More Americans Have Now Died In Iraq Than Died On 9/11

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:36 am

An interesting under-reported fact.

Here are the numbers: 3,015 Americans have died in Iraq as of September 9. 2,666 of these were military deaths and 349 were civilians.

A total of 2,973 people died on 9/11.

It delves into the realm of 'casuality' what that means; and how some 'casualties' aren't neccessarly talllied by the government as such because they weren't killed.

An intersting read IMHO.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/200609 ... ost/029234

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:02 pm

useless trivial fact.

Plus it's an opinion piece from the Huffington post, which is about as worthwile to me as an opinion piece from Townhall.com would be to you.

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:07 pm

useless trivial fact.

Then it's just as useless as our President touting the number of dead from 9/11 as a political tool.

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:13 pm

2973 civilians killed by terrorists in one 3 hour period.

3015 volunteers killed over the course of a 3 year old war. Not even close. And not at all comparable.

WBOB · Post by **WBOB** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:34 pm

sharkmansix wrote:
useless trivial fact.
Then it's just as useless as our President touting the number of dead from 9/11 as a political tool.

So thats the real reason behind the thread?

Probably throughout the history of most armed conflicts, the end game
casualties exceed the number of casulaties incurred by the
what started of the conflict in the 1st place.

Pearl Harbour would be just one of many examples.

I didn't get any political spin out of the speech from the other night.

I'm more ticked off at the Prez. on not securing our borders than this
right now.

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:46 pm

So thats the real reason behind the thread?

I thought it would spur a political discussion.

Probably throughout the history of most armed conflicts, the end game casualties exceed the number of casulaties incurred by the
what started of the conflict in the 1st place.

So in effect the ends justify the means?

I didn't get any political spin out of the speech from the other night.

I did. Comparing this war to WWII is foolish, IMHO; and highly political. It's just pulling on the heartstrings of the Saving Pvt. Ryan feel good vibe.

I'm more ticked off at the Prez. on not securing our borders than this right now.

Border security is not super high on my list of problems.

WBOB · Post by **WBOB** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:03 pm

thought it would spur a political discussion.

yes of course.

So in effect the ends justify the means?

sometimes war, unfortunately, is neccessary! and it almost always
comes with breaking things and killing people. I dont like it
any more than you. It's just the nature of the beast.

Comparing this war to WWII is foolish

I disagree when talking about your original premise of
the thread.

pulling on the heartstrings of the Saving Pvt. Ryan feel good vibe

again, disagree, I didn't get that from the speech.

Border security is not super high on my list of problems

It is for me. When basically any one that hates the U.S. and can cross
easily over the border and blend in with the populace without worry.
(but this is for another thread)

SM6, we may just have to agree to disagree on this.

sharkmansix · Post by **sharkmansix** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:18 pm

sometimes war, unfortunately, is neccessary! and it almost always
comes with breaking things and killing people. I dont like it
any more than you. It's just the nature of the beast.

I just think it's a slippery slope is all.

I disagree when talking about your original premise of
the thread.

How about this then, it's like longing for the 'good ol days' but then not realizing those days were pretty messed as well. WWII has it's ugly untalked things that we're not too proud of.

Plus, I really think he's trying to tap into that whole 'Saving Pvt. Blackhawk Down Flag of our Fathers Band of Brothers' mentality.

again, disagree, I didn't get that from the speech.

Calling it a "struggle for civilization" and comparing the WWII stuggle with facism to this war does for me.

WBOB · Post by **WBOB** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:45 pm

WWII has it's ugly untalked things that we're not too proud of.

That would be in virtually any war(armed conflict)

Calling it a "struggle for civilization" and comparing the WWII stuggle with facism to this war does for me.

I believe what is meant is that with "Islamic facism", that the enemy here
is determined to force Islam on all and kill anyone that doesn't embrace it.
This doesn't include all of Muslims,
more like a minority of 10% of them have got this
nutjob jihad thing towards the west. If they're enabled,
they become emboldened to pursue it all the more.
What makes them most dangerous to us, is that they consider it an
honor to die when killing "Infidels", and embrace it for that matter

Bottom line: I think that we're going to be forced to deal with this for a long time.

Curious though,... I don't see any better way out of this. Yes, I agree
the slippery slope fear. But I'm waiting for a better answer from
any of our officials from either/any party, but have yet to see it.

jewlee138 · Post by **jewlee138** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 3:00 pm

bassjones wrote:2973 civilians killed by terrorists in one 3 hour period.

3015 volunteers killed over the course of a 3 year old war. Not even close. And not at all comparable.

So, maybe it's not totally apples-to-apples, but damn interesting to know.

=^-..-^= · Post by **=^-..-^=** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:24 pm

Carnage from 9/11 = 1 month's carnage from automobiles in the US.

Cars are part of the jihad!

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:42 pm

bassjones wrote:2973 civilians killed by terrorists in one 3 hour period.

3015 volunteers killed over the course of a 3 year old war. Not even close. And not at all comparable.

how? volunteers are less important than civillians obviously...

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:43 pm

WBOB wrote:
sharkmansix wrote:
useless trivial fact.
Then it's just as useless as our President touting the number of dead from 9/11 as a political tool.
So thats the real reason behind the thread?

Probably throughout the history of most armed conflicts, the end game
casualties exceed the number of casulaties incurred by the
what started of the conflict in the 1st place.

Pearl Harbour would be just one of many examples.

I didn't get any political spin out of the speech from the other night.

I'm more ticked off at the Prez. on not securing our borders than this
right now.

your more mad about ppl comming in to our country to work... than thousands of ppl dieing for a reason that is unknown to most ppl?

Massage...Bored · Post by **Massage...Bored** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:58 pm

I don't think those figures mean anything, the relation to 9//1 deaths and Iraq war deaths.

You know......SINCE IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO F*UCKING DO WITH 9/11!!!!!!

QWETTY · Post by **QWETTY** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:27 pm

Massage...Bored wrote:I don't think those figures mean anything, the relation to 9//1 deaths and Iraq war deaths.

You know......SINCE IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO F*UCKING DO WITH 9/11!!!!!!

true dat