It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Souljah
Wikipedia used UPI as their source for the numbers - they did not made them up themselves.
Originally posted by shots
You left out the most important part Souljah.
Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003
This article has been cited as a source by Aljazeera in their article "Iraqi Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003"
Yeah Aljazeera as the source why does that not surprise me
Originally posted by shots
If you had checked you would have found that they were quoting Aljzeera.
www.aljazeera.com...
About Aljazeera.com
Important note: Aljazeera Publishing and Aljazeera.com are not associated with the controversial Arabic Satellite Channel known as Jazeera Space Channel TV (also known as Al-Jazeera Satellite Channel) station whose website is Aljazeera.net.
Originally posted by Souljah
Originally posted by shots
If you had checked you would have found that they were quoting Aljzeera.
www.aljazeera.com...
Well if YOU checked, this Aljazeera.com is not the SAME as the Real and the Original Aljazeera.NET
About Aljazeera.com
Important note: Aljazeera Publishing and Aljazeera.com are not associated with the controversial Arabic Satellite Channel known as Jazeera Space Channel TV (also known as Al-Jazeera Satellite Channel) station whose website is Aljazeera.net.
But that ofcourse has no importance to you...
Originally posted by Souljah
Furthermore, the specific part of this article I used for quotes, comes from UPI, which stands for United Press International, a news agency, which birth goes to 1907.
So where exactly does Al-Jazeera come in, Sir?
[edit on 2/4/06 by Souljah]
Originally posted by MajorCee
One casualty of the Iraqi war seems to be Souljah. I imagine
Souljah has spent more time on his keyboard forecasting disaster
for the troops in Iraq than most Iraqi Casualties have spent
in the hospital. It appears Souljah has spent more
time on the internet, finding everybit of news that can be
spun into some sort of disaster, that he must have entirely lost
normal contact to life. Maybe not though, maybe Souljah is
actually a team of 5 Muslims who spend their spare
time figuring out bad news for the US and Britain. I wonder
if after this is all over shortly and Bush and Blair have
had their way, if Souljah is going to have some sort of post
traumatic stress syndrome, or possibly carpal tunnel syndrome.
Ah yes, the terrible casualties of this war, takes its toll
in so many ways.
[edit on 2-4-2006 by MajorCee]
[edit on 2-4-2006 by MajorCee]
Wow Major - did you know that you did not write a word about the current topic of this thread?
Originally posted by DYepes
Well even if Souljah is trying to put some spin on this issue and this number is exaggerrated a bit, do you still agree that it is a very low number from a logistical standpoint considering the size of the operation?
Originally posted by shots
Exaggerated a Bit???? He is blowing it way and I mean way out of proportion.
As I understand it the UK had roughly 2,000 troops at any given time yet he claims that over 6,000 are casualties, which is totally unrealistic.
I do however agree with you on your points, just not his vivid exaggeration that is what I object too.
Originally posted by shots
All go Points DYepes, but that is not the case here.
Souljah with his usual zeal is trying to make it look like the figures is that high when they are not.
The article clearly stated theses are not all injuries, many are just normal illness or accidents that happen no matter where the troops are.
Originally posted by stumason
. It is now down to around 8,000, with a total of 100,000 troops passing through Iraq in the past 3 years.
Now, when almost the entire Army goes through Iraq and combat deaths are as low as they are (around 100), let alone injuries, we can see the situation is far from the situation portrayed in this thread.
As stated earlier by myself and others, most of these figures would have happened anyway, with or without the War.
Originally posted by Souljah
No matter how much lipstick y'all try to put on a Pig - it is still a Pig.
FACT is, that if there was no UK troops in Iraq, there would be on 6,700 Casualties.