7 more die- 1800 now (and counting)..what a damn shame..for what?

[reeds]

Seven Marines killed in action in western Iraq
BAGHDAD (AP) — The U.S. military said Tuesday that six Marines were killed in action in western Iraq, pushing the death toll for Americans since the start of the war past 1,800.

Relatives of 19 victims whose bodies were found Monday in Baghdad, grieve during funeral services.
By Kahlid Mohammed, AP

The Marines, assigned to Regimental Combat Team-2 of the 2nd Marine Division, died Monday in Haditha, 140 miles northwest of Baghdad.

A seventh Marine was killed Monday by a car bomb in Hit, 50 miles southeast of Haditha in the volatile Euphrates River valley.

Insurgents posted handbills in Haditha, claiming to have killed 10 U.S. troops, seizing some of their weapons.

At least 1,801 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count. At least 1,382 died as a result of hostile action. The figures include five military civilians.

In other violence, a roadside bomb targeting a U.S. military convoy exploded Tuesday at the entrance to a tunnel in central Baghdad, and at least 29 civilians were wounded, officials said.

The blast hit as the convoy was about to enter the tunnel in Bab Shargi, near Tahrir Square, said police Capt. Abdul-Hussein Munsif. Two Humvees appeared to have been damaged, he said.

U.S. and Iraqi forces placed a security cordon around the area. The U.S. military had no immediate information on casualties.

An emergency services official said on customary condition of anonymity that 29 wounded civilians were taken to two hospitals.

The bomb left a 3-foot-wide crater in the ground. Charred parts from the armored Humvee littered the site and seven civilian cars were also badly damaged.

U.S. troops took away some items from the damaged armored vehicle, including a helmet and two flak jackets.

In Samarra, 60 miles north of the capital, an explosion about 5 a.m. Tuesday damaged a pipeline used for shipping fuel from the Beiji refinery to a power station in the Baghdad area, police said. Insurgents have frequently targeted the line to interrupt electricity in the Baghdad area — already critically low as demand rises in the summer.

The U.S. military said a reporter for the Army Times newspaper embedded with American troops was injured in a suicide car bombing Monday evening in western Iraq near the Syrian border.

U.S. military spokesman Capt. Duane Limpert had no details on the extent of injuries to the reporter, and he added that troops reported only minor injuries.

As the Aug. 15 deadline neared for finishing Iraq's new constitution, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad called for it to protect women's rights, saying it was an important element for the country's success.

After meeting with representatives from some Iraqi women's groups, Khalilzad said they agreed that the equality of women "is a fundamental requirement for Iraq's progress."

The ambassador said that the U.S. government is expecting a constitution that would ensure full rights to all Iraqis, regardless of their sex, ethnicity or gender.

"My focus is to help get a constitution that does this. Of course, the Iraqis will decide but we will help in any way that we can," he said.

Khalilzad said his government would encourage Iraqi politicians to exclude any constitutional articles that discriminate or limit opportunities for any Iraqi citizens.

On Monday, women activists urged parliament to limit the role of Islam in the new constitution and follow international treaties on the rights of women and children.

With efforts exerted by religious parties to give Islam a central role in the Iraqi law, fears are growing that women would lose rights in marriage, divorce and inheritance.

Most worrying for women's groups has been the section on civil rights in the draft constitution, which some feel would significantly roll back women's rights under a 1959 civil law enacted by a secular regime.

Under Sharia law, women would inherit only half of what men receive. In issues of marriage and divorce, women would be at a significant disadvantage since only men would have the legal power to initiate divorces.

Khalilzad also called for more involvement by Arab Sunnis in the political process, stressing the necessity of national agreement on the future of Iraq as a way to divide and defeat the insurgency.

"In order to defeat the insurgency, one needs to reach a national compact, because if all Iraqis, including those who in western and central parts of the country see themselves as part of this new Iraq ... they will be separated from the insurgency," he said.

He accused insurgents of attempting to ignite a sectarian civil war in Iraq, adding that the solution to the insurgency problem should not be limited to military means.

"The military solution has to be integrated into a broad strategy that has a political element leading it, and of course, there are other elements."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[capitalcity]

1800 soldiers in 28 months over 3300 civilians in one morning - that's what.

[u2sarajevo]

reeds wants us to just ignore the problem. I mean, obviously if we just kept our hands off the terrorists they would leave us alone.

The quiet cheers that come from reeds when another soldier loses his life is just disheartening. I can almost see him responding with disappointment for sure, but happy that he can turn that screw just a bit more into the side of the man he obviously hates so much.... the very President of the Country he lives in.

Pathetic.

