-4

I am a soldier who lost a leg in iraq.
I came back home in darkness with so many shrouds without anybody noticing us.
I have made a vow to myself to reveal the lies of those who robbed my life.
here is the truth they are trying to conceal from you


As casualties mount in Iraq, so has the monetary cost of the war. The military is now spending more than $5.8 billion each month, top officials told Congress this week.
..
The Army, with about 110,000 soldiers on the ground in Iraq, has a monthly "burn rate" of $4.7 billion.
The Air Force is spending about $800 million monthly.
The Marines, which are spearheading the fighting in Fallujah, had an average monthly war cost of $300 million


The US goverment uses lots of methods to reduce the number of victims:

Only American soldiers are counted into the statistics, and even in this category they don't give the exact numbers

And what if we knew that the US government gave thousands of non-Americans promises of a citizenship if they fight in Iraq

and what if we knew that The US governenment uses thousands of american, british, and other bounty killers who work for the "special security companies" for high salaries and the US government isn't responsible for their safety

Number of killed soldiers till now : 9,500

Number of wounded soldiers till now : 24,000

number of deserters : 8,000

war cost till now :
http://costofwar.com/

number of bounty killers in Irak : 27,000

number of bounty killers killed till now : 16,300

Iraqi daily average attacks : 80-90

and u can get a look on this information urself usin this link :

http://cia.555mb.com/

and here


The Ultimate Deception?
By Jim Lampley
June 18, 2005
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/jim-lampley/the-ultimate-deception_2838.html

Press Reports on U.S. Casualties: About 17,000 Short, UPI Says
By Mark Benjamin, UPI
September 15, 2004
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000630846

20,802 US Soldiers Heavily WoundedBy Raed
November 24, 2004
http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com/2004/11/20802-us-soldiers-heavily-wounded.html

Their Blood Is In Bush's Hand
(Flash Presentation)
http://www.bushflash.com/ma.html

Murder By Numbers
(Flash Presentation)
http://66.230.230.110/geeklog/public_html/staticpages/index.php?page=20040602204332930

Maping Death: Iraq War Fatalities: By day: By Country
March 20, 2003 - June 20, 2005
(Flash Presentation)
http://www.obleek.com/iraq/index.html

The Soldier's Heart
PBS Frontline
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/heart/view/

Iraq: The Uncounted
November 21, 2004
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/19/60minutes/main656756.shtml

Stockpiling the Wounded from Iraq
Inside Walter Reed Hospital
By Nicole Colson
June 06, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/colson06062005.html

This was a very good read from a year ago.

The warmongers 'love' the troops, until they come home . . . damaged
By Doris H. Colmes
June 29, 2004
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/12573

http://www.americanprogress.org
http://www.awitness.org/journal/real_iraq_war.html
http://icasualties.org/oif/
http://antiwar.com/casualties/list.php
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/resources.asp
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/index.html
http://www.crisispapers.org/topics/iraq.htm

Votes + Comments
bahhhhhhhhh!
get your ¨facts¨ straight
keep your terrorist sympathies where they belong: with the Osama news network
8
Contributors
22
Replies
23
Views
12 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by deonnanicole
Featured Replies
  • 1

    ah, another terrorist sympathiser trying to turn Iraq into Vietnam. Like it or not bozo, but there are less people dead in Iraq from violence than there are people dead from traffic accidents. In fact, the number of troops hurt in Iraq due to accidents that would happen in peacetime … Read More

1

ah, another terrorist sympathiser trying to turn Iraq into Vietnam.

Like it or not bozo, but there are less people dead in Iraq from violence than there are people dead from traffic accidents.
In fact, the number of troops hurt in Iraq due to accidents that would happen in peacetime is higher than the number hurt in Iraq (per 1000 people).
The daily casualty count due to Saddam's violence against his own people was several times higher than the number of people being hurt right now (and most of those are terrorists).
Of course you don't want to acknowledge that because it doesn't fit your agenda.

And then we don't even mention the good our troops do there.
Building schools, hospitals, providing education and healthcare to scores of people that never had it before because Saddam didn't like them.
But then you don't want that known do you?

