US death toll in Iraq hit 4000

Agreed and we will never know exactly how many civilians have died during this conflict.

But I think we can safely say that the number is higher than died at Sadam's hands. Sadly.

Anybody who still argues in suport of this conflict needs their head examined.

505,695,000,000 USD

That's US Dollar

Probably better spent on US children.

No?

http://www.populistamerica.com/top_ten_reasons_to_get_out_of_iraq_now

As for that American troop throwing that puppy over the cliff, the puppy was dead already. Still, it's the thought that counts. Sorry to say it, but I'd be the first to rejoice if a terrorist shot him between the eyeballs for that malicious thought. I can't stand cruelty to animals.

Why does Bush need to create a climate of fear? These people are already afraid and show false manhood. Just wait til he gets his face rubbed in the ground and tortured

They always have done.
URL

You are talking about Bush here right ?

They were all Americans. There are 308 other coalition deaths, 23 of which are Polish. Multiply the figures by ten and you will roughly get the average wounded.

Absolutely no comparison. Never.

John - that would be great if it was true but you are fighting a war for Bush and the Oil companies.

The war is not valid.

By the way, I had a bunch of what you would call Iraqi "vets" for dinner last night. 2 or 3 tours each ( Afghanistan too ). Its obvious to everyone this war is about Oil.

It is a classical piece of US shooting themselves in the foot.
They start a war to get the Oil, spend trillions, kill hundreds of thousands and then the Iraqis sell their Oil to Russia - you couldn't write a better comedy.

Sorry JohnP, u r slacking a wee bit. Ur logic has deteriorated and Szkotja2007 has just shown u why. Scots love whacking straight up views on the table and presenting things in simple terms that journalists try and complicate.

When does the comedy come out on the big screen btw?

Don't be mislead, Seanus. The war is not just about oil.

I think the price is also related to the higher price of medical care being given, not to mention the fact that every politician out there thinks we need to fight with some "super weapon" or other, and insists on using 500,000 USD missiles when a 500USD bomb would do the job just as well-after all, we *DO* teach our pilots marksmanship....also the price of travel to and from is high. Fuel has went through the roof (of course) and major hubs previously relied on have been given back to their host countries. Also when politicians want to run off at the mouth and denounce our allies for things done 100 years ago, it hurts us. The time for that was 100 years ago, not with the people currently there who had nothing to do with it.
As for civilian deaths being higher than in Saddam's rule, I really doubt it. I've yet to see on any news report them reporting on the extreme measures being used to avoid innocent casualties. I'm sure they happen, but not nearly as much as the uninitiated would think. I and many others who work with me have been shot at and been in a situation where we were unable to return fire. I've heard Spooky gunships actually being called OFF of a target by troops who were under fire, simply because they couldn't guarantee the firing was from a certain building. (If you were wondering, Spooky gunships don't start fights, they just finish them)
Whether the price tag is worth it, is something that has to wait and see. It appears from everything I'm hearing over there, that it is starting to be. I haven't heard this from the news, of course-they are only interested in pain and suffering, and if they don't have that, scandal if they can create or find it.
Also the number, while staggering, is still a tiny percent of the U.S. budget. There's a LOT of people here milking the bureaucracy, and honestly while I like the idea of paying for children (especially education) I fear it would go into the current system, which has apparently become more indoctrination and social grooming than education.
Seanus, I've heard about the puppy video, and while I think it was all staged, there is always going to be someone or other with a twisted sense of humor which will catch the media eye. Had he been a regular civilian it would have never made the news. Refer above to my comment about pain, suffering, and scandal....
I also think arguments about Bush are a little ridiculous. No matter what one likes or dislikes about his policies, he is gone. The smart bet would be to start trying to figure out what to expect from the next one in office. Personally, I really dislike our choices this time. At least the last time, I was able to hold my nose and support the guy who wasn't an open traitor. This time, they all lack, IMHO.

John P.

I know it's not just about oil, it's about strategic placement in the Middle East too. I think Iran was voted as the most hated country by the US people. I might have sent this to Matthias, ask him if he has this poll

John, really, you can do better than that.

The 505,695,000,000 USD price tag on the Iraq war, thats 1 dollar a second for 16,000 years, is related to the higher price of medical care.

