2000 - Now dead

[LuvRPgrl]

I "support our troops" because I want them to return home safely before they are killed or maimed.

Tell me which of these enteries is your term "support" is being used. You dont support the troops. The troops want to be there. If we brought them home now, Iraq would fall into chaos and all the 2,000 would have died for NOTHING. If we stay the course, then they will have died for a serious attempt, hopefully sucessful, at democracy and transforming the middle east and bringing a near death blow to worldwide terrorism. Not only do you not support the troops, you would have those who already gave their lives desecrated.

12 entries found for support.
sup·port ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-pôrt, -prt)
tr.v. sup·port·ed, sup·port·ing, sup·ports
To bear the weight of, especially from below.
To hold in position so as to keep from falling, sinking, or slipping.
To be capable of bearing; withstand: “His flaw'd heart... too weak the conflict to support” (Shakespeare).
To keep from weakening or failing; strengthen: The letter supported him in his grief.
To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities.
To furnish corroborating evidence for: New facts supported her story.

To aid the cause, policy, or interests of: supported her in her election campaign.
To argue in favor of; advocate: supported lower taxes.
To endure; tolerate: “At supper there was such a conflux of company that I could scarcely support the tumult” (Samuel Johnson).
To act in a secondary or subordinate role to (a leading performer).

n.

The act of supporting.
The state of being supported.
One that supports.
Maintenance, as of a family, with the necessities of life.

in the name of a war that more than half the country now doesn't support and nobody knows the real reasons for..

Thats a lie, more than half still support the war. If you cite a poll, those polls are skewed. And just because your anger towards things that are good and rightous doesnt allow you to see the benefits and reasons for the war, dont include us in that. WE know the reasons for the war. As do the soldiers, but of course, to you they are nobodies anyways. You lie when you say you have concern for them. You use them as pawns to try to further your agenda.

Did any of you read the NYT today? They devoted a large section of their paper to listing the mugs and names of all soldiers that have died so far for this "cause.".

Why would anyone read that rag? Too bad they didnt devote as much time to the election they had on the new Constitution for Iraq. Or maybe list the names and pics of people murdered by saddam, or those murderred on 9/11.

How many potential artists, writers, actors, comedians, doctors, lawyers, etc. will never share their gifts with the world now but would have had a chance to if not for this war? Answer? 2000 and counting. And nobody's even counting the losses on the other side.

How many comedians, doctors, lawyers etc are willing to die for freedom? I cant think of one of your prized group members who has done more for this country, and served in a more honorable way than the soldiers who have given their lifes.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

. You can't say "libs could'nt wait" for there to be 2000 deaths when everybody knew it would happen anyway. Nobody wants these kids to die over there and claiming they do only makes you look foolish..

Claiming she said that anyone WANTS these kids to die, only makes you look foolish.

. You can't blame anti-war people for calling attention to the deaths of 2000 Americans, especially when they were caused by the Republican whitehouse's war policy. Demanding the reasons for war and protesting the deaths of 2000 Americans does not make "liberals" evil or un-American by any means.

Before you gnash your teeth at liberals for demanding accountability for this war and for demanding the safe return of our troops so more of them don't die, you might want to take a look at your own party and ask them why it has been so "necessary" for these soldiers to die in the first place.

"DEMANDING",?? Pleeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase, get over yourself. You and the other anti war protestors dont have the power to demand anything. THe people voted for Bush to make these decisions, you have to just sit on the sideline and watch.

 

[Annie]

Claiming she said that anyone WANTS these kids to die, only makes you look foolish.

"DEMANDING",?? Pleeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase, get over yourself. You and the other anti war protestors dont have the power to demand anything. THe people voted for Bush to make these decisions, you have to just sit on the sideline and watch.

Right you are. The idea that the left would capitalize on the # per se, was picked up a long time ago, they didn't fail. Not Cindy, not Moveon, not Kos. They are all using the number to try to rally.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

But dude, we're not fighting terrorism anymore. We started-off fighting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and then we invaded Iraq.?

I find it interesting how you leftist liberal commie pinko fags can claim that the terrorists responsable for Bali, Spain, London, etc are the ones we should be fighting against, but what is their connection to 9/11? We invaded Iraq because saddam gave terrorist safe haven. You dont think many terrorists from Afghanastan fled into Iraq? The war on global terrorism doesnt require that every time we attack a terrorist cell, that it have direct connections to the 9/11 perps.

