No. It distresses me that people think we are losing, when it reality it couldn't be further from the truth. The only way to balance out this *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#e reporting is to dwell on every enemy combatant killed/apprehended by our forces. I think its around 70 a day. Why arn't we talking about this? The power levels that are higher than Saddam's?Nevermind. I think America is doomed if everytime we deploy our military people cry "Vietnam!" and "we're losing!" We have got a long fight ahead of us, and if this any indication of how it will be perceived, then we are doomed to fail.
I would not vote for Bush 3 reasons why. If your men have the balls to risk their lives for you (the country) you don't tell them 1 thing then later do another. They were supposed to come out on one date then change plans so they have to stay a lot longer in danger then they were originally told. I would never do that. Bring new people in who were not in danger before. 2) Be stupid enough not to use Iraqi oil to pay for the war. We have it we should have used it. 3) We went into iraq to stop a danger real or imaged. Also by doing that it does make the region a less dangerous place to us. Well iraq is not a danger to us at home now, and they are not a danger to the region for the next 20yrs. We should just leave we finsihed the mission. What about there people? I don't care about their people. We leave, Germany, France and Russia will move right in. Let them take care of the iraqi people they are their "friends". The terrorist in the country will mess with them now so what? Good what do we care? ----------- Those are the reasons Bush should go for me.
Granted, this isn't their usual mission. But to throw out that Veitnam analogy is in insult to the wonderful job they've done in keeping the country stable. There are going to be attacks simply becuase there are people who know what a democratic Iraq means for them and their ilk.
I find it deliciously ironic that you throw out body counts, and then bitch about people bringing up Vietnam. manny, you're right, we aren't losing the war in the sense that the Iraqis aren't going to drive us out like the French drove out the English in the Hundred Years War. But you apparently aren't aware of the persistent recent buzz that the Bushies are preparing to declare victory and go home. I have a real fear (note "fear;" I ain't certain or anything) that we're half-assedly training and vetting the Iraqis we're putting into the police, and we plan to draw down too much too fast. At which point, any spark can start a civil war there, but we'll have 60,000 soldiers there. And no way in hell Bush sends in more targets in the middle of the election campaign. Rotation policy dictates a big drawdown next spring. Politics dictates a big drawdown by next summer. What if it's premature?
Just an update.... http://www.centcom.mil/ still doesn't seem to give a crap about the soldiers under their command. Not a single mention of the Chinook incident. Still, CENTCOM is all over that HUGE toy drive story. Asshats.
http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/casualties.asp From centcom.... November 2, 2003 Release Number: 03-11-03C FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 15 SOLDIERS KILLED, 21 WOUNDED IN HELICOPTER INCIDENT AR RAMADI, Iraq – Fifteen soldiers were killed and 21 were wounded when a Coalition helicopter went down near the city of Amiryah at approximately 9 a.m. Sunday, Nov. 2. The helicopter, a CH-47 Chinook, was transporting personnel to the Baghdad International Airport when the incident happened. An aerial quick reaction force was immediately dispatched to the scene and a ground force secured the site, located near Fallujah. The wounded soldiers were evacuated to nearby medical facilities. The aircraft is assigned to the 12th Aviation Brigade, which was operating in support of the 82d Airborne Division Task Force. The CH-47 Chinook is a medium-duty dual-rotor helicopter designed to provide medium lift or to carry personnel. The soldiers’ names are being withheld pending next-of-kin notification.
Re: Just an update.... Ahh yes, that HUGE toy story drive. It's SO HUGE that they only mention it once, and it's not even the top story.
If I was not already convinced that the Bush is going to pull out prematurely (like his Father should have done 50 years ago) I am now after this horrible incident. Simply put Bush cannot politically afford anymore attacks like this (by Iraqi insurgents - since when has attacking a occupying military force of your country considered terrorism?) before the US people go South on him. My prediction is that Bush is going to declare "victory" with another banner on some carrier and then he is going to do massive troop drawdowns in Iraq. It will start to look like Afghanistan but the American people won't give a sh$t because our solidiers aren't dying over there anymore (never mind that like Afhganistan we will have no control over the country and terrorists will romp about like kids in a candy store). Someone sticky this thread - I guarantee you by April next year we are out of Iraq regardless of the conditions at that time (only minimal troops left behind). The Bush apologists will somehow claim "victory" when in reality all we did was further destablize a reigon and created a new petri dish for Joe Taliban. Finally to Ritchie, MFT etc. STOP ATTACKING THE MESSENGER. Ritchie I have not seen one post of your many on this thread where you actually adressed the topic. Why? It seems to me your the un-American one here with little concern for solidiers lives. It seems to be a favorite tactic of the right - don't like the news? Attack the messenger - shuck and dive.
Silly me. There it is, in huge letters at the bottom of the page. Nothing under news briefings, nothing under press releases. Casualties are the 24th most important thing on the front page, I guess. The toy drive? Number 3. Cruelly, R&R policy is number 1. I stand by my characterization of the scumbags at CENTCOM, only more so. Guarantee you here and now that Superdave cares more about the troops than CENTCOM, and you can quote me. Defending a policy of putting toy drive stories ahead of casualties is sickening. But, I should have scanned the page better - that was my fault. How stupid of me, not to think it would be under "news."
