[Loodoyaye]

Quote

BAGHDAD - The overall U.S. death toll in Iraq rose to 4,000 after four soldiers were killed in a roadside bombing in Baghdad, a grim milestone that is likely to fuel calls for the withdrawal of American forces as the war enters its sixth year.

The White House said it was "a sober moment." President Bush received a lengthy update on the war and aides said he was likely to embrace recommendations for a pause in troop withdrawals beyond those already scheduled.

Bush was to participate in a two-hour conference by secure video hookup with Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. Petraeus and Crocker are due to testify in Congress on April 8-9.

The American deaths occurred Sunday, the same day rockets and mortars pounded the U.S.-protected Green Zone in Baghdad and a wave of attacks left at least 61 Iraqis dead nationwide.

more - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23771735

Quote

And if you believe the controversial theory that non-Americans might also be people, the tragedy gets even worse.

At this point we should ask ourselves what has been achieved in Iraq in the past 5 years, and how has this war and the dead of so many people made Iraq, USA or the World in general a better place?
In other words, how will history look at the dead of all those people in Iraq in the past 5 years, and how do YOU look at it?

[Arabland]

The casualties are insignificant, the resistance nothing but a minor annoyance. The tide is in our favor and the situation is (or rather was ( Turkey ( ) stabilizing.

That's not to say I agree with the war and history will mark this as it did Vietnam, a mistake. But we're winning nonetheless.

[Smallfrog]

What has been achieved in the past 5 years is a difficult question. In the North, freedom, peace and safety. In Baghdad, for a brief while anarchy, though in the past 18 months the attacks in Baghdad have dropped by a huge amount. In the south, the Iraqi police are now running things, and Basra is free from the old threat of massacre. The coalition forces their (mainly UK in that area) are now mostly in a training role, and since the withdraw from Basra palace the city has become more peaceful, although some militia's have gained power.


...waits for some military guy to rubbish this...

[Deepthinker]

Waits for someone to say 4,000 people dead is insignificant...

oh wait...

[king normanIII]

The war was wrong and stupid, but no matter what some presidential candidates would have you believe, covering you ears and eyes and singing real loud does not make Iraq go away. COIN operations are long and tough, but winnable. Almost every indicator has markedly improved since mid 2006 or so. We're winning and the deaths are a tragedy but we must go on.

[Israeli Land]

Compaired to WWI WWII and Vietnam it is VERY small. While WWI and WWII were shorter, in WWII alone, more then 50 million people died. Vietnam was much longer than the World Wars, yet the number of dead is a fraction of what wsa lost in the other conflicts. This is to say that a life is not important, I believe that you cannot put a price on a human life. A major reason that the death toll is a problem, besides the obvious, is that the war is hugely unpopular. We would not be having this conversation right now, if Iraq was a popular war.

[Smallfrog]

Perhaps another point that should be raised, is why does the 4000th death matter? What makes it any different to the death of 3999 or 4001?

[king normanIII]

Smallfrog, on Mar 24 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

Perhaps another point that should be raised, is why does the 4000th death matter? What makes it any different to the death of 3999 or 4001?

It's doesn't, its a psychological point.

[Israeli Land]

Yes it is, the anti-war media will use it to degrade American confidence even more then they already have.

[king normanIII]

Israeli Land, on Mar 24 2008, 05:11 PM, said:

Yes it is, the anti-war media will use it to degrade American confidence even more then they already have.

Yes, but my point is that the actual 4000th death isn't more important than the 3,999th, practically.

[Israeli Land]

No, each death is a tragedy. but the psychological aspect of this number will be used by the anti-war media, to generate anger towards our brave men and women of the armed forces and the war in general.

[king normanIII]

Israeli Land, on Mar 24 2008, 05:16 PM, said:

No, each death is a tragedy. but the psychological aspect of this number will be used by the anti-war media, to generate anger towards our brave men and women of the armed forces and the war in general.

That's exactly what I've been saying. Sorry if I didn't make it clearer.

[Smallfrog]

Lets just say we all agree, it will be quicker.

[Loodoyaye]

king norman, on Mar 24 2008, 06:06 PM, said:

We're winning and the deaths are a tragedy but we must go on.