Brilliant :)

I'm laughing, no really!
Didn't want to make it seem we are the ONLY ones making sacrifices...
Exactly my point. I am making a purely numerical comparison. People are complaining about 4,000 dead, when many times that died in a few hours at D-Day and others would never forget. Also, millions more civilians were killed in WWII intentionally than have died or even likely WILL die in Iraq, where civilian deaths are intentionally avoided. How many German civilians burned to death in Dresden at the hands of British Lancaster bombers? British in London thanks to German Ju-87's and V-1, V-2, etc? If anything war has gotten more "civilized" if such a thing can be said. The only thing making it look worse is how things are reported.
So you say, but then, you have no idea apparently. I think it's interesting people say "oh this war or that one is for oil" or even better, some call Bush an oil man (what, for 6 months? not even close to an "oil man"). The war started about WMD's. Without Iranian (and perhaps other) interference, it's quite likely the war would have also been over for some time. Still, enjoy your armchair and quarterback me all you want.
Now now, why wasn't I invited? troops are troops. We all have our opinions. I would also point out that these vets you claim to have had over for dinner are likely your friends. I'm not surprised that they align well with your political views.
Sorry, but the initial point is where you are mistaken. Oil has nothing to do with it, although everyone and his brother who is against the war likes to say so. Iraq has to deal with Iraq's problems. Russia and Iran (and the alliance between the two) will more likely affect Iraq than something done across the globe in the US. Iran is right on Iraq's border. Iran has a fuel deal with Russia. I've posted this would happen elsewhere, I believe...and for some reason nobody believed it.
So...come to whatever conclusion you wish.

You know, you could read the ENTIRE post....I didn't just say it was about medical care....that's what you get for SKIMMING posts instead of reading.

Night folks.

John P.

Im sorry John, you're quite right. But it made me laugh so much that I read the rest of the post with tears in my eyes.

On a serious note. You do present your case elequantly, biased, with obvious vested interest but elequantly. But no matter how hard you flog dead horse, it just wont make it to the finishing line.

The puppy looked staged ( arm goes out of shot ) shooting the shepherd looked real enough.

So what was it about then..

Of course,... and you still believe that he had them because you have personally seen......yep, I remember now.

Yes, I am making an unsubstantiatable claim that I had friends and relations over for dinner who happen to be in the forces. And funnily enough they think the war is a heap of crap, nothing to do with WMD and are sick of the US politics surrounding it.

You are American - you would eat too much ;-)

Okay, okay I agree...WMD....and you still believe that he had them because you have personally seen......yep, I remember now.............. ( turns to medicine cabinet and draws up the Acuphase ).

Spij dobrze.

505,828,000,000 USD

does any actually care about the plight of the people that live there...things are worse than they were before, Im sure the numbers are far higher than 4,000.

I respect the soldiers that are over there doing their job but the lack of direction and actual help given the Iraqis is pittyful and after watching Rageh Omaar's documentary it really really made me think how badly things have been handled and how many more inocent lives are going to be lost before Iraq is a safe place for men women and children to live in peace, because wasnt that the whole point of it.

Also widely inaccurate.
D-Day loses talk about casualties, dead, injured and missing (POW etc).
D-Day casualties on the first day are estimated at 10,000 with 2500 killed.
http://www.ddaymuseum.co.uk/faq.htm

Loses in Iraq are 4K US dead and 60,000 wounded, plus 300 allied dead and probably 4500 injured. So the figures would be more like 70,000 casualties.

Total casualties for the US in WW2 were about 1 million (291k dead)
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html

The Iraq war has not finished and will probably continue for another 10-20 years,so we should expect the figures to double or so.



No it wasn't, not everything that isn't moving is dead. Besides it had no signs of rigor mortice and no sign of an injury. it looked perfectly alive to me.

The question then is begged, was going to war necessary? Bush is the classic exponent of this but many advised against it.

WMD's, well, this has already been covered in some depth. Like JohnP, I entertain the possibility that he had them but neither Hans Blix, nor Scott Ritter unearthed any conclusive findings. If America is to be consistent, it must take the same stance with Iran, sth the world would live to regret. The level of suspicion is much the same. Bush just didn't seem interested in what Mr Ritter had to say, he had a pre-planned agenda.

