7 US Marines Killed in Iraq

wilheim · Jul 7, 2004

July 7 (Bloomberg) -- Four U.S. Marines were killed in Iraq's al-Anbar province, the military command said in an e-mailed statement. Three Marines were killed in the area on Monday, the command said earlier.

The four were killed yesterday while conducting security operations in the province, the command said without giving any other details.

In Monday's incident, two Marines were killed and a third died of wounds sustained during a security operation.

Most of the attacks on members of the U.S.-led coalition in al-Anbar have taken place in and around the city of Fallujah, 64 kilometers (40 miles) west of Baghdad.

Fallujah was the center of an uprising against coalition forces that began in April and lasted for more than a month.

Bloomberg.com

truthteller · Jul 7, 2004

I see from your all your post that Liberals rely on negativity of America to bolster their numbers in the polls.

Pretty pathetic.

CharlieChan · Jul 7, 2004

More Americans dead to suit Bush war agenda. Wake up does any of this sound familiar. 7 US soldiers dead in two days, think back 30 years.

wilheim · Jul 7, 2004

TT - What negativity? Just the news, sorry if you cannot handle the real truth.

btw. is this post negative?

http://forum.therx.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=100090022&f=9103084407&m=596108751

wil.

ChuckSims · Jul 7, 2004

If Bush had his way this kind of news would be censored from the masses. The clueless moron will be rendered powerless in a few months.

American · Jul 7, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by truthteller:
I see from your all your post that Liberals rely on negativity of America to bolster their numbers in the polls.

Pretty pathetic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If liberals could chose between continued violence and casualties in Iraq, or no more violence and with a peaceful closure to the current situation, the liberals would unanimously choose continued violence and deaths because that is what would further their agenda. If there were news of an attack in which 100 more American soldiers were killed today, for instance, there are many libs that would silently rejoice in this. It makes me sick.

jimbutorac · Jul 7, 2004

If liberals could chose between continued violence and casualties in Iraq, or no more violence and with a peaceful closure to the current situation, the liberals would unanimously choose continued violence and deaths because that is what would further their agenda. If there were news of an attack in which 100 more American soldiers were killed today, for instance, there are many libs that would silently rejoice in this. It makes me sick

Yeah right American,

All of us libs want more casualties.

If you think as a Gulf War I vet, I'm in favor of more American casualtes, you're completely fvcked and warped. It's my precise concern for them that I do not want to seem them have their lives wasted on a useless misguided crusade that leads me to oppose this war that Bush Admin so foolishly conducted.

Glad to hear you're in favor of casually spending other families' lives for a ridiculous futile pursuit of freedom in the Middle East. After all, their previous justifications of Iraq having WMD and ties to Al Qaeda are complete bullshvt. - I can see you are a true "American" by your support for this misguided war.

Quite frankly, it makes me sick that neocons like you that have no justification for it, belieeve, that the 800 dead plus and 5,000 wounded plus were worth this excursion.

wilheim · Jul 7, 2004

Sounds like some would just rather sweep US casualties under the rug and not hear any thing about them. Why is that? Does a headline 7 US Marines killed in Iraq hit a nerve. Perhaps our fearless leader is spilling young American blood on the other side of the world for the wrong reasons. The truth is no one wants to see anyone killed in this worthless war, to imply that ANY American is secretly glad is sad commentary indeed. "American" another armchair general who has never been anywhere near a combat zone, just like the president.

wil.

American · Jul 8, 2004

So you guys think that there aren't some liberals out there welcoming bad news? That's not the impression I'm getting, although I'm glad to hear that Mudbone and Wilhelm aren't among these people.