[dude1394]

Is that you jimmah?

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: capitalcity
1800 soldiers in 28 months over 3300 civilians in one morning - that's what.

both are casualty figures which are not only regrettable but avoidable.

btw these two statistics have absolutely NOTHING to do with each other, it would be like mentioning the deaths from the tsunami and 9/11 together.

[madape]

considering most of the deaths in Iraq (especially in the last two years) have been courtesey of Al Queda and other islamic terrorists, I'd say they have everything to do with each other.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: madape
considering most of the deaths in Iraq (especially in the last two years) have been courtesey of Al Queda and other islamic terrorists, I'd say they have everything to do with each other.

no, the "insurgency" is not only those islamists you mention but also (and perhaps the most lethal) former Baathists/Saddamites.

There is absolutely NO credible link between the 9/11 al Queda attack on the US and Iraq.
from the 9/11 commission to the spokespeople for the current administration, the conclusion is the same.
no connection.
period.

[u2sarajevo]

Originally posted by: Mavdog

no, the "insurgency" is not only those islamists you mention but also (and perhaps the most lethal) former Baathists/Saddamites.

There is absolutely NO credible link between the 9/11 al Queda attack on the US and Iraq.
from the 9/11 commission to the spokespeople for the current administration, the conclusion is the same.
no connection.
period.

Damn. You seem so sure. I bet the US Intelligence Agencies wish they had your hot line number.

[Drbio]

Genius U2.


Edit---> PERIOD.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: u2sarajevo

Damn. You seem so sure. I bet the US Intelligence Agencies wish they had your hot line number.

That's pretty funny, you know, because I don't think I've ever heard Bush say the words "Saddam" and "Nine-eleven" in the same sentence. No credible link between the 9/11 attack and Iraq? Well, actually, I think Saddamn offering Bin Laden safe-haven in Iraq could be considered a "link." Either way, nobody in the administration has suggested that we toppled Saddam's regime because he had a role in the 9/11 attacks.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: u2sarajevo

Damn. You seem so sure. I bet the US Intelligence Agencies wish they had your hot line number.

this has been reviewed over and over. read the 9/11 commission report.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: Thespiralgoeson

That's pretty funny, you know, because I don't think I've ever heard Bush say the words "Saddam" and "Nine-eleven" in the same sentence. No credible link between the 9/11 attack and Iraq? Well, actually, I think Saddamn offering Bin Laden safe-haven in Iraq could be considered a "link." Either way, nobody in the administration has suggested that we toppled Saddam's regime because he had a role in the 9/11 attacks.

really? here's a link to a speech titled "President Bush outlines Iraqi Threat". 9/11 is mentioned 5 times in this speech, and (gast) is in the same sentence as Iraq/Saddam.

No, the administration has not connected Saddam to 9/11 (just as I mentioned above), but by this type of disingenuous speechwriting the impression is made that the Iraq conflict is a part of the war on terror....which is false as Saddam was not connected with the terrorists who attacked the US.

link

[reeds]

"The quiet cheers that come from reeds when another soldier loses his life is just disheartening. I can almost see him responding with disappointment for sure, but happy that he can turn that screw just a bit more into the side of the man he obviously hates so much.... the very President of the Country he lives in."

Another moronic post. To say I cheer the death of our men is a discrace- unfreaking believable I might add. But, to stick up for YOUR president, you might as well try to throw dirt and lies out there to create a diversion from the real facts..the fact that are innocent men are dying and its not for our freedom..PITIFUL,discraceful..no wonder the world hates americans so much..too many think like you people.

[MavKikiNYC]

PITIFUL,discraceful..no wonder the world hates americans so much..too many think like you people.

And sadly, too many people like you don't think.

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: reeds
"The quiet cheers that come from reeds when another soldier loses his life is just disheartening. I can almost see him responding with disappointment for sure, but happy that he can turn that screw just a bit more into the side of the man he obviously hates so much.... the very President of the Country he lives in."

Another moronic post. To say I cheer the death of our men is a discrace- unfreaking believable I might add. But, to stick up for YOUR president, you might as well try to throw dirt and lies out there to create a diversion from the real facts..the fact that are innocent men are dying and its not for our freedom..PITIFUL,discraceful..no wonder the world hates americans so much..too many think like you people.

Yes it is disgraceful that you provide quiet cheers when another soldier loses his life defending your right to wish him harm. Can't wait to post another death to make a political point.

[reeds]

Thats BS and you know it dude. I am and have always been for getting the soldiers out NOW- not leaving them as sitting ducks. SO for you to say I wish them harm is a total JOKE- and total LIE and you should be ashamed to even bring it up..classless really bottom of the barrel stuff. Soldiers dont have to die for my point to be made.