Because all you want is to turn the world against the US and in favour of Muslim fundamentalists, to establish Muslim law as the law of the land all over the world and mullahs as the rulers of the planet.

Votes + Comments
!!!
0

I don't understand you people about the number of casaulties in this war. If you think it's so high, then grab a book and or goto one of your one sided websites and look at the numbers from the past...Compared to the past this is one of the most succesful wars of all time, that is of course based upon number of deaths...That's what you've implied matters most.

I'm sorry to hear you say that you lost a leg, if that is infact true. I personally don't believe you. I think your the same idiot that came in here advertising terrorist propaganda. I don't think a real soldier would be complaining and "downing" america in a time like this. If you were really over there and saw what saddam was doing then you wouldn't be opening your mouth.


You need to go live in another country. When that country is in political crisis, suffereing from natural disaster, or in financial trouble, do you know who is willing to jump in and help when no one else will? Yeah, that's right America.

I hate you dummies that find all the bad things happening which don't outway the good, but will never let the good be known. And who is concealing this information from us? Google can turn that crap up in milliseconds, and I can flip to any news channel and find the same stuff(you know because they are interested in showing all the bad as you are)

Geez, there is so much I want to say to you, but I like this forum too much to get into anymore trouble with people like you.
Again, I still think you're the same dude that posted those terrorist pictures in another thread(except with a different user name). Even if you aren't I don't believe you were in the war, nor do I believe you lost your leg and you won't be able to convince me otherwise.

0

I don't understand you people about the number of casaulties in this war. If you think it's so high, then grab a book and or goto one of your one sided websites and look at the numbers from the past...Compared to the past this is one of the most succesful wars of all time, that is of course based upon number of deaths...That's what you've implied matters most.

Soldiers killed in Iraq:1752

Civilians killed in Iraq:25814

Soldiers killed in World War two in America alone:405,399

So, as you can see, with all the progress that we are making compared to a lot of wars, this war has been extremely succesful. If you are indeed a real soldier and have lost your leg, then please accept my apologies for showing you the facts.

0

Enough with the abuse!!!!

:mad::evil::mad::evil:

Disagree with comments someone makes but there is no need whatsoever to call someone names when doing so. That sort of behaviour only belittles the argument that you try to put forward yourself.

People are entitled to hold rigid and conflicting views, and to express them. they are also entitled to expect courtesy in the way that others put forward their disagreement. If anybody here finds it impossible to put forward their views without being abusive or discourteous then I'd suggest they don'y bother. Member accounts WILL be suspended if such behaviour is continually exhibited!


Comparison of statistics gathered during WWII are rather meaningless for the purposes of this particular discussion, by the way. They demonstarte nothing whatsoever.

For the record, I'm Australian, I supported the Iraq war and still do so. Call me stupid, because the Iraq war was NEVER about defeating terrorists or protecting the world against 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Regardless, I believe that brutal, hideous regimes such as that of Saddam Hussein SHOULD be toppled by the collective efforts of the free world.

I believe the Iraq war to be now over and won! I believe that we in the so-called 'free World' have a collective responsibility to continue peace keeping activities in the region. Note that I said 'PEACE KEEPING'. We are no longer engaged in a 'war' against a tangible foe of any description! Even El-Queda is no longer an 'organisation' at which we can strike! It has metamorphosed into an ideology rather than an organisation. The various 'cells' of the movement can and do act independently of one another without ever having any contact in any way whatsoever. They are simply groups of private individuals following a belief system! That 'belief system' is NOT Islam, and anyone who thinks so is foolishly ill-informed.


Regardless of my support, then and now, I am not so blind or stupid as to believe that any other outcome in relation to Terrorism other than an increase in it was ever going to be the outcome of the Iraq war. The intelligence was available prior to the Iraq War's commencement to indicate clearly that International Terrorism would INCREASE as a result of it! Sobeit. It is a blight on humanity that always needed to be brought out into the open and confronted. Ultimately, military 'might' cannot EVER defeat it!

