|
|
json version - view hidden posts
View article without comments
by peace dove
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 5:46 AM
On Tuesday a total of six U.S. occupation soldiers were killed in Iraq. AND FOR WHAT? Hey bu$h... YOU BIG FAT LIER... where are those weapons of mass destruction you launched this war over! In the photo, U.S. occupation soldiers seal off an area where a truck and two Humvee vehicles were afire following a guerilla attack on a U.S. convoy in central Iraq that killed three of the six (photo REUTERS/Ali Jasim)
 six_dead_why.jpg, image/jpeg, 410x285
A bomb that exploded south of Baghdad killed three U.S. soldiers and wounded three others Tuesday night, hours after another bombing west of the capital killed three U.S. paratroopers and wounded one, the military said. In addition, two employees of Cable News Network died in a shooting south of Baghdad.
The latest U.S. deaths occurred in a roadside bombing about 8 p.m. Tuesday near Iskandariyah, some 25 miles south of Baghdad, a military statement said. Earlier in Khaldiyah, west of Baghdad, a roadside bomb exploded near an 82nd Airborne Division convoy. Three paratroopers were killed and one was critically wounded, Kimmit told a news briefing in Baghdad. He said a rescue force that rushed to the scene came under small arms fire, but suffered no casualties.
Iraqi hospital staff said two Iraqi civilians also were killed in the ambush — including one shot in the stomach as he stood in his office nearby, hospital staff said.
Another Iraqi, Nameer Mohammed, who said he was standing about 500 yards from the site, claimed American soldiers fired randomly after the blasts. . Tuesday's killings brought to 519 the number of Americans who have died since the Iraq war began. Most occurred after President Bush declared an end to combat May 1.
by fresca
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 6:04 AM
This is a war you know, right?
I mean you do know what that means.
What exactly is your point, if any?
by Meyer London
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 6:09 PM
The point is that more and more US soldiers are being killed many months after Bushytail declared the war over. How could you have missed it? It almost seems like the good old days when reporters were fearfully wondering if the death toll might go up to a soldier a day. Well, five were blown up a few days ago, three a couple of days ago, and six on Tuesday. What happened to Bush's assurance that the attacks were going to go way down now that Saddam Hussein was captured? It sounds a bit like his assurances that tax breaks for the filthy rich would result in new job opportunities for everyone.
by KPC
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 6:11 PM
"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." - da shrub - Friday, May 02, 2003
by KPC
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 6:15 PM
M:"What happened to Bush's assurance that the attacks were going to go way down now that Saddam Hussein was captured?"
No, no, no....what he really said was "ah taxes are gonna go way down now that Saddam Hussein was captured."
by ;lkkjhkh
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 9:15 PM
Oscar:
"What happened to Bush's assurance that the attacks were going to go way down now that Saddam Hussein was captured?"
They did. You need to pay moe attention. http://www.irnnews.com/news.asp?action=detail&article=1002
"Attacks down 22% since Saddam's capture By: Administrative Account | Source: USA Today January 12, 2004 11:14AM EST
By Jim Michaels, USA TODAY BAGHDAD ? Attacks against coalition forces in Iraq have dropped 22% in the four weeks since Saddam Hussein's capture, military records show.
U.S. military officers say the decline in attacks, after months of growing intensity, is the first proof that Saddam's capture and recent U.S. offensives have dampened, but not eliminated, resistance to the occupation."
Ckicken Boy cackled:
'"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." - da shrub - Friday, May 02, 2003'
Which naturally implies that minor combat operations are continuing. Sheesh...do you have to have EVERYTHING explained to you?
nonanarchist
by Meyer London
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 9:26 PM
Obviously, the rate of US soldiers being killed is no longer down, if it ever was. The total number killed may be around a thoudand by the time the election comes around.
by ;ljlkhkjh
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 10:31 PM
"The total number killed may be around a thoudand by the time the election comes around."
You wish.
But on a brighter note, how many militants will get wasted?
Oh, sorry...I don't mean to make light of the deaths of your heroes.
nonanarchist
by Meyer London
Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 at 11:31 PM
Operations in which three, five or six US troops are killed at one time are minor only in military textbooks and in the minds of yahoos like you. Most of the casualties in Vietnam were taken in such operations; to paraphrase Senator Dirkson in another context, once you get about 30,000 of these it starts to round out to some real numbers. All the indications are that the Iraqis are becoming more skilled, daring and persistent in these operations and the number of dead GIs will continue to mount while you sit on your rear and type messages indicating that this is nothing to be concerned about. Of course, you would not be concerned if 100 troops a week were being killed, along with several hundred of the "enemy." After all, you lose more than that every day while playing Space Invaders. How's the cheetos? I hope that none of those meanie strikers crushed them with a sign while you were coming out of a scab-staffed market.
by lkjlkhh
Friday, Jan. 30, 2004 at 1:00 AM
"Most of the casualties in Vietnam were taken in such operations..."
Don't tell me you belive that "Iraq = Vietnam" hogwash. No one has ever offered a credible comparison of the two...and I doubt that you're going to, either.
"All the indications are that the Iraqis are becoming more skilled, daring and persistent in these operations.."
And more dead, too. Hooray for our side!
"..and the number of dead GIs will continue to mount while you sit on your rear and type messages indicating that this is nothing to be concerned about."
The numbers will not mount as quickly as you'd like.
"Of course, you would not be concerned if 100 troops a week were being killed, along with several hundred of the 'enemy.' "
You're half right (which is a definite improvement over your usual track record!): I am always concerned over the losses of our troops. I am not concerned over the losses of enemy troops. If they didn't want to face the horns, they shouldn't have grabbed the bull. Think of it as evolution in action.
"After all, you lose more than that every day while playing Space Invaders."
I don't play Space Invaders. I prefer to make fun of idiot Marxists on the internet. Much more fun.
"How's the cheetos?"
Don't like 'em. How's the borscht?
"I hope that none of those meanie strikers crushed them with a sign while you were coming out of a scab-staffed market."
I shop at the commissary, dork. And the local Wal-Mart SuperCenter. The comissary cashiers are gov't employees, who, on the whole, are too well paid to strike. The baggers work for tips only.
Nevertheless, I would not hesitate ONE SECOND to cross a picket line. The arrogance that says that union workers have more right to work than non-union workers is apalling.
nonanarchist
by KPC
Sunday, Feb. 01, 2004 at 1:47 AM
Ah just LUV yer broke dick doggie dance....
...do it agin Fido.....!
by KPC
Sunday, Feb. 01, 2004 at 1:50 AM
Fido: "If they didn't want to face the horns, they shouldn't have grabbed the bull. "
Geez, Fider....betcha thunk that wun up all bah yer lonesum....
.....how 'bout ta 'nuther..hayseed?
|