[u2sarajevo]

Soldiers don't die to make points for you reeds. They die to protect your freedom.

[Drbio]

And yet reeds continues to revel in every media release of fallen heroes.

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: reeds
Soldiers dont have to die for my point to be made.

Then QUIT doing it.

[mavsman55]

Originally posted by: reeds
Soldiers dont have to die for my point to be made.

Then how come you keep trying to make your points whenever soldiers die?

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: dude1394

Then QUIT doing it.

gee, I was under the impression the MB is here to allow anyone to make a "point".......

[FishForLunch]

Thats it I had it, who the hell is running operations in Anbar province. I am sure those marines positions were tipped off by our loyal friends the Iraqi army and police. Time to have another Falluhaj siege in Haditha. Screw the liberals and the president, the insurgents need to know the consequences of hiting the marines. I no longer think the president cares what happens in Iraq.

[dude1394]

The predominant posts by reeds are making political points when soldiers have given their lives to protect him. Yet he says he doesn't. Reeds can make pletny of points but it's disgusting to proclaim another hero is dead and then make a political point off it.

If he wants to rag the iraqi war, then rag the war, but don't wait until another american hero has died giving reeds the freedom to make political points off his death to do it. Especially then don't whine and cry when someone calls him on it.

[reeds]

"Soldiers don't die to make points for you reeds. They die to protect your freedom."


HERE we go again...they are protecting my freedom in IRAQ? REALLY? Iraq was a big threat to the freedom of Americans? WOW..no wonder you voted for BUSH..you beleive in fairy tales...

[u2sarajevo]

Yes. Really.

You can wear your blinders if you must, that is certainly your right. But they are protecting the very ideals that this Country is built on.

[dude1394]

Guess what reeds. Your countries government, your governement and mine decided that taking sadaam out was best to protect you, your children and family and my family.

Your government, your representatives. Sainted John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle, etc. Those politicians to this DAY say they would vote the same way again (all except maybe kerry since no one knows how the will vote from one day to the next).

American soldiers went over there to do this job to protect their own families. You are blessed lucky that they also are protecting you, I'm not sure they would to be honest the way you belittle them.
They've died for you and all you can do is ridicule their sacrifice to make political points.

[reeds]

Dude- how long was Sadaam in power anyway?? HUH??? He sure wasnt a threat to me that whole time...he sure wasnt a threat to you or your family either. He became a threat by fabrications and BS that some of you bought into. Now our innocent soldiers are dying..but to sugar coat it, and make it a bit less painful, we are told they are protecting our freedom..Yet when that statement is made, NO one can give a clear cut answer as to how they are doing it. 1800 and counting. Kids coming home in body bags..Mr. Bush thanks the parents for their sone or daughter protecting our freedom. If it were my son coming home in a body bag over this fabricated poor excuse for a war, Id spit right in his face.

[dude1394]

Quit avoiding the dang question. I know you don't believe any of this. I don't really know what you think to be honest. But after 9/11 your government felt that sadaam hussein had wmd, supported terrorists and had given al queda safe harbor. Your government decided that they could not take the chance that sadaam hussein would stay nice and cozy and decided to take him out.

Your governement did this. Hillary, Kerry, Daschle...It was a bi-partisan declaration. The UN also decided to do this. And it was done.

----------------------------------
I just didn't want to muddy the waters up for you. Now...I also belive that dubya (and many,many other middle east scholars) felt that killing bin laden would not solve this problem for good. The islamists have been blowing our asses up for about 35 years now. They decided that a more strategic solution was needed. That included bringing modernity to the middle east. It's a gamble but one that liberals should actually be on board with, except for bush hatred. Their candidate after all supported it and they voted for him in record numbers.

Your solution is to stick your head in the sand and hope like hell that 9/11 doesn't occur with a nuke. If it did, all holy hell would break lose. You want to see some pissed off rebublicans and americans then just wait. This is a long-term strategic plan to try and defeat terrorism.

I'm not asking you to agree with it, but I am asking you to be serious about the discussion. If not this what? Just let bin laden and terrorists drive us out of the middle east, end our support for israel and make the whole middle east into some horrific taliban caliphate, that is what they are after. Then after that they want to convert your children and the world to islam.

You just got to take a stand sometimes reeds, it's time.

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: reeds
Dude- how long was Sadaam in power anyway?? HUH??? He sure wasnt a threat to me that whole time...he sure wasnt a threat to you or your family either. He became a threat by fabrications and BS that some of you bought into.

Some of you being
Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Putin, Blair, Jacque Chirac.

