Sad milestone, American victims of Islamic terrorists reach 3,000!

Status
Not open for further replies.
A quarter of all smokers die when they are between 35-69 years of age (125,000 people a year). Ive seen family die of cancer and i'd rather get shot in combat.

edited to add: Since 1951 smoking has killed an estimated 100 Million people world wide. Where are all the protests? The UN should do something!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3826127.stm
 
samcdkey

Its also incredibly ironic that the "insurgents" and "militants" that the US is fighting in Iraq today are the same "victims" that were "suppressed" by Saddam.
Click to expand...

Your proof for this?
 
I would have thought its pretty obvious.

Muqtada al-Sadr, the son of a revered ayatollah killed by Saddam Hussein's regime in 1999
Click to expand...

The Mahdi Army, also known as the Mahdi Militia or Jaish al Mahdi (Arabic جيش المهدي) , is a militia force created by the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in June 2003. The Islamist militia rose to international prominence on April 4, 2004 when it spearheaded the first major armed confrontation against the U.S-led occupation forces in Iraq from the Shiite community in an uprising that followed the banning of al-Sadr's newspaper and attempts to arrest him, and lasted until June 6.
Click to expand...
 
samcdkey said:
And they started right after the US stepped in. Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

Because Americans won't use the same tactics that Sadman did to quell any of the unrest and violence in Iraq. Thus the radical Muslims are more free to kill those other Muslims that they don't like.

If you'd allow the US to use the same tactics that Sadman did, we'd have no violence in Iraq now. Freedom also gives one the freedom to kill others.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Because Americans won't use the same tactics that Sadman did to quell any of the unrest and violence in Iraq. Thus the radical Muslims are more free to kill those other Muslims that they don't like.

If you'd allow the US to use the same tactics that Sadman did, we'd have no violence in Iraq now. Freedom also gives one the freedom to kill others.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

So if the US is attacking the same people as Saddam, who are they "saving"?

Plus:
The two most prominent militias -- the Mehdi Army and the Badr Organization -- are armed wings of Shiite political parties whose support is crucial to the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.
Click to expand...

So the US is attacking the same militia that is holding up the "democratically" elected government?

More "successes" in Iraq:
Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi Army has replaced al Qaeda in Iraq as "the most dangerous accelerant" of the sectarian violence plaguing Iraq for nearly a year, according to a Pentagon report.
Click to expand...
The number of attacks recorded in September and October were the highest on record, the report found, but it provided no specific figures.

Nearly 70 percent of attacks targeted U.S. and allied troops, "but the overwhelming majority of casualties were suffered by Iraqis," the report concluded.
Click to expand...

Happy days are here again?
 
Site proof Sam, Site Proof, from what I have put together is the Iraqi's who are bearing the brunt of the attacks, and the casualties, yes the attacks are up, but this also means we are killing more terrorist, the question is can the terrorist keep up the tempo of attacks and the loss's they incur from them.

And with out the howl from the Media, what have the terrorist achieved militarily? It is with people like you who the terrorist seem to impress, the Guy's I talk to, who come back from their tour's say the don't have the stuff to win the war militarily, that when they can get a hold on the terrorist they die like rats in a half filled 55 gallon drum.
 
cite proof?

Its a Pentagon report, with your "connections" you can surely access it.

Or are your buddies keeping secrets from you too?:rolleyes:

And the "terrorists" are also holding up the government, so essentially the US is destabilising the Iraqi government.

As for your buddies in Iraq: I'm sure they think Iraq is an oasis in the desert, filled with bubbling brooks and virgins.:D

hellloooooooo anybody home? Reality check 1...2...3...

May 1, 2003

bush-mission.jpg
 
Last edited:
No Sam my friend are telling me, yes there are more attacks on U.S. troops, but that works to our advantage, it give us a better chance of killing them, and they tell me that it is still the Iraqi civilians that are taking the brunt of the attacks in Iraq, and most of those attacks are blood feud reprisals,and as far as old Muqtada Al-Sadr, he wants to become the next Saddam of Iraq, we made a mistake in letting him set up his militia, but it looks like he is going to get his just deserts shortly, and we are going to correct that mistake.
 
Baron Max said:
You've never heard of Fallujah? Sam-o, Sam-o. Block 'em in, then go house to house and kill 'em all.
Click to expand...
I recall a seige on Fallujah some time ago. Did that stop the insurgency? Or affect it in any way? And isnt killing mass numbers bound to create more insurgents (unless you kill everyoine in Iraq)?
 
Sam just heard that in 2006, the Iraqi's lost 16,976 casualties, and we have lost 3,000 troops since the beginning of the war, so who is taking the brunt of the casualties?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top