Casualties


sorabji.com: The Stalking Post: Casualties
By Antigone on Tuesday, July 22, 2003 - 08:31 pm:


By patrick on Tuesday, July 22, 2003 - 08:59 pm:

    if anyone needs to put anything in perspective its him.


    he's a fucking idiot. he's trying to neutralize deliberation commitment to war (and the subseqent death) of the soldiers to that of accident, disease and crime?


    what?


By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 03:28 am:

    250,000 soldiers in the region.
    Almost 150 deaths.
    Anyone who claims to know me knows I am not demeaning the sacrifices that were made, but on a cold numbers stand points, we lost 176 military members last year to training accidents.


By dave. on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 12:07 pm:

    of course, american lives are all that count.


By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 12:14 pm:

    i am sorry to hear you feel that way, dave.
    I don't.


By J on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 12:18 pm:

    I'm more concerned for the soldiers who come back becoming victims of Post Tramatic Stress Disorder.And it is just fucking miserable over there and then to have women and kids,people the soldiers were there to liberate trying to kill them,my heart goes out to them.


By J on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 12:28 pm:

    Not that I don't care about the causulties,even if the numbers are low,these soldiers who lost their lives are somebodys sons or daughters,fathers and mothers and it's already too much of a loss as far as I'm concerned.


By patrick on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 12:50 pm:

    spunk dave was being sarcastic, with good cause.

    because all you and Rush cared to address were American lives silly.



    "Anyone who claims to know me knows I am not demeaning the sacrifices that were made, but on a cold numbers stand points, we lost 176 military members last year to training accidents."


    Key word: ACCIDENT


    the comparison is irrelavent spunk.






By Antigone on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:02 pm:

    The bottom line is Rush doesn't want the American people to know that American soldiers are dying in Iraq.

    Why are conservatives now so afraid of the truth?


By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:04 pm:

    both of you, shove off.
    You are talking out of your ass


By Antigone on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:07 pm:

    And you're not?


By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:10 pm:

    i am not telling you who you care about and who you don.t
    That's just cynical and sick.

    I am honestly pissed at the accusation


By Antigone on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:15 pm:

    Why are you and Rush comparing accidental deaths to intentional deaths? If they're the same, why are you so fired up about 9/11?

    From Rush's article:

    "14 Americans die by pedestrian accidents. 27 Americans die in falls. On average, 50 Americans a day are murdered. 118 die in auto accidents, and 25 people die from A.I.D.S. every day, on average."

    Hmmm.

    14+27+50+118+25 = 230 per day
    230x365 = 83950 per year

    That's about 28 times more people than died in 9/11. Why did we report on 9/11? By Rush's logic, it was bad for the morale of the American people. By Rush's logic, if we had one 9/11 scale attack per year, while the deaths would be regrettable, they wouldn't be important enough to be reported by the media.


By patrick on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:15 pm:

    He's making illogical, irrelavent and pointless comparisons and if you're too blind to see that.....


    "So why are we getting a daily Iraq death update when we don't get daily drowning death updates or fire death updates or pedestrian updates, accidents, this kind, when the numbers are clearly far greater than what is happening in Iraq? The answer is obvious."

    No Rush, you dumbfuck, the answer isnt as obviously as you'd like it to be. The answer is because deaths in Iraq were direct cause of Bush's order for war. Everything else you mention is an accident, i.e. NOT a direct result of a Presidents order.

    Why is that so hard to understand? Why is that "talking out my ass" ?




By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:34 pm:

    "deaths in Iraq were direct cause of Bush's order for war."

    That is a point of view statement, not a factual statement.

    It can be argued that the order for war was Hussien's choice.
    He had 12+ years and chances to avoid it.


By heather on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:42 pm:

    now that i've started to read some of this, all i
    can say is.....

    shit spunky- point of view statement?

    is that like- why do you always make me hit
    you? why? i don't want to do it. you just make
    me so angry....


By spunky on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 01:50 pm:

    do you blame the cops for a robber being jailed?


By patrick on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 02:03 pm:

    when its questionable if the "robber" actually robbed the store and the burden of proof is on the cops to demonstrate evidence, yes, we will blame the cops.

    spunk you're allegories are such fucking primative, trivial and fundamentalist its ridiculous.


    Bush ordered soldiers to the middle east. had ne not. the 150+ would still be alive.


By Antigone on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 02:12 pm:

    dimlu, it's your fault we argue with you because you're such an idiot. You leave us no choice.

    Ya know, I could get used to such logic. :P


By heather on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 02:56 pm:

    cops have a specific job, specific precincts
    and well defined rules.


    when did we become the world-police? what
    kind of analogy is that?


By semillama on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 - 06:31 pm:

    "i am not telling you who you care about and who you don.t
    That's just cynical and sick.

    I am honestly pissed at the accusation"

    Remember when you were telling us exactly how we felt about America?