Hopefully, they'll be amongst the last. Who'd want to be the last guy to die for a country that calls you an occupier?
especially since the oil deals went south....

It will be extra tough on their families knowing that the end of combat operations for Americans was supposed to be over.

Who'd want to be the last guy to die for a country that calls you an occupier?

The last name begins with a "B"?

Getting involved in the Middle East is the biggest mistake since Woodrow Baines Bush decided to make the world safe for democracy (Sorry, Sybil is one of my personalities).

just because US troops moved out of the cities doesn't mean the task is over. if it were, why not send them directly to embarkation points for the return home? sealing the borders between iran & iraq as well as syria & iraq would be a good idea...something thaat should have been a priority since occupation day 1. rumsfeld screwed up badly.

Get soldiers out of Iraq = no more dead soldiers
in Iraq.

Time to bring them all home.

Whether we stay 2 more years or 2 more weeks, the
result--we all know--will be exactly the same.

As soon as we leave--bam--Civil War.

I mean, these people have been at each others
throats for thousands of years, and we thought
we could change that?

The only difference is, we keep more of our
brave men and women alive, and we save 1 billion
dollars a day that they are not there.

Time to bring them all home.

He has his super-majority, and his landslide mandate couldn't be greater.

So why do we still have this gross war, phone taps, Gitmo and NO health care? herm

6 posts on a thread about dead GI's? Apparently GI deaths don't bring forth the fake concern and outrage they used to.

#8 newsworthy flag

I don't think anyone is less concerned about, or saddened by a loss of troops anywhere, anytime.

But I do think there is a difference in overall attitude about the war between being there in full force with a "stay the course" standing order, vs. knowing we are in the process of withdrawing now.

Casualties are bad news period, and these people are due our respect and gratitude.

One of the reasons people care less about the war today is that the economy crashed and we have more immediate concerns.

Another is that we're not engaged in combat operations over there any more. We're moving out.

Are people less fired up because the current president didn't start this elective war? Yes. But it's not just about missing an opportunity to be angry at Bush.

Are any of you libs keeping score on how many are killed under BHO's watch? I guess not.

Apparently GI deaths don't bring forth the fake concern and outrage they used to.

Especially from the right. The KIA have apparently done their duty-get Bush elected in 2004 but failed to get Century Warrior McLost elected, so now the righties don't give a damn.

Party before Country.

GW Bush, the gift that keeps on giving.

Time to bring them home.

For refitting with cold weather gear.

Pyongyang gets nippy in the fall.

And? It's war. War sucks. War is also full of assholes on both sides. Take WW1. On armistice day there were 11,000 casualties. Most caused by shitbag American generals who wanted to fight as long as possible for glory. Try to convince a doughboy who last his face and arms about the value of fighting for just glory.

The surge worked that's why there have been fewer deaths. Less death equals less coverage by the state-run media.

But I agree, the economy is front and center.

I also think there has been a shift because those on the left know that we have an anti-war president in the WH so there's nothing for them to argue about anymore(Re: this so-called occupation -- time to move your collective hate towards Israel).

Whereas, in my opinion, I have a lot to "whine" about. On one hand -- I think hey, the rest of the world sees us leaving Iraq... Right on! It's not like we had a great big coalition like the 1st Gulf war. On the other hand, I see the current admin. being TOO sympathetic to the UN and acting unprofessional towards socialist-style rule abroad.

Four soldiers killed but seven teens in Detroit (see other thread)? Iraq is safer than the Crips or Bloods.

more civis die everday from shooting eachother in the U.S. (yes, I support the 2nd amendment) than have ever died in Iraq on a given day to gunfire. at least our soldiers are not dying for the corrupt south American dictatorships that POTUS support. lets see if your super-majority supports an invasion of Honduras. hypocrites.

at least our soldiers are not dying for the corrupt south American dictatorships

At least not anymore(Reagan,Bush the first,Teddy roosevelt,etc)

"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

- John Kerry (1971)

Four soldiers killed but seven teens in Detroit (see other thread)? Iraq is safer than the Crips or Bloods.

#18 | Posted by Diablo at 2009-07-02 12:32

Point well made, Diablo.

I guess it's then fair to say the level of crime now on our city streets have put them on par with combat war zones.

#20 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-07-02 02:39 AM

you left out a lot of presidents that served between those you list. funny enough they all wore D's by their name. 100 years and you list 3 presidents. you're a worthless hypocrite.

you also cut my sentence short to suit your own purposes. disingenuous.

like i said, at least American soldiers aren't dying (YET) to support a South American dictatorship our CURRENT POTUS supports.