Why does reality escape you on this?

[Mavdog]

The constant repitition of "well, even the Dems voted for the Iraq War" mantra is clearly an attempt to spin.

Very similar to Bush yesterday asserting that Iraq was indeed a part of the war on terror because Zawahiri mentions it in his video, and there's islamist terrorists fighting us there as well. duh, that's the situation today, out of Bush's own making. He's not honest here folks, Iraq was not involved with the war on terror until our actions produced that situation. I agree that it is now (much to the suffering of the Iraqi's themselves), but to rationalize the war on that basis is not accurate.

There are not just Dems who criticize the White House on the Iraq War, there are also Reps. The common thread is they gave their consent to the White House when the WH gave to them information supporting its cause. What these politicos didn't know then is just how strongly the WH manipulated the intelligence services to produce conclusions the WH deesired. Opposing views in the IS were smothered.

Just as there is not 100% support for the war by reps, so too is there not 100% opposition by dems.

What you are starting to see from the dems isn't opposition to the war per se but opposition to the management of the war.

[reeds]

"There are not just Dems who criticize the White House on the Iraq War, there are also Reps. The common thread is they gave their consent to the White House when the WH gave to them information supporting its cause. What these politicos didn't know then is just how strongly the WH manipulated the intelligence services to produce conclusions the WH deesired. Opposing views in the IS were smothered."

EXACTALLY- PERFECT!!!!!!

[dude1394]

What these politicos didn't know then is just how strongly the WH manipulated the intelligence services to produce conclusions the WH deesired. Opposing views in the IS were smothered.

Bullcrap. Prove it.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: dude1394

Bullcrap. Prove it.

9-11 commission report

[dude1394]

Cute...Even at 585 pages there is not one instance of the word manipulate. Read the dang thing yourself and prove it.

However there is 158 instances of Iraq. Here's one.

"Bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi Intelligence officer". It seems that bin laden asked for space in obtaining training camps and assistance in acquiring weapons. There is no evidenc that iraq complied although bin laden continued to attempt this.

I'm SO GLAD that you were not responsible for taking this threat seriously.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: dude1394
I'm SO GLAD that you were not responsible for taking this threat seriously.

Bingo. We also know now that the Iraqi generals themselves believed that their arsenal not only had chemical and biological weapons, but that they would actually use them in the upcoming war. Amazing that the CIA is expected to know more about the state of Iraq's military than its own generals do, in a country where the penalty for cooperating with the CIA is death.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: dude1394
Cute...Even at 585 pages there is not one instance of the word manipulate. Read the dang thing yourself and prove it.

However there is 158 instances of Iraq. Here's one.

"Bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi Intelligence officer". It seems that bin laden asked for space in obtaining training camps and assistance in acquiring weapons. There is no evidenc that iraq complied although bin laden continued to attempt this.

I'm SO GLAD that you were not responsible for taking this threat seriously.

so the best that you can show is that Iraq wasn't working with bin Laden? that iraq denied these rumoured "requests"? that the Iraqis didn't allow any al queda training camps?

thanks for the validation...

[dude1394]

I'm still waiting for you prove that the president willfully lied about intelligence to "pull the wool" over the eyes of your democrat heroes. Let me repeat.

Bullcrap. Prove it.

[u2sarajevo]

All this talk about al-Qaeda is ridiculous anyway. The war is on Terror, and Terrorists. Not al-Qaeda specifically. Oh sure, Bin Laden is a prime target. But he is not alone.

We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

Words our Military live by.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: dude1394
I'm still waiting for you prove that the president willfully lied about intelligence to "pull the wool" over the eyes of your democrat heroes. Let me repeat.

Bullcrap. Prove it.

I actuallly believe Bush was caught in a tunnel vision preoccupation with iraq rather than out and out lies.

you know, it's not like the internal memos are available for us to see. who knows when we'll get to see the material...probably after we learn what cheney's energy task force was all about.

but here is one item that haas been publicized by our allies, the british.

The secret Downing Street memo





SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY


DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02

cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.

This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.

thanks tony.

[dude1394]

So first it was the 9-11 commission report. That didn't have any proof so you trot out the even less clear infamous "downing street memos". Do you seriously fall for this mavdog? If the DSM memo were as much "proof" as you say don't you think the NYTimes wouldn't have let it go for months, even the msm knows that memo is far from "proof" but just communicating a change in the situation.

You claimed that your democrat friends fell for dubya because:

What these politicos didn't know then is just how strongly the WH manipulated the intelligence services to produce conclusions the WH deesired. Opposing views in the IS were smothered.

Again I say:

Bullcrap. Prove it.