We need to get stronger in our collective stance against inhumanity. We need to get serious in our efforts to bring resources to the less privileged areas of the World, and to share our wealth rather than hoard it and deny others.

0

Enough with the abuse!!!!

:mad::evil::mad::evil:

Disagree with comments someone makes but there is no need whatsoever to call someone names when doing so. That sort of behaviour only belittles the argument that you try to put forward yourself.

was it the "x1000" because I dont even think its possible, actually I dont even think it makes sense.

Anyways, im for the cause, just dont draft me because I will move to Canada :p

0

Regardless of my support, then and now, I am not so blind or stupid as to believe that any other outcome in relation to Terrorism other than an increase in it was ever going to be the outcome of the Iraq war.

And most of it brought about by our own media which make (potential) terrorists see the west as weak, divided, ready to give in to any demand no matter how absurd if they only destroy our image of invulnerability.

United we stand, divided we fall. When did we forget that lesson, or more properly when did the media forget that lesson and started to actively work against the best interests of the people they're supposedly serving with information?

US troops now drop footballs and running shoes from their helicopters instead of the handgranades and poison gas Saddam's forces used.
Where is that reported in our media? Where are the stories of villages and towns where people have a future again?

0

Cat no one is calling you stupid for saying the war was not based upon terrorist. I agree with you, BUT no matter what the reason it had to be done. I hear people complain about: "well, these other countries do this and that, why aren't we there?".. The US will do what it can and knows it's limitations. If we help one country(iraq) then that's one country we made a difference to. To sit back and watch what was going on is JUST AS BAD as what saddam was doing.

Someone who took the time to write all that junk has posted it in more than one forum and will expect comments like this, and may not even look back at the comments after they post. I don't understand why this person posted this in a tech forum????? Would it not make more sense to post it in a government/war debate forum?

Anyways, you're talking about the abuse will get accounts suspended, but I take great offence to the one sided propaganda garbage that he posted. Name calling means nothing to me, but something like this just down right pisses me off, and my views should be allowed as anyones in a topic like this. Maybe you don't understand because you don't like in the US, but I just get so pissed when I see topics complianing about the war, or even our president because they don't even have the facts right or all of the facts.

If comments is not allowed that are abusive(even though I think his was the most abusive of any of us) in a topic like this, then I will gladly take a suspension setting him straight even though I would hate to get banned or suspended. This guy was not asking for opinions, it's not like he ask: " do you guys think the war in iraq is right?"..That would have been a fine friendly topic, but this was nothing of the sort.

Forgive me for posting my views.

0

His post is not abusive. It simply makes claims that you disagree with.

Your suggestion that I possibly can't be understanding because I don't live in the US is patronising in the extreme! And the 'name calling' is the only thing that really matters to me in my role as moderator here. It won't be happening ;)

Do you honestly not realise that your own rigid views can also be seen as 'one sided propaganda garbage'? Different strokes for different folks, and people have conflicting views. Perhaps some people need to realise and accept that.

0

Do you honestly not realise that your own rigid views can also be seen as 'one sided propaganda garbage'? Different strokes for different folks, and people have conflicting views. Perhaps some people need to realise and accept that.

Mine are not one sided. I've watched news specials that show everything bad and news specials that show everything good. I've researched the internet, but that doesn't matter. I never got into any big statistical information like he did. When I post a hundred links and a bunch of clearly one sided information, then you can say my views are one sided garbage. But none of that was propanganda, and if you think so, grab a dictionary. Remember that I did not post a thread containing my views as did he and never have I, so if you say that what I posted was propanganda, then you obviously don't know what your talking about.

Do you not think what you just posted was abusive and questioning? I don't think so but it wasn't much different than what I said.

And I do not disagree with many of the statistics he posted, I disagree with(not just because it's my so called views) his purpose. I think his post was abusive in a way, but if don't want to think that then that's your opinion, but the more you post the more I can see you don't understand. Maybe you can call it annoyance, but I wish people would shut their mouth about the war, this country, and the president. People who complain of such don't know much. I hear people complain about what the president is doing, but they don't realize how powerless he is and that most decisions made reflect back on him even though he's not the one who made them. That's another topic I wont get into though, just giving an example.

