go where are government sends them and do the best job a soldier can do anywhere in the world. .

But I really don't understand why our government sent them to Iraq in the first place - and with such a build up of anticipation prior to the attack. Was our whole purpose to eliminate Saddam or what? Now that he's gone, the country destroyed, many, many thousands of Iraqi lives ended and thousands of our soldiers lives gone, why are we still there?

I think we need to look at who is profiting from this war to determine how long we remain - and what these profiteers have to gain.

A war is not a pretty thing. Though our soldiers take a vow to defend our nation with their lives, one life lost in a war is a life that will leave a hole in our nation where a brave soldier once stood. Every soldier who gave their life is one soldier too many lost if we could have prevented the loss before it occurred.

Answer 3

You could make this same sort of illogical argument for a lot of causes:

How many auto deaths are acceptable until we ban cars?
How many unborn deaths are acceptable until we ban abortions?
How many deaths by fire are acceptable until we ban home heating?
How many drownings are acceptable until we ban swimming?

While I'm all for bringing the troops home as soon as possible, we should not gauge the outcome based on how many soldiers die. There is no magic number. The issue isn't whether 1, 100 or 100,000 soldiers die. The issue is whether we should be there in the first place, and if our presence there is in our best interests.

Answer 4

i think of attacking Iran simply by threat is stupidly risky. comparable to i'm bored with Obama retaining our being an importer of oil. Our squaddies and sailors have not have been given any ought to die on even training workouts. because of the fact we amplify our armed forces might to guard remote places oil routes and not so friendly countries. as quickly as we are able to open Federal controlled public lands and end remote places oil dependency. Then we are able to purely end sending billions remote places in a circle jerk of money and blood funds. inner maximum lands purely yield 9% of what's presented in public lands. yet SuperOman nevertheless thinks we ought to do the Jimmy Carter "take care of" path. Repeating the cycle of dependency on remote places oil. which will save us embroiled in greater Iran's. as quickly as we ought to continuously merely make sparkling that one omit step with a nuclear gadget will end with the offending united states of america being immediately vaporized.

Answer 5

The 28%-ers do not give a rat's azz about any soldier slaughtered in Iraq.

The whole damn issue is about saving face now.

Answer 6

Of choice? Of course not! Was it forced on us? Who flew 2 airliners into the WTC? Pentagon? (Unless you subscribe to the theory there was no plane wreckage) and don't you remember the Patriots who put a plane into a Pennsylvania field to avoid the same fate! Go before the events of 9/11. What about the Cole? Riyadh? Embassies in 2 African countries? Marine barracks in Lebanon?
We have been getting "hints" for decades! Total the death count in all of these events and they pale to troop deaths. I am an ex Marine and I mourn when 1 falls. But one who falls in battle doesn't wear a "victim" tag. He returns a hero, mourned and loved.
How many are acceptable? Not 1 should be acceptable when taken by acts of terrorism. Should we EXPECT that some will die in battle, most certainly.
What is your option? Bring them home, forget what's happening there and believe it couldn't happen here. I thought Pearl Harbor taught us to not let our guard down. We let it down and got punched on our own soil! Something that hasn't happened since the Battles of 1812! 9/11 Brought the horrors of terrorism to our streets on a grand scale! I don't want to see another one.

Answer 7

My question is this have any of you ever served your country? Any of ya? Why don't you ask this question to the thousands of fine men and women who have served their country? ASK EM GO AHEAD!! HECK ASK ME!! Ask the thousands and thousands who gave their lives for you and everyone else so you can call yourselves an American. Course life is sooooooooo easy writing questions like this and hiding behind your little keyboard isn't it!

Answer 8

There are no "acceptable" numbers for the loss of human life.

Answer 9

Apparently, more than are acceptable to the 10% 'ers (Congress's approval rating).

Answer 10

The answer is and always will be zero.

I reject the premise of your question completely!