I guarentee you that you will be proven wrong. This satisfaction expressed in these subsequent 'i told you so' posts is the subject. SD already posted this topic in the occupation thread but was so satisfied to see so many Americans dying he felt the need to start this thread. Richie's point was not that SD made a post on it but that SD felt the need to post it twice. Let me make a prediction. I predict that every time an American dies someone will post a reminder of it and imply that we should either should have never gone into Iraq or should follow their lead in how to handle the 'occupation'.
Attacking Monded: So to your mind we are not supposed to highlight the greatest sacriface a young man can give in the service of his country? Superdave create a new thread because 15 dead and 20 injured in a single attack is a hell of alot of dead or maimed American boys. It was a *#*#*#*#*#*# day for our troops. Again you attack the messenger for talking about the truth. Our boys are dying at a rate of one a day. That is one too many a day for my liking. Two of my cousins are still over there. I worry daily for their safety (one is a helicopter pilot ) . It astounds me the people like you are so full of the kool-aid that you cannot stop for a second and ask some serious questions about why so many of our boys are dying? What is the plan? What are our long-term strategic objectives? Questions like these scare the crap out of people like you because you know our administration has no answers. If our boys are gonna keep dying at this clip I demand a plan and a leveling with the American people by this administration. Alot of folks are DYING yet somehow you still manage to play politics by trying to attack the messenger who delivers the bad news.
Beleive me when I tell you that nothing anyone writes on the internet scares the crap out of me. That's the way it is with people like me.
I agree. That Big Oil benefits indirectly when crude traders buy/sell futures contracts on the commodities market is just the most immediate consequence. But controlling the Persian Gulf spigot allows the US a geo-economic bulwark physically located between the economic challengers from both Western Europe and the Far East. And one can argue that's good thing. But to deny that oil has nothing to do with committing our military to the region is ridiculous.
The best part of this thread is that all the venom went toward Superdave, who put absolutely nothing political in his post at all. It was actually LaStort who waited all the way to the second post in the thread to use the death of our soldiers as a reason to attack Bush. RS
CBS News reported that there have been >20 of these fired at aircraft before, it was just a matter of time before one hit. Can someone more weapons-savvy clue me in...given how dangerous these weapons are, why haven't we made/didn't we make locating and destroying them job 1? These aren't something guys can cook up in their basements like the IEDs, right? I don't know how straight the blogger Steve Gilliard is, but he's making the argument that we're losing this thing. He makes the point that the enemy is systematically attacking our ability to move around the country. First they went after convoys. Last week they blew up a train and stole all the stuff being transported. They've shot down two helicopters in a week. What's left? He writes like he knows something of military tactics, not like an interested layperson like me. And his dire pessimism scared the crap out of me. Really, there are other threads for that. I intended for this thread to be about this specific tragedy, and the implications.
These are the equivalent of America's stinger missiles (Assuming it was a SA-7 like those talked about in another thread.) They are shoulder mounted, have very short range (1 mi. IIRC) and are slow at around Mach 3. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-fg-iraq3nov03,1,1857169.story?coll=la-home-headlines Finding them is like trying to find a golf bag. You can do it but it ain't easy. The missile does not emit any EMF (radar) UNTIL after it is fired, IIRC. This makes it very hard to locate them before they are dangerous. They are one reason why our military doesn't like to operate helicopters without tanks and infantry around. There was a story sometime ago about how General Clark was unhappy our air assault guys didn’t want to operate without a ground presence in Bosnia. (One of many reasons he was sent home from Europe early.) The reason they don’t like to operate without infantry around is because of these kind of missiles. If you remember they were used to try to shoot down an Israeli airlines a years or so ago. They are not very effective and that's maybe why the Chinook was the type of helicopter hit as it has a large and Vietnam era heat signature.
I am sure you didn't say that to get sympathy, but damn! It must be hard hearing the news every day having family over there. I hope they are safe, and I hope we can have a peaceful resolution to the conflict soon, with a minimum of casualties. The sooner we can turn the country back to the people of Iraq, the better it will be. Whatever our opinion may be about the effort to topple Hussein and bring democracy to Iraq, those people over there putting their life on the line in the service of the country are the true heroes of the story. Finnegan, have you heard from your cousins in Iraq? What is their perspective about this whole thing?
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/11/04/missiles/index.html Salon has had articles on the threat of these missiles to commercial airliners for a while now.
The leading cause for the SA-7's failure in taking down the Israeli jet was due to the age of the gas used to cool the guidance circuitry. The gas has a ½ life of only a few yrs, I think, and the rocket was much older than that--dating back to the Afghan war which ‘concluded’ 13yrs ago. I think it’s safe to presume Saddam’s stocks, tho antiquated, are still more current than what one can buy on the Afghan black market. I heard yesterday it's believed the missile used to take down the helicopter came from an unguarded, confiscated weapons cache. Several months ago, I asked my congressman-whom I voted for, Dr. Burgess(R), what his committee, air/rail/infrastructure, had planned to protect our assets against Igla’s, Silkworms, & Strella SA-7s. His stammering answer didn’t fill me w/ confidence.