Just like when we hd the cold war with the Soviet Union, we also fought Commies in other parts of the world who may not have had a direct link with the Soviets, but it was still all part of the overall effort to break down the Soviets, and guess what? IT WORKED !!! Even though the "anit war" activists were opposed to what Reagan did.

Invading Iraq was a knee-jerk move by our government

Knee jerk????????? PLeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease,,,it was many months of preperation and attempts at not having to invade. Knee jerk, gimmie a break.

Nations such as Iran and Saudi Arabia are much more involved with terrorist groups than Iraq ever was, so why didn't we invade them? QUOTE]

OH, yea, like you would have supported invading IRan or SA...oh, and I think we would have had more than 2000 casualties then. So, c'mon, answer the question, would you have supported invading Iran?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Such is the price of freedom.

GIVE me a fucking break. Like you pay the price of freedom in any way shape or form, or any of us who havent served.

THE price of true freedom right now stands at 2000, no more, no less, NONE of us, except those who served have truly paid the PRICE of freedom. We may fight political battles against our own internal enemies, but that is nothing in terms of price compared to what the brave soldiers paid.

In fact, I would say, unequivocably, that those who OPPOSE the war, OPPOSE the troops (even those who claim they "support" the troops but in reality oppose them) not only dont pay a price for freedom, but they are part of the reason our soldiers have to put their lives in harms way.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

the deaths of 2000+ Americans and an un-countable number of Iraqi men, women and children.

QUOTE]

If the IRaqi deaths are uncountable, its only because they are and will be busy for years to come counting the bodies of women clutching their babies and babies clutching their teddy bears buried in mass graves in the desert.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

About 1500 hundred of them were needless. If only Bush would get his damn hands off the video game controller and hand it to the Generals. Lord what a mess, it seems we have zero control of any sector of Iraq if a freakin cement truck can drive practically up to a hotel entrance.................

BULLSHIT.

You think going into that place is easy? You think it would have been easy to figure out the strategy of the terrorists?

Its a very complicated and diverse situation. We cannot be sure where they will go, if they would have stood and fought, who is gonna support them, hell, there could be a revolution in Iran tomorrow and throw everything into turmoil and require massive strategy changes.

The situation is more fluid than any other war situation ever. The US military, at all levels has done an excellent job, they have had to adapt and conquer.

You can read any page in a two thousand page history book on WWll and read screw up after screw up. Its war, thats its nature.

Not to mention Bush has to deal with a hostile media, anti war protestors, a large segment of Americans who cant stomach seeing or hearing about Americans dying

Yea, things could have been done differentlly, but please, TELL ME ONE PROJECT YOU HAVE EVER DONE THAT YOU DIDNT LOOK BACK ON AND COULD SAY THE SAME THING.

You tell me when a woman comes up to a check point, and she appears pregnant, you are gonna just shoot her in the head, then when you dont, she blows you, herself and others up.

You tell me we dont have alot of bullshit and are tying the hands of our military when a marine shoots a wounded Iraq TERRORIST and gets worldwide condemnation for it.

You tell me we dont have extremely difficult media situation when we are trying to not only defeat them militarily, but we are trying to win the hearts and minds of Iraqi over to freedom and away from thousands of years of culture, particularly on a culture that is so emotionally based

and at the same time we have to support Israel, YOU tell me how easily that is gonna be to pull off.

Dont be so damn critical, instead spend some of that time sending condolences to the famlies of some of those who gave their lives.

 

[Adam's Apple]

So true.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/toons/coxandforkum/coxandforkum.asp

 

[LuvRPgrl]

As i've stated before Saudi Arabia is not in anyway an ally of ours and the fact that we haven't torn them a new asshole yet, OIL BE DAMNED!, is beyond me.

The man/woman has a point.

Thats because you have a simplified version of the war and the world running through your head.

Take WWll for example.

Russia attacks Finland. We give aid to Finland to fight back. Germany attacks Russia, so we aid Russia. Germany pals up to Finland, and wants their support to attack Russia, so Finland allies with Germany. Now we are Finlands enemies.

War is over, and we are Finlands allies again and mortal enemies of Russia.
Japan, previously our mortal enemy, is now our ally against an ever increasing communist China, who is now our enemy, but previously was whom we got into the war with Japan over in the first place.

The situation is so complex and fluid, and there are so many details we dont know about, will never know about and cant know about. Thats why we have to trust our leaders. Not that they ALWAYS do the right thing, but that they are mostly doing the right thing.

It doesnt mean you cant question things, just dont be so damn critical. RIght now SA IS helping us tremendously in the terrorist war.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

WTF is thevanguard.org and why should I believe them?


