How much are the deaths of over 6000 soldiers to you?

I keep seeing all the attacks on spending...which to me is justifiable as I'm against the insane government debt we have accumulated.

BUT....

You cannot be against the debt and PRO-WAR as it is a huge part of our debt...not to mention DEATH.

So let me ask you this...

How much are the deaths of 6000+plus soldiers the last 8 years to you? Was the cost worth it? What about the innocent people that have died? What about the innocent children that have died? Were the 6000 plus soldiers a good trade off for the 3000 that died in the world trade centers? What is a justifiable cost for you in that regard? Against abortion? How can you be against abortion if you are FOR DEATH?

Yet again...the same applies for the opposite...

How can you be AGAINST the war and FOR Abortion.....you support death your you don't....

Why are people so hypocritical in this regard?


Anyway...as my topic states....

How much are the deaths of 6000 soldiers to you?

I know what the answer to this question is. I know that some will try to justify one over the other.

Justify it.

(this comes from a post in another topic...decided to make it a thread)

[edit on 25-9-2009 by David9176]

Even though I'm not who you're addressing this to, I know the answer for those who are.

Soldiers are worthless to these people. I want you to compare. Every day, soldiers die in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So you remember the biggest outrage expressed over American deaths in iraq?

The killing of four Blackwater mercenaries in Fallujah. You remember this, right? The bodies being desecrated was a nice sideshow for outrage, but i'm certain many of our men and many more in the Iraqi forces have had their bodies brutalized as well.

But when it's a corporate entity losing private guns-for-hire, well, that's untenable. Fallujah was flattened for this outrage.

That's the key. These wars - like all wars before - are about profit. The deaths of soldiers do not impact the pocketbooks of Merrick, Bechtel, Mattel, ExxonMobil, and all the others making a mint off these two wars, and so are regarded as inconsequential. The people cheering for the war do not care about hte soldiers for a few more reasons, though not more complex. One, money is god, so they support the outlook of the corporations. Two, Muslims are evil, so any sacrifice is acceptable so long as they die too. And three, it's not them getting shot at.

So just leaving Iraq and A-stan is the solution? That will really cut back spending and allow more money for the fed to use for whatever BS program that their handlers are pushing at the moment.

Their lives would be wasted if we just gathered our toys and went home, snivelling. We started this mess, we need to finish it.

Are 6000 dead worth the 3000 lost in the WTC? A friend of mine told me this:

"It doesn't matter where I was on that day.

It matters where I have been since that day and where I am now.

Have not forgotten, am not forgiving.

When I crumpled my first Muj, I told the guy next to me 'two thousand nine hundred and seventy five'.

I will stop when my number reaches zero. I still got a long way to go....."

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Do not forget that our own congressmen and representative own stock in the very companies who make a profit on the wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is very wrong. They send us to war to make a buck.

To David1976 on the abortion issue: It takes two people to make a baby. Society however only holds one of those people responsible. The woman who is tasked with carrying, birthing, and raising the baby. Us men have to take some kind of responsibility when we whip our dicks out and start pointing them at people. When men fail to take responsibility for the children they have fathered, society should step in and make them responsible. Their wages should be garnished and their belongings sold at auction and their tax returns should be forfeited. If the money is insufficient to raise their children, then they should be sterilized. Men should not get off scott free while the women suffer the emotional, physical and financial burden associated with bringing an unplanned child into the world.

reply to post by jerico65


Will it be "finished" when every Muslim is dead and Standard Oil owns the Mid-East? Perhaps it will be "finished" when our country is bankrupt because Halliburton and KBR have all the taxpayer's money.

reply to post by jerico65


So what you're saying is that dead soldiers wasted their lives if your ego isn't pumped by "victory"?

Hate to break it to you, but those six thousand men and women, hundreds of soldiers from our allies, and over a million Iraqis and Afghans, have had their lives "wasted" for the ego and pleasure of people like yourself who just want to get your war on.