0

I'm sorry, but if we are to presume that someone's purpose is to offend when they have made no comment or statement to that effect then we might as well disallow all discussion no matter what the stance taken.

The post above simply presents information and discussion pieces. There are a lot of people in this world who agree with such opinion, and there are a lot who disagree. Are you arguing that people should not have the freedom to express opinion? I'm merely insisting that when such expression takes place here courtesy is extended in the way it is expressed.

0

Are you arguing that people should not have the freedom to express opinion?

Yes cat, that is exactly what I'm doing. :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: What are you thinking dude?

Take a look at his topic title and see if he didn't mean anything by his post other than to present information. It seems YOU are the one limiting expression of opinion. I'm just expressing my opinion on his purpose and information. Everytime we have a debatable topic you're always the one telling me I can't say this, you shouldn't say that, that was uncalled for. If someone should complain about expressing an opinion it's against YOU.

I still don't think you undestand at all. When someone posts a topic like that, they should be well ready to take "heat" and quit frankly, if this guy was serious about getting his point across he would be right back in here in this discussion.

Take this for example, what if someone started a thread about what they thought we should do in the war. they would tell people the government is doing a terrible job because they believe we should just "blow" these terrorist countries off the map. Now do you think he/she would piss people off with what he/she posted? I gurantee that you would have anit war people yelling their head off, but it's their opinion and I gurantee that you would not complain about what would be said because you seem to support your own side. By the way, I don't believe that I'm just giving an example that hopefully you can understand.

It's funny, you just posted earlier:" and people have conflicting views. Perhaps some people need to realise and accept that.". Why don't you take your own advise. I respect all peoples views and if I want to disagree with them, I can and you can't stop me. If you want to ban me because you disagree with my views, then fine. Anyways, I don't see what you found so bad about my post. I never directly assaulted him, I directed everything(that could be taken conflicting) towards a group.

0

For the record, I'm Australian, I supported the Iraq war and still do so. Call me stupid, because the Iraq war was NEVER about defeating terrorists or protecting the world against 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Regardless, I believe that brutal, hideous regimes such as that of Saddam Hussein SHOULD be toppled by the collective efforts of the free world.

Here, here...

Most of the objections to the war and the subsequent peace-keeping actions came and are coming from those interests that profited from the ill-gotten schemes of each of the rulers of Iraq and other countries in the region. The US and some of its former representatives are also not blameless in these activities. Thank goodness Mr. Bush ignored all of the money-hungry Alpha Hotels out there and did something about the problem...

As for the terrorists, they have been plying their wares in the region for centuries and are not likely to stop. They do it to each other and have only just begun to do it to the US and its allies.

0

I still don't think you undestand at all. When someone posts a topic like that, they should be well ready to take "heat" and quit frankly, if this guy was serious about getting his point across he would be right back in here in this discussion.

Argue all you like. It's not going to stop the fact that if the 'heat' you mention is in the form of personal abuse it is NOT going to be acceptable on a forum such as this.

THAT'S the point being missed here. The only thing wrong in this topic is that some people have earlier resorted to name-calling, and that the view has been expressed that name-calling is acceptable. It is not.

0

Where in my post is it more unacceptable than other peoples? I know you hate me but at least treat me fair. You complain all the time about my posts but take a look at other peoples for once. I was reading the post about girl trouble and could not believe how you took one persons post to be bad(which in no way was it) and then someone turned around with a comment that I would have took much more worse but you didn't even say anything. I think bad language is worse than name calling, and I've seen you say things such as: " why the f*** did you open your mog"... What kind of hypocrite are you?

0

No personal feelings whatsoever enter the situation. My comments are directed toward the smooth operation of Daniweb, where personal abuse is not acceptable. People who post here should not have to contend with being called 'bozo' or 'idiot' or anything of the ilk.

