First US/British Casualties In Iraq

[Marty Weiner]

FoxNews just gave details of the first Allied casualties in Iraq. A helo crashed due to mechanical problems killing 12 Brits and 4 Americans.

With all of the technology, we're bound to lose many GI's due to friendly fire, mechanical breakdowns, etc.

I feel for the families of these guys and gals.

Anybody who wants to send a message to a serviceman or woman can go here: http://AnyServiceMember.Org

Marty

 

[tkl]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

just heard myself, it's a damned shame. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon23.gif

 

[Rothrandir]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

wow, that's too bad /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

i think i would much rather die in the process of killing a bunch of bad guys...

 

[Empath]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

[ QUOTE ]
Rothrandir said:
i would much rather die in the process of killing

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow the efforts to inject the religious/political idea that war is glorious and honorable has been successful, though it should come as no surprise. Man has been offering up their youth in this 'honorable' sacrificial ritual for thousands of years. But we bless their deaths with the far overused cliche 'these men did not die in vain". And it continues until someday someone thinks "what a waste", and we pause a bit.

We take note of those that would do us injury by losing their life thinking there is a grand reward that awaits them, and we can't understand how anyone can be so deceived.

Fight fire with fire I guess. It's all so confusing and tiring. It kind of makes you want to throw up.

Man is such an interesting animal, but sometimes far too repetitive, and dreadfully, predictable. I think I'm in the wrong place, but can't seem to find a place. G'nite

 

[Monsters_Inc]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

I believe Empath is correct. Man is an interesting animal - one which does not seem to learn from history repeating itself many times over.

 

[NightStorm]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Goodnight Empath, sleep well. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Dan

 

[e=mc²]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

Empath, I'm with you on this one. Did these people really have to die.

Onyx, did you type in that message in you sig line or did an admin really remove it due to its content.

I really hope that we're not being censored. I would hate to leave one of my favorite boards due to "censorship", which I believe is against all what the internet was founded on. (Read about it on the Electronic Frontier Foundations home page: www.eff.org) Just my too scents worth.

E

 

[Rothrandir]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

empath, i didn't mean that war is glorious, certainly not in it's current form..

i just think that i would rather die in the process of doing some good. not saying that the helecopter people didn't, but it seems almost ironic that they should die in such a way.

 

[Charles Bradshaw]

Re: First US/British Casualities In Iraq

I see Empath did NOT quote the full text, only the part that suited him: taking something out of context for a totally different meaning.

There's quite a difference between stopping at 'killing' and continuing to the END of the sentence with 'killing a bunch of bad guys.'

Thinking about all that is going on, taking 90 percent of Earth Humans out of incarnation, may be too little.

One FACT of War that the wussies forget, is that there are casualties on BOTH sides. If this had been a WW2 style conflict (tech wise), then our casualties would be a whole bunch higher at this point. There will come a point, when the troops are in the cities, that our side will take higher casualties. How much higher remains to be seen.

Take what I have said above in ANY context and/or ANY meaning you want to. Then report it to an Administrator.