Yes. Bring them home. I would rather the government spend money on "BS programs" than on killing its own soldiers in a project to dismantle entire nations for no reason other than the last manager thought it was a good idea.

War is a racket. Plain and simple. America needs enemies. Money makes the world go round. It's just a little easier now since we have what amounts to a mercenary army. Available to the highest bidder. i may seem cold-blooded on this but if you signed on the line that is dotted you knew what you were in for. Misguide3d patriotism, money for school whatever your motivations the old saying rings true, "Your heart may belong to Jesus but your ass belongs to the Corps".

All thing in perspective.

2 wars over 8 years and ONLY 6,000 deaths? That's pretty damn good. Compare that to the 620,000 deaths during the 4 year Civil War. During the civil war over 6,000 soldiers died in a single DAY. That happened numerous times.

More perspective.........

www.realclearpolitics.com...

For example, according to the National Health Center for Statistics, in the year 2003:

A total of over 2.4 million Americans died.
Over 684,000 died from heart disease.
Over 104,000 were killed in accidents (over 44,000 in car accidents and nearly 17,000 fell to death).
Over 30,000 committed suicide.
Over 17,000 were killed in homicides.

In comparison, the annual average death rate for American military personnel in Iraq is about 751.

For World War I, over 6,100 per month.
For World War II, over 9,200 per month.
In Korea, over 900 killed-in-action each month (non-battle death information is not available).
For Vietnam, over 600 per month.
For Gulf War I, almost 300 in one month.

Without perspective it is easy to blow things out of proportion.

Just look a yearly traffic deaths......

www.infoplease.com...

Over 40,000 traffic deaths every YEAR.

all things in perspective.







[edit on 25-9-2009 by RRconservative]

reply to post by RRconservative

2 wars over 8 years and ONLY 6,000 deaths? That's pretty damn good.

Yeah...that's great RR. Beautiful stuff. Why don't you go DOOR TO DOOR AND TELL THE FAMILIES OF THOSE LOST HOW DAMN GREAT IT IS.

There is no way I can say how much these deaths are worth to me... 6000 deaths in addition to the 3000 on 9/11 just seems such a horrible tragedy! But there's no way I can put a value on it. It's too big! If just one of those people were my brother, my son or my husband... Just one would be totally devastating! When I think of all the pain in the families of those 9000 people who have died, it's just too much to consider. It fills my brain and my heart aches...

People are hypocritical because they have different values. What some people hold as a priority in life is a mystery to me.

To be fair, I don't think it's quite as black and white as is stated in the OP.

I am against war in general and definitely against the war in Iraq. But if attacked, I would fight to defend my family, my home, my country. So, I'm not a pacifist, because I would support a necessary war of defense. I am also against abortion. That is, I wouldn't have one unless my life was at stake. But I believe that everyone has to make that choice for themselves. So, I am pro-choice. I am against the death penalty. So, the overall picture is that I am "anti-death", but I am rational enough to know that we cannot live without it.

reply to post by David9176


just to answer your title question,

if they were conscripited and didn't want to go i would be sad for them,
if they signed up to fight then i'm glad they're dead.

a little harsh? so are bombs, guns, mines, bayonets, etc....


edit to add, oh and if they worked for blackwater or any of those other idiots then i'm double glad they're gone.

[edit on 25-9-2009 by NatureBoy]

reply to post by David9176


Hi!

Whilst I see the point you are trying to make and I agree with you that the war in the Middle East is wrong and illegal, I believe that by making a suggestion that one can be against the war yet pro-abortion you are creating a fallacy.

The two issues are so different.

Abortion is something that is personal. War is not, on the whole, personal.

War is not mysogynist. Pro-Life movements generally are.

Abortion is sometimes the only option for some people.

I cannot and will not put a price on the brave soldiers who have died. Each and every one to me is a hero.

