U.S. death toll in Iraq surpasses 1,000

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
U.S. death toll in Iraq surpasses 1,000
Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A spate of attacks, including a suicide car bombing, pushed the number of U.S. military deaths in the Iraq campaign past 1,000, with the majority inflicted by an insurgency that grew after President Bush declared major combat over.

Fighting with Sunni and Shiite insurgents killed eight Americans in the Baghdad area on Tuesday and today, pushing the count to 1,003. That number includes 1,000 U.S. troops and three civilians, two working for the U.S. Army and one for the Air Force. The tally was compiled by The Associated Press based on Pentagon records and AP reporting from Iraq.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld cited progress on several fronts in the Bush administration's global war on terrorism and said U.S. enemies should not underestimate the willingness of the American people and its coalition allies to suffer casualties in Iraq and elsewhere.

"The progress has prompted a backlash, in effect, from those who hope that at some point we might conclude that the pain and the cost of this fight isn't worth it," Rumsfeld told a Pentagon news conference. "Well, our enemies have underestimated our country, our coalition. They have failed to understand the character of our people. And they certainly misread our commander in chief."

The Bush administration has long linked the Iraq conflict to the war on terrorism. The Sept. 11 Commission, however, concluded that Iraq and al-Qaida did not have a "collaborative relationship" before the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, and some have questioned to what extent foreign terror groups are involved in the anti-U.S. insurgency in Iraq.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry issued a statement saying the United States joined the friends and families of those who died in mourning their loss.

"Today marks a tragic milestone in the war in Iraq. More than 1,000 of America's sons and daughters have made the ultimate sacrifice. Our nation honors their service and joins with their families and loved ones in mourning their loss," Kerry said.

"We must never forget the price they have paid. And we must meet our sacred obligation to all our troops to do all we can to make the right decisions in Iraq so that we can bring them home as soon as possible."

The 1,003 figure includes deaths from hostile and non-hostile causes since the United States launched the Iraq campaign in March 2003 to topple Saddam Hussein's regime. All but 138 deaths came after Bush's May 1, 2003, declaration of an end to major combat operations.



(There is a full story version at http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/2784470 )
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
With this news, do you think the Americans will ever get what they went there for? We all know what they went there for, so no need to mention it. But what do you foresee the future to be in Iraq?
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: U.S. death toll in Ir

I think the US is well on the way to losing control of the situation. I think we'll see a US attack on Iran if Bush is re-elected, but beyond that I think we are looking at uprisings in Saudi Arabia and other US-friendly countries in the area and that will lead to major conflict, possibly with some EU countries siding against America.

If things don't change soon, we could see large-scale war over resources.
 

FireJED

New Member
Sep 7, 2004
40
0
6
Lund, Sweden
www.maths.lth.se
Hello Reverend Blair.

I agree with you about EU countrys siding with the arab countrys if there is more conflict. I see in the future that Sweden, Denmark, Norway (not EU), Finland, Switzerland, Spain will all remain neutral. Germany, France and Russia (not EU) will all be against the war. I see that the United Kingdom will go through big trouble if there is mention of supporting any more wars. It would be impossible to a United EU on support or no support for the war unless the UK is stopped by the citizens which will make the whole EU against another wars.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: U.S. death toll in Ir

I don't just mean against other wars, I mean actively fighting them. The friendship between the EU and the US is a pretty thin veneer pasted over a lot of hostility and European countries need oil too.

Toss a couple of wild cards into the mix (like China) who also need oil, and the situation can get very bleak very quickly.
 

Prometheus

Electoral Member
Jul 12, 2003
198
0
16
Eastern USA
So the numbers negate the deaths? I don't think so. And not all of the Iraqi deaths were caused by US soldiers. Some were caused by other Iraqis. I in no way condone what is happening in Iraq, and oddly enough in the US, when we get death tolls they hardly ever give us the Iraq numbers. Always say "no details available" or "numbers incomplete", something like that. Gotta love our news and media :/ But I don't think any deaths should be trivialized due to a difference in the numbers.

I agree with Rev. I see some of the US former allies rising up, drawing Europeans in through their alliances. It IS about resources, and is a power struggle bigger than George W. was anticipating.
If the US doesn't leave Iraq, the situation will get uglier by the day. If the US does leave now, it leaves Iraq in the chaos it has created through the current administration. Iraq (and it's resources) will be open fodder for everyone in it's current state. Even the Democrats know that. Just removing Bush isn't enough anymore. So I also see the US losing control of the situation, or made to fight for that control by people other than Iraqis.
 

Isengard

Electoral Member
RE: U.S. death toll in Ir

I'm not saying US soldiers death is less important, I'm pointing the fact that we only speak about US people dying over there, we should consider what is happening to Iraqis people too. Even if not all iraqis death were caused by USA it is still 40 times the number, I think it's not negligeable. US soldiers know that they may die going to war, civilians never asked to be involved in this war so I think it's worse to see the number of civilians death.
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
I agree fully with what Isengard says. Especially the part: Civilians never ask for war, Soldiers know they are risking their lives by going to war.
 

Prometheus

Electoral Member
Jul 12, 2003
198
0
16
Eastern USA
I agree with that point also. As I said, US media doesn't even keep us informed of the number of Iraqi deaths, just US soldiers' deaths. And civilian casualties have been severely neglected by our media. That's one reason I come to these forums, you always get an honest answer. :lol:
My apologies to Isengard, your point is now well taken. The original post seemed callous..
 

Isengard

Electoral Member
RE: U.S. death toll in Ir

Yeah, I know the original posts sounded like that but it was sarcasm, I'm not of the kind that cheers everytime a US soldier gets killed, au contraire! In a perfect world there would not be any casualties because there wouldn't be any army at all :)

I think I'll keep on dreaming for now :wink:
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: U.S. death toll in Ir

The civilians are the ones that really suffer and due to the continued use of DU weapons, landmines, and other wonders of modern warfare, that suffering will go on for a very long time.

If this thing was magically settled tomorrow, the civilian death toll would still continue to rise.

The only way the US can pull out now is if all of their corporations go with them and the UN goes in in really massive numbers. That would require not only a complete turn-around of US foreign policy, but a complete re-working of the UN and massive changes to the foreign policies of EU countries and Russia. Somehow I have my doubts about that happening any time soon.