http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-14745907
After reading this article I found it really interesting how after about 8 years this was the first month in which there were no US casualties in Iraq during the war. With over 48,000 soldiers being there and about 4,500 have been killed is really crazy. In the least the good part is that the soldiers will be out of Iraq and returning home by the end of the year.
Osama Abbasi Discussion 10am-10:50 Friday
Going a month without an American death does not necessarily mean anything because the troops will still remain in Iraq, and at this point we can only hope that the lack of deaths will last.
ReplyDeleteKanza Ahmed (9am Friday)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it is sad to say that this is the first death free month for the US in Iraq. We still should not be discouraged by the amount of deaths incurred over the length of this war. When we look at the numbers from only a single battle of WWII, such as Okinawa's casualties and losses:
ReplyDeleteUnited States:
12,513 killed
38,916 wounded,
33,096 non-combat losses
Japanese:
About 100,000 killed
7,400–10,755 captured
Other:
Estimated 42,000–150,000 civilians killed
These occurred in roughly a 2 month period. This can be attributed to many things such as better equipment and more advanced war-fighting tactics. I would also like to credit the policies and the commanders in charge of them.
I would say that it is a bit presumptuous to say for certainty that the troops will return from Iraq before the closing of the year. The decision to withdraw from the country should not be in the hands of the executive branch, but instead a sound agreement between the Commanders of Ground Forces and the Provincial Government. Removing ourselves too early based on political notions risks not only America's image (which is already damaged from Iraq to begin with) but also the safety and security of the "new" Iraq. You can't take the training wheels off until you can balance on two wheels.
Joshua 'jinx' Mooi
(11am Friday)
This is a very good thing that this war is slowly down but it funny how we are taking soldiers out of war and ready to put them back in it in a new country.
ReplyDeleteAdam Alvarado
Fri- 9am
A slow down in mortality rate is always a good thing, cant argue with that - bring the troops home. Now, when I think of the war going on in Iraq, the one thing I must have either forgotten somewhere down the line or never figured out at all; Why did the US even invade? Amidst the fog in my memory I remember some things about WMD's, about Hussein, about this anti-terrorism campaign. This may be politically incorrect, I'm proud of the troops that have fought and those still fighting, but I can't for the life of me understand why they were sent in the first place. Let's send the kids, the 18-22 year old's to fight, let's send brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers.. because everyone is something to some body.. Let's send them to fight a war that will be meaningless to the average public (myself included) years from now. We still have troops in Iraq, but is Iraq even in the general consciousness of the US public? Other than the families of the troops, other than people actively involved in political science, I don't hear about anyone talking about Iraq and I doubt people think about it. Im glad there weren't grieving families in August, but I cant understand why any life should have been lost.
ReplyDeleteErvin Velic
Friday, 9am