Additionally, each and every woman who has made what is possibly the most difficult decision a woman can make - to terminate an unborn life is equally strong in my eyes.

Some may argue that to abort is weak. It is not. It is a choice. Late term abortions are undesirable. They are traumatic - no question. But one person cannot sit in judgement over a woman's choice of how to deal with a preganancy.

Often, it is not an issue of fathers refusing to take responsibilty. It is more than that.

A foetus is not a child. It is a foetus. I will not be drawn into semantic arguments on such an issue because, as far as I am concerned, they are not valid.

I respect your decision to see the two issues as linked but I cannot agree with you.

I am pro-choice. I am not pro-death.

Have a good evening one and all,

Cado

reply to post by David9176


You can take it for what it is....or....you can continue to trivialize and propagate a very low death toll.

If there was no war during the last 8 years over 6,000 troops would still would have died just by the act of living. It's called the law of averages.

You live therefore you must die.

Stop trivializing troop deaths!



[edit on 25-9-2009 by RRconservative]

Originally posted by NatureBoy
reply to post by David9176

 

if they signed up to fight then i'm glad they're dead.

Many did not sign up to fight. They signed up because they had no other employment options and chose not to take benefits/welfare.

reply to post by cado angelus


Everyone has a choice. The mentality you exhibit is only an excuse for failure.

reply to post by cado angelus


yeah i know, i'm not stupid like them i understand life

If you are willing to sign up to fight to protect anglo-american dominance of the middle eastern oil pipelines just because you're unwilling to educate yourself and do something worthwhile then quiet frankly the world is better off without those people.

Being a bully and stealing everyone elses lunch money isn't ok just because you don't want to get a job, using a government issue gun to steal lucrative resource contracts and maintain a petrodollar standard isn't ok just because you don't want to get a propper job.

To anyone replying...as I should have stated in the OP....I just want to see why one believes in one and not the other.

Myself...I am against abortion, especially after having a child of my own (I think many people are this way), but in the case of rape and incest I think it should be up to the mother.

I would fight for what I think is right...not for what someone tells me is right. I don't do what I do because Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Thom Hartmann, Keith Olbermann, etc. tells me to do it...I do what I do and I say what I say because I believe it myself...and I believe that I want the best for my family. Will my opinions change? Absolutely.

You will learn more from those you disagree with if you only take the time to value their argument and understand why they believe what they believe.

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by jerico65

 

Will it be "finished" when every Muslim is dead and Standard Oil owns the Mid-East? Perhaps it will be "finished" when our country is bankrupt because Halliburton and KBR have all the taxpayer's money.

Dude, if it weren't Haliburton and KBR, it would be someone else. Seems like everyone loves to make money on the backs of the troops.

Doesn't make it right, tho.

reply to post by RRconservative

You can take it for what it is....or....you can continue to trivialize and propagate a very low death toll.

Or I could be like you and MINIMALIZE it. But you're right...they are just numbers and statistics....

I find it quite disgusting for you to state that I'm trivializing the deaths of soldiers when I'm completely against and hate the deaths of ALL soldiers.

I've constantly railed against any hatred AT THEM and supported them and their families...and i've even made a thread about "Don't forget our soldiers".

Don't give me your BS. I know how you are.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
(Soldiers thread, vids)
[edit on 25-9-2009 by David9176]

[edit on 25-9-2009 by David9176]

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
So what you're saying is that dead soldiers wasted their lives if your ego isn't pumped by "victory"?

Then why go to war, Gus, if it's not for victory?

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Hate to break it to you, but those six thousand men and women, hundreds of soldiers from our allies, and over a million Iraqis and Afghans, have had their lives "wasted" for the ego and pleasure of people like yourself who just want to get your war on.

Hate to break it to you, but some of these that are dead are friends of mine. I'd rather see something tangible accomplished than some PC feel-good "bring the troops home because we need the money" excuse that a lot of people seem to spout off with any time the subject comes up.