0

People who post here should not have to contend with being called 'bozo' or 'idiot' or anything of the ilk.

What about being asked " Why the f*** did you open your mog?"

You know, that would really bother me if it was said to me, even over being called a bozo or idiot(which wouldn't bother me).

So, I want to ask: If this guy didn't mean anything by what he was doing, then why the f*** did he open his mouth?

0

Your question makes very little sense.

You may as well ask "Why did someone start a topic about Recipes?" or "Why did someone start a topic about favourite games?" or query any of the other topics people have started in the Lounge section.

I'm sorry if it upsets some people, but the Lounge section is NOT some exclusive 'club' where only people holding particular views may participate. It is perfectly permissible for people to object to military intervention and for them to express those views.

Mild oaths are aceptable here when used for emphasis and this has been strongly endorsed by the owner of the site. Excessive and/or gratuitous use of obscenity is not. There is a distinction. But personally directed abuse is not acceptable in any form at all.

The example you've cited above ( a comment made by myself for the benefit of others reading this) was a question posed to someone who posted a very patronising comment which was denigrating to women, obviously acknowledged its offensive nature, and then sought to 'justify' the comment by adding a statement that offense was not intended. I strongly queried the sense of doing that. Surely if it is understood that a comment is offensive then the comment should not be made!

The answer, of course, to your question "why the f*** did he open his mouth?" is simply that he had a view to express. Regardless of whether or not I agree with that view, I am very pleased that it was put forward in a 'matter-of-fact' manner and completely free of heated language.

-1

I'm sorry if it upsets some people, but the Lounge section is NOT some exclusive 'club' where only people holding particular views may participate.

How contridicting. You just were talking about freedom of expression and how he had the right to post what he did, but now you've implicitly said he should not have done it(that was obvious from the start but you couldn't see that)

The example you've cited above ( a comment made by myself for the benefit of others reading this) was a question posed to someone who posted a very patronising comment which was denigrating to women, obviously

Hmm, as this topic is not denigrating to the US and it's government. I guess that makes the people who name called in the right, or a better way of putting it is the comment you made you find fit because YOU made it. I thought that was one of the rudest comments I've seen in here myself. Actually, his comment was very factual and is easily proven correct in this society. I didn't see any denigration in it myself, but again, the only thing that matters is what you think, no one else.

Surely if it is understood that a comment is offensive then the comment should not be made!

Don't tell other people this unless you are willing to do the same. Remember that just because you're a moderator and you say something doesn't mean it's not an offensive comment.

Excessive and/or gratuitous use of obscenity is not. There is a distinction.

I think obscenity and name calling are on the same level myself, but don't kill me for me thinking that.

Remember that what's not offensive to one person might be offensive to another. I've never said anything conflicting in posts that are not conflicting.

1

Actually, his comment [about women] was very factual and is easily proven correct in this society. I didn't see any denigration in it myself, but again, the only thing that matters is what you think, no one else..

Just because such comments are common does not lend them credibility or acceptance by intelligent human beings. Your failure to comprehend the denigration, as you put it, and the commonality of such commentary is what most of us here find unacceptable and incredible.

What is more, the value of the opinions, on any subject, of those who express or condone such comments, is reduced to near zero!

I've never said anything conflicting in posts that are not conflicting.

Perhaps you should review your posts...

Votes + Comments
indeed
0

Perhaps you should review your posts...

Perhaps you should review the threads in which my conflicting posts are made. It's like I said, I don't make conflicting posts unless it's a conflicting thread. If you can find a thread that disproves what I have said, please do. Otherwise I'm getting tired of argueing in this thread because I did nothing.

0

To me it seems pretty simple...there is absolutely no need for name calling. While some people may not mind being called a "bozo" or an "idiot", others, myself being included, would certainly take offense to being called that or anything else that is demeaning. I don't understand why such a big deal is being made....simply go by the rules of no name calling, state what you believe or whatever your opinion is on the topic, and be done with it. Like another poster stated earlier, when you take to name calling and the such, it does nothing at all for helping your statement or you opinion on something.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.