QUOTE]

Because you believe all the bullshit propaganda out of your left wing sources, now try believing something true for once !

 

[LuvRPgrl]

I don't buy it. If it were really true, Bush would have plastered banners everywhere saying "We found them," but he hasn't. I'd guess that the source for most of that information is the thoroughly discredited Jack Shaw. He was behind the WashTimes article on the same.


Right. Eight years (2003) after Bin Laden had contacted Iraq regarding training camps, nobody had yet responded. That's some great collaboration there.

Saddam posed absolutely no threat to the U.S. He wasn't retarded, he knew, just as you and I know, that if he ever blew up a chemical weapon in NY or DC (assuming that he HAD such weapons), that his regime would fall faster than George Bush can say "nucular." It's a policy known as deterrence.

What do you have to say about this speech delievered to CONGRESS????


As a condition for ending the conflict, the United Nations imposed a number of requirements on Iraq, among them disarmament of all weapons of mass destruction, stocks used to make such weapons, and laboratories necessary to do the work. Saddam Hussein agreed, and an inspection system was set up to ensure compliance. And though he repeatedly lied, delayed, and obstructed the inspections work, the inspectors found and destroyed far more weapons of mass destruction capability than were destroyed in the Gulf War, including thousands of chemical weapons, large volumes of chemical and biological stocks, a number of missiles and warheads, a major lab equipped to produce anthrax and other bio-weapons, as well as substantial nuclear facilities.

In 1998, Saddam Hussein pressured the United Nations to lift the sanctions by threatening to stop all cooperation with the inspectors. In an attempt to resolve the situation, the UN, unwisely in my view, agreed to put limits on inspections of designated "sovereign sites" including the so-called presidential palaces, which in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left. As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets.

In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

Now this much is undisputed.

 

[Adam's Apple]

2,000 Gone: And A New Republic Is Born
Editorial from The New Hampshire Union Leader
October 27, 2005

THE MAJOR story in the national press yesterday was the death of Sgt. George Alexander Jr., 34, of Killeen, Texas, though his name was not always mentioned in the reports. Sgt. Alexander was America's 2,000th military death in Iraq.

Much is remarkable about the men and women who have died in our ongoing effort to liberate Iraq. Most remarkable is that every one of them enlisted voluntarily. According to The New York Times, a fifth of the dead had enlisted two, three or four times.

Interviews with Iraq veterans who have re-enlisted show how deeply many of them believe in the cause. They would rather risk their lives to see this war through than leave before the Iraqis are ready to protect and govern themselves.

The other big news yesterday, which received far less attention, was the certification of the Iraqi constitution. Iraqis voted 78 percent to 21 percent in favor of the constitution. Soon, Iraqis will vote for their new government.

To pretend that there is no connection between Iraq's progress toward democratic governance and the 2,000 brave American service members who died there is to deny the obvious. Those 2,000 Americans were not lost in vain. They died to make America safer by making Iraq freer. The best way to honor their memory is, as President Bush said, to complete the mission for which they gave their lives.


http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=62345

 

[Max Power]

So not WW2 then? I mean Germany never attacked us. Japan did so that was justified but Germany never attacked us. Who were we to invade their lands?

Simple logic eludes you.

The statement, "Every war of defense is justified," does NOT mean that every other war was not justified.

 

[OCA]

BULLSHIT.

You think going into that place is easy? You think it would have been easy to figure out the strategy of the terrorists?

Its a very complicated and diverse situation. We cannot be sure where they will go, if they would have stood and fought, who is gonna support them, hell, there could be a revolution in Iran tomorrow and throw everything into turmoil and require massive strategy changes.

The situation is more fluid than any other war situation ever. The US military, at all levels has done an excellent job, they have had to adapt and conquer.

You can read any page in a two thousand page history book on WWll and read screw up after screw up. Its war, thats its nature.

Not to mention Bush has to deal with a hostile media, anti war protestors, a large segment of Americans who cant stomach seeing or hearing about Americans dying

Yea, things could have been done differentlly, but please, TELL ME ONE PROJECT YOU HAVE EVER DONE THAT YOU DIDNT LOOK BACK ON AND COULD SAY THE SAME THING.

You tell me when a woman comes up to a check point, and she appears pregnant, you are gonna just shoot her in the head, then when you dont, she blows you, herself and others up.

You tell me we dont have alot of bullshit and are tying the hands of our military when a marine shoots a wounded Iraq TERRORIST and gets worldwide condemnation for it.