SENDITIN · Jul 8, 2004

American,

Don't waste your breath. Posters like Wil have an agenda like all liberals who loathe Bush. Nothing positive comes out of their mouth. They have no ideas...just hate. It doesn't matter the topic either. Bush is the terrorist...Sadaam was just a poor old man in a hole. Bush is Hitler...Bush is a Nazi...blah blah blah.

xpanda · Jul 8, 2004

Likely the only people hoping for an extended war in Iraq are Lockheed Martin and Zarqawi. Liberals, unless they are complete hypocrits (and thus not really liberal) generally oppose that which reduces the value of life to the casualties of means to achieve an ideological end. It is the neocons in power who have a blatant disregard for the lives of your American soldiers and the Iraqi people. And, for every American killed in this adventure, I know we inch that much closer to the inevitability of Canada joining your coalition. I most certainly do not welcome that.

SENDITIN · Jul 8, 2004

Xpanda,

You're getting as bad as the other flaming libs..again no ideas just the same old song and dance. Lockheed Martin wants the war to go on...Chaney doesn't care about casualties...just Halliburton...blah blah blah. Now I know John Kerry would have done things smarter...of course no ideas to back that up...just smarter. Oh wait he would have got the UN more involved....you mean after the 20 some odd resolutions??

Here's some advice to you libs...come up with some CONCRETE plans and stop spewing your hate.

xpanda · Jul 8, 2004

Lockheed Martin is the biggest defense contractor in Iraq. Does it not go without saying that every day this war goes on they make money? On the other hand, I should think that Halliburton places their profit at risk as the war worsens. I made no comment about Cheney.

My concrete plan? Maybe you missed it in your absence from the board -- I think the US should get the hell out of there. I foresee a very long long war on the horizon. Iraq is just the beginning. They're calling it the Greater Middle East Reform Initiative, and it's going to take years, and probably tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of lives (including Canadians, eventually) and hundreds of billions of dollars. So, yes, my plan would be to bail ASAP.

jimbutorac · Jul 8, 2004

My solution is to conscript all who vote Republican and send them all over to Iraq. We'd be outta there in no time.

SENDITIN · Jul 8, 2004

Hmmm let's see...because Lockheed Martin makes military equipment they are rooting for the war to continue? Another evil corporation just out to make money? How about the 30 some odd Halliburton employees that have lost their lives? I guess using that logic all of the security companies are rooting for more terrorist attacks in the U.S. so they get more business? Or maybe the construction companies are rooting for a boatload of tornadoes and hurricanes so they get more business? Or doctors hope there are more sick people so they don't miss out?

Chaney is considered a neocon...and you said the neocons don't care about the casualties..therefore Chaney doesn't care about the casualties.

Do you have any idea what would happen if the Mideast Oil supply is seriously disrupted? Or if someone like Sadaam decided to drop some nasty stuff on Israel? We need to maintain a SERIOUS presence in this area.

I'd be curious as to your thoughts on what would happen in Iraq and the surrounding areas if we immediately removed all military presence. You don't think we'd be back there in no time flat? Hell I think we should have finished the job the first time, but we were just following the UN orders of getting Iraq out of Kuwait period. And I remember all of the whining at the time by the left when we were decimating the remnants of Sadaam's military.

wilheim · Jul 8, 2004

Senditin you show me a single post where I say anything remotely close to your qoute.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Posters like Wil have an agenda like all liberals who loathe Bush. Nothing positive comes out of their mouth. They have no ideas...just hate. Bush is the terrorist...Sadaam was just a poor old man in a hole. Bush is Hitler...Bush is a Nazi...blah blah blah. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A single post where I say Bush is Hitler or a Nazi, or Saddam is poor or innocent - anything even close. You do and I will never post in Politics again. Please spare me from any further "blah blah blah" you like to add to your posts.

wilheim

wilheim · Jul 8, 2004

Senditin:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>...just Halliburton...blah blah blah. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Nazi...blah blah blah. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SENDITIN · Jul 8, 2004

A single post where I say Bush is Hitler or a Nazi, or Saddam is poor or innocent - anything even close.

