Gun Forums banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
pwnt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I don't really agree with his message (except the part about supporting the Armed Forces, of course), but I'd be the first to congratulate him on making one of the more articulate and coherent expressions of a conservative veiwpoint I've heard in recent memory.
 

·
Plays Counter Strike and knows everything about gu
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
He made some very good points. Such as the only thing the media reports is the lost american lives. We all know good things happen over there, why not report some of those?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
Gun-Nut said:
He made some very good points. Such as the only thing the media reports is the lost american lives. We all know good things happen over there, why not report some of those?
im more concered with the drastically altered iraqi civilian lives lost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
264 Posts
I'd give my left nut for us to become a "serious country" again. I'm serious. It's a damn shame things are getting to this point. :-(

:alien:Petrus
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
From what I have seen in the last 5 years... I fear for the future of this countrys future and I dont think there is anything that can save it.


I like this guys message.

Then again... Semiautomatic machine gun fire?! wtf?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
This guy was confusing the war in Iraq with the war against terrorism. He even mentioned 9/11. 9/11 or any other "bombs" going off in the US had nothing to do with Iraq. Sure there are al-Qaeda members in Iraq now. But only after we invaded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
reporting the # of enemy killed can be very difficult. As for the # of Iraqis killed someone tried to report that and was attacked for exagerating the numbers greatly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
DJ 9iron said:
No kidding because the number was probably the truth. The truth kills liberals.

It was the Conservatives that had a problem with the #. George Bush specificly. Here is a quote.

"The death toll in Iraq following the US-led invasion has topped 655,000 - one in 40 of the entire population - according to a major piece of research in one of the world's leading medical journals.
The study, produced by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and published online by the Lancet, claims the total number of deaths is more than 10 times greater than any previously compiled estimate.

The findings provoked an immediate political storm. Within hours of its release, George Bush had dismissed the figures. "I don't consider it a credible report," he told reporters at the White House. "Neither does General Casey [the top US officer in Iraq], neither do Iraqi officials.""
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
I heard it was estimated at 35k dead insurgents, and another 70k dead Iraqis total.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Balbino said:
It was the Conservatives that had a problem with the #. George Bush specificly. Here is a quote.

"The death toll in Iraq following the US-led invasion has topped 655,000 - one in 40 of the entire population - according to a major piece of research in one of the world's leading medical journals.
The study, produced by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and published online by the Lancet, claims the total number of deaths is more than 10 times greater than any previously compiled estimate.

The findings provoked an immediate political storm. Within hours of its release, George Bush had dismissed the figures. "I don't consider it a credible report," he told reporters at the White House. "Neither does General Casey [the top US officer in Iraq], neither do Iraqi officials.""
IIRC, the way the Lancet derived their data was from extrapolating the numbers of dead in actual battles zones and then applying that calculation across the entire country, much of which has never seen battle.

In addition there is the issue of disposing all these bodies. Does anyone ever recall seeing such an operation in progress even when the war was at its peak?

The message this man brings forth is so basic. It reaffirms to the soldiers actually fighting what the principles of warfare are. Von Clausewitz wrote about it 300 years ago and it simply states that war is about two sides fighting until one side kills so many of the other that it can no longer continue to do so. Everything else is secondary in being effective.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
Balbino said:
It was the Conservatives that had a problem with the #. George Bush specificly. Here is a quote.

"The death toll in Iraq following the US-led invasion has topped 655,000 - one in 40 of the entire population - according to a major piece of research in one of the world's leading medical journals.
The study, produced by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and published online by the Lancet, claims the total number of deaths is more than 10 times greater than any previously compiled estimate.

The findings provoked an immediate political storm. Within hours of its release, George Bush had dismissed the figures. "I don't consider it a credible report," he told reporters at the White House. "Neither does General Casey [the top US officer in Iraq], neither do Iraqi officials.""
George Bush isn't a conservative.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top