You tell me we dont have extremely difficult media situation when we are trying to not only defeat them militarily, but we are trying to win the hearts and minds of Iraqi over to freedom and away from thousands of years of culture, particularly on a culture that is so emotionally based

and at the same time we have to support Israel, YOU tell me how easily that is gonna be to pull off.

Dont be so damn critical, instead spend some of that time sending condolences to the famlies of some of those who gave their lives.

Now is exactly the time to be critical. Iraq is not the South Pacific or Nazi Germany, the terrorists are vastly outnumbered and outequipped(sp?). We should have been in and out of there in under a year but LBJ errr Bush can't seem to keep his hands off and leave war to the trained big boys.

The house is falling down around us, as conservatives we've been ambushed by this administration and yet we still have those who wish to put blinders on and picture it as a Disney film.

 

[OCA]

Thats because you have a simplified version of the war and the world running through your head.

Take WWll for example.

Russia attacks Finland. We give aid to Finland to fight back. Germany attacks Russia, so we aid Russia. Germany pals up to Finland, and wants their support to attack Russia, so Finland allies with Germany. Now we are Finlands enemies.

War is over, and we are Finlands allies again and mortal enemies of Russia.
Japan, previously our mortal enemy, is now our ally against an ever increasing communist China, who is now our enemy, but previously was whom we got into the war with Japan over in the first place.

The situation is so complex and fluid, and there are so many details we dont know about, will never know about and cant know about. Thats why we have to trust our leaders. Not that they ALWAYS do the right thing, but that they are mostly doing the right thing.

It doesnt mean you cant question things, just dont be so damn critical. RIght now SA IS helping us tremendously in the terrorist war.

Please support the S.A. statement, as I see it they are factually implicated in the 9/11 attacks. Hell even in their schools their hatred of the west is taught and fostered.

 

[insein]

Simple logic eludes you.

The statement, "Every war of defense is justified," does NOT mean that every other war was not justified.

IT seems to have eluded you as well. If we can legally invade Germany during WW2 despite them never attacking us or posing a direct threat to us, then how can that be more justified then the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? BTW, we lost 400,000 troops in WW2. So by your logic that should have been the most unneccassary war in the history of the US because one life is too many but 400,000 is way too many.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

The only reason that everyone is making such a big fucking deal about this 2000 deaths thing is because it's been showcased all over the place. Unlike WW2, Vietnam and Korea where we didn't hear about every single death that ever happened over there, we hear about it now and that's the problem. If we didn't know so damn much people wouldn't make such a sissy fit about it.

I hate that it's presented all over the news, we don't want to hear how many fucking people died today it doesn't help our morale at all.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

P.S. - FUCK CINDY SHEEHAN! stupid "woe-is-me" bitch...

 

[OCA]

The only reason that everyone is making such a big fucking deal about this 2000 deaths thing is because it's been showcased all over the place. Unlike WW2, Vietnam and Korea where we didn't hear about every single death that ever happened over there, we hear about it now and that's the problem. If we didn't know so damn much people wouldn't make such a sissy fit about it.

I hate that it's presented all over the news, we don't want to hear how many fucking people died today it doesn't help our morale at all.

My friend I agree, but do you think if Bush had let the dogs hunt from day 1 of the invasion that the insurgents would have even gotten close to a 1,000 much less 2,000? Hell we haven't even used have of our weapons or technology over there. My brother was in 2nd marines out of LeJeune and he still has buds in, apparently to a man they say that with all the bullshit rules about who you can smoke and when you can fire its hardly worth even carrying a gun there. Hell the Marines at 1 point had Fallujah and the rest of that rat infested triangle surrounded with mass troops and heavy armour at 1 point, what did Bush do? He ordered a retreat and let Fallujah right back into enemy hands. Hell even when we did go back later it was with small patrols and light fire, nice way to fight a war.

My point is this thing is being micromanaged to a fault, Bush needs to get his hands off the controls.

 

[Max Power]

IT seems to have eluded you as well. If we can legally invade Germany during WW2 despite them never attacking us or posing a direct threat to us, then how can that be more justified then the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? BTW, we lost 400,000 troops in WW2. So by your logic that should have been the most unneccassary war in the history of the US because one life is too many but 400,000 is way too many.

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize the only deciding factor in waging war was "did they attack us first." Using your logic, you could justify invading any country at any time.

Fortunately, in the real world, there are more factors than that in deciding whether or not to go to war.