How about responding with full support to the independent minded Lander's post calling the president a genocidal idiot. That's close enough for me.

xpanda · Jul 8, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by SENDITIN:
Hmmm let's see...because Lockheed Martin makes military equipment they are rooting for the war to continue? Another evil corporation just out to make money? How about the 30 some odd Halliburton employees that have lost their lives? I guess using that logic all of the security companies are rooting for more terrorist attacks in the U.S. so they get more business? Or maybe the construction companies are rooting for a boatload of tornadoes and hurricanes so they get more business? Or doctors hope there are more sick people so they don't miss out?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, on your last point, I would argue that pharmaceutical companies make more money in the treatment of an illness rather than a cure. I think that logic can be applied to any company so long as their principle responsibility is to their shareholders. The 30 Halliburton casualties are not relevant to this discussion since I believe an ongoing war is detrimental to Halliburton's profit margin.

Let's talk Lockheed Martin, specifically. Bruce P. Jackson, Vice President of Strategy and Planning at LM, is one of the Directors of the PNAC, who, since their formation in 1997, have been obsessed with Iraq, going so far as to write the now famous letter to Clinton in '98. Other members include Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Rove, Kristol, Perle and Armitage. I should say that these are interesting bedfellows for a company who you now claim would have zero profit motive in the region. While I don't think profit is the main motive of this war, I should say that it would be very naive to suggest it had nothing to do with it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Chaney is considered a neocon...and you said the neocons don't care about the casualties..therefore Chaney doesn't care about the casualties.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I spoke of Cheney, I referred to his lack of profit motive for an ongoing war. Surely Cheney would like for things to go smoothly. But, yes, I don't think he cares too much about the casualties, at least outside of the public relations disaster it's causing him.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Do you have any idea what would happen if the Mideast Oil supply is seriously disrupted? Or if someone like Sadaam decided to drop some nasty stuff on Israel? We need to maintain a SERIOUS presence in this area. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I'm not going to get into another argument about what this war was about and/or whether or not it was justified. I think both of us know where we each stand on that. However, yes, I understand what would happen if the MidEast oil supply is seriously disrupted, which only adds to the confusion of why Bush invaded, given that unrest in Iraq is much more severe now than before. Kinda brings you back to the profit motive, doesn't it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>I'd be curious as to your thoughts on what would happen in Iraq and the surrounding areas if we immediately removed all military presence. You don't think we'd be back there in no time flat? Hell I think we should have finished the job the first time, but we were just following the UN orders of getting Iraq out of Kuwait period. And I remember all of the whining at the time by the left when we were decimating the remnants of Sadaam's military.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

On some of this we can agree. It will be horrible in Iraq if the US pulls out. However, I don't particularly think it would be worse than it is now. The threat of civil war is probably less now than before the war, given the unity that anti-Americanism provided. The biggest concern of course is if Zarqawi and Friends are looking to govern a nation, they may be able to wield enough power to take control. I don't particularly think they are looking to govern, however, but to disrupt the American plan. A removal of US troops would provide the Iraqis cause to turn on the terrorists in the region, rather than join them as they are doing now.

Most importantly, however, is that democracy and freedom need to be owned by the people who desire it. Presuming that Iraqis want a democracy at all, it is theirs to take, not ours to give. I say let them have at it so that they may take ownership of and pride in their destiny.

[This message was edited by xpanda on July 08, 2004 at 01:13 PM.]

SENDITIN · Jul 8, 2004

Xpanda,

Why do you think that an ongoing war is detrimental to Halliburton but great for Lockheed? If you listen to the flaming libs on this board that's what the war was all about...Cheney and Halliburton.

I agree with your comment about democracy...it isn't going to come easy but the U.S. democracy didn't come easy either. I think we are trying to let them "have at it", but they have to be in a position from a security standpoint to have a shot.

P.S. Guys as smart as Cheney can make boatloads more in the private sector without any aggravation. To say he doesn't care about casualties isn't productive and I'm sure untrue.