Off Topic
|

|
Please help support pocketfives by using our links when choosing to download a new site! CarbonPoker · Full Tilt · Cake Poker · PokerStars · Ultimate Bet · Players Only · Bodog
|
Let me preface this by saying I am in NO WAY making light of the deaths of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. I just think maybe a little perspective is in order.
Some numbers to remember:
In WW1 the US lost approx. 53,402 soldiers
In WW2 the US lost approx. 291,557 soldiers
In Korea the US lost approx. 36,568 soldiers
In Vietnam the US lost approx. 58,199 soldiers
In the Gulf War the US lost approx. 529 soldiers
In Afghanistan the US has lost approx. 491 soldiers
In Iraq the US has lost approx. 4020 soldiers
(the above numbers are the "low" etimates from WW2 - Vietnam)
Cliff Notes:
All wars suck
This one sucks a lot less than most of the others in our history
|
|
|
|
|
What is the reason we are going with now, then? Freeing the Iraqis and sewing the oats of democracy? lolz
|
|
|
|
yes im aware of that but were not at war with iraq now were at war with, well i don't really know, terroists i guess, so i guess the number of enemies that would count is the innocent bystander or do u consider all iraqis guilty?
|
|
|
|
So like, what is this war all about? Please to be educating us idiots.
|
|
|
|
Some former high-level Bush people have said that Iraq was always No. 1 on his agenda when he got into office but obv he could not just invade, he is not a dictator (though I think he wishes he was). So obv 9/11 afforded him the opportunity to use suggestive language and focus Americans' support for his war in Iraq, which was surely about oil to an extent. The point is if it was always on his agenda what else could it be about? Surely, he did not just pick some random country with a "bad guy" as president to invade. Many countries around the world have dictators and poor leadership and governments but none of them have the natural resources that Iraq has. I don't have the source for the people that said it was tops on his agenda but I could get some links if anyone cares I'm sure.
|
|
|
|
looool shipit. "It must be that because I can't think of anything else it could be"?? hahahaha
|
|
|
|
? Like? edit: Also, why are you always such an ass in threads like this, I state an opinion and you just laugh at it without actually making any kind of rebuttal -- reminds me of the Repub debates when Ron Paul stood up and spoke more truth than anyone I've seen in politics in a long time and Mccain and Romney just laughed at him because he wasn't saying the "correct" thing, the thing it takes to get elected in this country, Disgusting.
|
|
|
|
OneM24
(United States)
5,591
Posts.
Joined
12-18-2005.
04-07-2008 5:48 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
|
Although the death toll is not as high as some previous wars fought by U.S. soldiers.....don't forget the numbers of wounded soldiers.
Last I checked there were over 29,000 wounded combat veterans from this war. There's more perspective for you. While I believe there is good being done in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are paying a much heavier price than just the body count. Some of my friends will never be able to walk, see, hear, or use their arms again.
That said, this doesn't even begin to compare to Korea, Vietnam, WWI, WWII....but let's look at it all the way around, shall we?
|
|
|
|
[EDIT: for shippit. eff this new system imo] google the un resolution. you have some vague recollection of "someone" saying iraq was "1 on Bush's agenda" whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean, and then you decide that based on that weak-ass guessing, Bush went to war because saddam tried to kill hid dad? and ron paul is a fucking goof, that's why he got laughed at. so sorry to break it to you
|
|
|
|
I don't really see how after Bush started his campaign in Iraq getting the UN to support him proves well, anything really, other than the UN is in our pocket and is a joke. Accepting things because a President or The United Nations said it, doesn't mean its true. Why is Ron Paul a goof?
|
|
|
OneM24: |   |
Last I checked there were over 29,000 wounded combat veterans from this war. There's more perspective for you.
Obviously I feel terrible for all of the injured troops and 29k is horrible. But...
WW1 wounded = 204,002
WW2 wounded = 670,846
Korea wounded = 103,284
Vietnam wounded = 153,356
Again. I'm not making light of the situation. Just putting it into perspective.
|
|
|
|
Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq were/are not worth losing our soldiers over imo.
WWI and WWII were wars that needed to be fought.
|
|
|
|
meh, US involvement in World War I was unnecessary I think. WWII we (gov) always wanted to get involved and probably rightly so.
|
|
|
|
US involvement in WWI might have been overkill, better safe than sorry though IMO.
The US did not want to get involved in WWII at all, Germany was a bad mother fucker back then.
|
|
|
|
|
Sortable Rankings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|