What exactly is considered a victory in this case? Which events need to happen so that America can say "Ok, we won, let's go home now"? I always hear US officials talk about victory, but i never understood what exactly victory means in such a case, and how can there be a victory at all in a war like this?

Smallfrog, on Mar 24 2008, 06:08 PM, said:

Perhaps another point that should be raised, is why does the 4000th death matter? What makes it any different to the death of 3999 or 4001?

No it doesnt matter, its only a statistical number, especially for the families of the dead :angry:

[Smallfrog]

Loodoyaye, on Mar 24 2008, 05:19 PM, said:

What exactly is considered a victory in this case? Which events need to happen so that America can say "Ok, we won, let's go home now"? I always hear US officials talk about victory, but i never understood what exactly victory means in such a case, and how can there be a victory at all in a war like this?

Victory would be an Iraq run by a democratic government with a powerful enough police force to keep order, and enough political power to untie the country. This already exists in several regions, if we keep going it can cover the entire country.

[deja]

In reply to Smallfrog, I believe the Pentagon actually released a statement saying that 4,000 deaths is not significant, but rather each individual death was its own tragedy. Six of one, half a dozen of the other if you ask me.

I read an article yesterday that explored the changes that Petraeus has made to our strategy and the armed forces as a whole. You know... actually trying diplomacy...? They've given more leeway to commanders on the ground to make their own decisions, strike deals, make contacts, etc.... They've gotten soldiers walking along and making themselves visible as people instead of just armored tank columns, they've started bargaining with people who have power and worked with them to cooperate to lower violence levels instead of just try and kill everyone who's a problem. It also noted that in contrast to Vietnam, where most soldiers were a draft force that would leave the military once their year term is up, we have people going on multiple repeat deployments. While this has created a strain on our soldiers individually (for obvious reasons) it has resulted in a force with unprecedented experience in what they're doing, which has greatly extended their capabilities by having people who are more familiar with the people, and who have the experience in what works and what has utterly failed. This means they're more capable of working with other leaders in the country to lower violence. And it has been working dramatically.

We already won the war in Iraq. That was done in 2003 (in a manner of speaking). We defeated Iraq's military. What we have now is a whole new problem, and one that is far more difficult and not nearly as simple to understand and approach. We won't be judged on whether we "win" or "lose" from this point out, but rather on a sliding scale of how good of a state we leave Iraq in when we are done. It's not a pass/fail anymore, it's a sliding scale. If we pull out now, we're going to get a very bad grade, and we can only hope that Petraeus's work is successful fast enough that this can be redeemed before the political capital and will to stay at the cost of American lives and millions of dollars monthly runs out.

We are in a very ugly situation.

This post has been edited by deja: 24 March 2008 - 11:28 AM

[king normanIII]

Quote

What exactly is considered a victory in this case? Which events need to happen so that America can say "Ok, we won, let's go home now"? I always hear US officials talk about victory, but i never understood what exactly victory means in such a case, and how can there be a victory at all in a war like this?

Smallfrog hit it on the head. Its not easy but it has been and can be done.

[deja]

I actually just addressed that. Like... one post ago.

[Loodoyaye]

Smallfrog, on Mar 24 2008, 06:23 PM, said:

Victory would be an Iraq run by a democratic government with a powerful enough police force to keep order, and enough political power to untie the country. This already exists in several regions, if we keep going it can cover the entire country.

And that would be worth the lives of 4'000(and more to come) american men and women? Not to ask how realistically is to expect that a islamic country like Iraq will ever become a western style democracy and that the sunnis, shia and kurds will suddenly forget 1000 years of bloodshed and become one nation?
And even if all that happens, which sounds cool for Iraq itself, how will the life of the average american improve then?Would you feel safer? Will the islamic terrorism disappear?

[Smallfrog]

deja, on Mar 24 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

I actually just addressed that. Like... one post ago.

The aim of the war was to "liberate Iraq," not to conquer Iraq.
http://news.bbc.co.u...war/7303594.stm
Probably the best speech of the war.

If we leave now, and Iraq falls to the militia's, then we will have failed to liberate it.