2000 and counting...

The 100,000 number is based on a 'Household Survey'. This method of counting fatalities is notoriously poor, as mentioned in the article.

Iraq Body Count.Net shows the civilian fatalities in the range of 14,181 and 16,312. Of course, this report is also not completely credible. The numbers are based only on those fatalities that make the news reports. For instance, in April, there was extensive US military action in Fallujah. Many of the deaths were unreported. A new report shows this information:

Iraq Body Count dot Net said:
Today the Iraq Body Count (IBC) website has published its analysis of the civilian dealth toll in the April 2004 siege of Falluja. This analysis leads to the conclusion that betweeen 572 and 616 of the approximately 800 reported deaths were of civilians, with over 300 of these being women and children.
We will never have an accurate count of the number of Iraqi's killed during their liberation. But we can be certain that the deaths are not going to stop anytime soon.

Continuing reports tell us of a planned 'decisive assualt' to suppress the insurgents in Fallujah after the United States election.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/29/uiraq.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/29/ixportaltop.html&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/29/ixportaltop.html


I guess we should all be glad that this is not going to be 'major combat' action. Those all ended a while back.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/iraq/20030501-15.html
 
With the assault on Fallujah, more soldiers are being killed. Today, TWICE as many United States Soldiers have died while Iraq was under the new Interim Authority than were killed during 'Major Combat Operations'.



139 US Fatalities from April 19, 2003 - May 1, 2003

283 US Fatalities from June 29, 2003 - November 9, 2003
 
By PeachMonkey:

A lot of this comes from the urban myth about Vietnam soldiers having been "spit upon" by war protesters upon their return to the States. See:
After I got back from my tour we had to talk to "doctors", really just a way to say you are seeing a pchyciatrist. Many of the Vietnam vets didn't have a chance. My father got his orders to go home, when he stepped of the plane in LA he was a civilian. He was spit on called a baby killer, etc. and why? Because people are ignorant in the fact as it was said earlier that people take out their feelings about the war on the sodiers. It is not their fault they got sent over seas, its not thier fault the enemy is trying to kill them, they are just doing their "JOB" as a sodier. I see that many of you support the troops, which I really respect, and truly thank you. Although, there are a lot of people out there that still disrespect the soldiers when they come home. When I came home there were bars that would kick us out for being military. I personally have been spit at, and called a baby killer, but I just have to think that they are just mis-informed as to who exactly is making the call for we soldiers to be over there. I just shake my head at those poor fools, I, along with everyone else who serves is just fufilling their oath as an American Soldier. It was really hard not to just give in to my animal side and chew their arms off, but instead I became a better person by just shaking my head and walking away. I hope that through brilliant people like yourselves, the truth keeps getting spread.

Anyways I'm off work now so I'll talk to you all tomorrow!

Chow,

Ryan
 
rmcrobertson said:
Strain of Iraq war showing on Bush, those who know him say
By Judy Keen, USA TODAY


...Bush believes he was called by God to lead the nation at this time, says Commerce Secretary Don Evans, a close friend who talks with Bush every day. His history degree from Yale makes him mindful of the importance of the moment. He knows he's making "history-changing decisions," Evans says. But Bush doesn't keep a diary or other personal record of the events that will form his legacy. Aides take notes, but there's no stenographer in most meetings, nor are they videotaped or recorded.

It's widely assumed that one reason Bush wants to rid the world of Saddam Hussein is to complete the mission his father, former president George Bush, began in 1991. The senior Bush led a coalition to eject Iraqi troops that had invaded Kuwait, but knowing that the U.N.-backed alliance was formed solely to liberate the country, he decided against going on to Baghdad to remove Saddam from power. People who know both men say this war isn't about vengeance. "It's not personal," one Bush aide says.

Rather, the president's passion is motivated by his loathing for Saddam's brutality, aides say. He talks often about his revulsion for Saddam's use of torture, rape and executions. He is convinced that the Iraqi leader is literally insane and would gladly give terrorists weapons to use to launch another attack on the United States.

The thought of another assault on the United States horrifies Bush. Aides say he believes history and heaven will judge him by his ability to prevent one....


...Bush copes with anxiety as he always has. He prays and exercises. Evans says his friend has a placid acceptance of challenges that comes from his Christian faith.

"He knows that we're all here to serve a calling greater than self," Evans says. "That's what he's committed his life to do. He understands that he is the one person in the country, in this case really the one person in the world, who has a responsibility to protect and defend freedom."
Last week Don Evans announced he was leaving his cabinet post. Hmmm ... Hindsight is interesting, eh?
 
According to this news report, Fallujah is now 100% secure.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200411/s1244655.htm

exceprt said:
US commander says Fallujah is 100 per cent secure

United States troops have secured control over the whole of rebellious Fallujah with more than 1,000 insurgents taken prisoner.

Colonel Michael Regner, operations officer for the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Fallujah, says "somewhere over 1,000" insurgents have been killed in the offensive that began on November 8.

"A 100 per cent of the city is secure," he said, but added that Marines were still involved in fighting in portions of the city and were sweeping house to house.

He says 38 US troops had been killed and 320 wounded in the operation.

Six Iraqi government troops also have been killed and 28 wounded.

He added that no more than about 24 of the prisoners were from outside Iraq and a senior U.S. defence official says "a large fraction" of the Fallujah prisoners would very likely be released quickly.
Although the commander reports only 38 US troops have been killed, the total number of US Fatalities in Iraq for November is 72, according to icasualties.org. There seems to be a disconnect there.

I am not willing to conceed that 100% secure means 100% safe. I fear there will be more soldiers returning on midnight flights from Fallujah.

Total US Fatalities in Iraq as of November 15, 2004 : 1193
Total US Fatalites in Iraq for the month of November : 72 (so far)
 
One year ago today, Saddam Hussein was captured by US military forces in Iraq.

Since that time, 895 coalition fatalities have occured in Iraq, 752 under hostile circumstances.
 
Feisty Mouse said:
It just makes me want to cry.

And all this, for what - ?

To help rebuild and bring democracy at this point.

I think the role of the U.S. military in Iraq ended after we bombed them and captured Saddam.

Time to leave.
 
MisterMike said:
I think the role of the U.S. military in Iraq ended after we bombed them and captured Saddam.
For those who are concerned, 906 Coalition fatalities since the capture of Saddam Hussein on 12/13/2003.
 
MisterMike said:
To help rebuild and bring democracy at this point.

I think the role of the U.S. military in Iraq ended after we bombed them and captured Saddam.

Time to leave.
That's sounds a little contradictory.
If the whole point was to remove Saddam and replace his dictatorship with a new democratic nation... the work has only begun. Yes, Saddam is gone. But there is hardly a stable democracy there. If the coalition ran away with their tail between their legs now, it would leave a fertile ground for another tyrannical dictator to pick up where Saddam left off. The US military damaged the infrastucture of that country during the invasion, and at a minimum they have a responsibility to help replace what was lost. If the aim of this war were really so noble, shouldn't we be leaving it a better place than we found it?
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top