The central focus may not be oil in the short term but more the strategic deployment of a slave government. Hamid Karzai was a member of Unocal, a friendly company, so Bush put him in power (in Afghanistan of course). The new Iraqi leader has a positive dialogue with the American ambassador. A stable Iraq is a worthy pawn in the hands of the US administration. In this way, human life is devalued through war to secure such an objective. As Bush himself said, "[A] free Iraq is essential to our respective securities.".

Let us not forget Bush's wisdom, "This has been tough weeks in that country", LOL. The immediate future of Basra is showing that, hehehe

An equally pertinent question must ask if the gains outweigh the costs?

With over 4000 US soldiers killed and a cost exceeding 506,000,000,000 USD, what exactly have we gained that could be worth this cost?

I disagree...Iraq was not the worst tyrannical state on the world but it has the second most oil reserves of the world.
Bush decided to go after Saddam even as he was an enemy of Al Quaida, had no WMD's and had nothing to do with 9/11 - Oil was the true reason!

Of course, oil and influence

sorry to quible John,but the US dead on D day was just a smidge over 2.000

anyhoo,this is a thread about the loss of 4000 sons/husbands/fathers/daughters/sisters etc etc....any chnace a l'il respect can be shown?


Just watch 3 kings...wrong war,plenty of answers though....

Bumper bonus for US companies in Iraq.
URL
Crude Oil now selling at just over $117 a barrel.

Heres one for the conspiracy theorists...

Iran had been working on opening an Oil bourse which will trade Oil in various currencies rather than the $. This could destabilise the US economy big time.
The bourse is based on an island and uses peer to peer trading over the internet.
The opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse was delayed earlier this year because the undersea fibre optic cable had been cut !


Interesting fact - Iran has the world's second largest oil reserves of 136 gigabarrels.
( 1 gigabarrel = one thousand million barrels ).

ahhh... the black gold.
easily worth 4,000 American lives, just think of the economy*









*view expressed is that of GWB and not my own.

It's shame this thread only covers US paid soldiers (or paid contractors) dead in Iraq. Statistics says for one US "soldier" 20 Iraqi people die: http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/. What about them, they did not attack anybody; USA attacked their country because of "weapons of mass destructions" never found anywhere!?

It was like Poland was attacked by Germany during the WW2 and the world counts only German dead soldiers and didn't mention 20 times more Polish people dead, for some reason.

That's like 8 euros...right?

For all sceptics or supporters of "war on terror" or "war in iraq", here is a speech of the American soldier and I could not describe the whole situation better than this.

Title is: KILL Everybody (who dares to fire at you)

Er, not quite. We were told how many British, Americans, Russians and Poles were killed but not Germans.

It is not a low price and of course not a low,low price.It is an acceptable price,yes.But not something to disregard or be proud of or regard as satisfactory outcome.This death toll comes from guerilla forces and guerilla forces cannot cause the same extent of losses as normal forces(like in Vietnam).
If you compare to german losses of Wehrmacht by guerilla action during the war(which was heavily supported by british and US ammunition) were the same or even less than US losses in Iraq for the same amount of time.In Greece for example where the resistance was extensive,Wehrmacht lost about 4000-6000 soldiers during 3 years and a half occupation.This was regarded as serious losses at the time and fired large scale operations of Wehrmacht against guerilla forces.
Given the population of Iraq,i think that 4000 dead is a high number although my guess is that even 10000 dead would be an acceptable price for US.
I am not sure what would happen if the dead were about 15000.

you know what, all the troops out in these places, Iraq, afghanistan, bosnia, africa or wherever the hell they ae don't care about all the bleeting going on and moaning, all they want and need is the support of their people. Instead of debating this crap about weapons or no weapons and if its worth it or not you should be backing your troops and the other toops of the allies.

Don't forget that the soldiers are just the soldiers they don't decide where they go or what ops they do they have do do as their told by the government etc. Just think about it for one second, if you were out their what would you want?? people talking **** back home or actually supporting you!!!!! So buck up and get behind your people who are off around the world protecting your freedom.

The reason is simple. Germany lost a million (plus some change) more people than Poland.