More Troops died in Iraq in April than in all of original "War"
 

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...lt-380x246.jpg
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...l_040428225315

There will be more. The closer we get to the so called "hand over" the worse it is going to get. The administration did a great job planning the war but a shitty job handling the "insurgency". The terrorists and the islamic extremists have a vested interest in our failure. In my opinion the worse it gets over there the easier it will be for them to hit us here or in Europe.

I give my blessings and thanks to all who died. Bless their souls- they're all heroes in my eyes.

I do not think that we have done a bad job with the insurgency; it is just an impossible task. Cultural hatred of the US runs deep and this isn't a task that the US can complete. The sooner we hand it off, the better.

The next goverment won't be much better, but we can wash our hands of it.

As people have been saying, they didn't really have an exit strategy.

I think the Administration truly believed they would be greeted as liberating heroes rather than invaders.

The US should never have invaded. The loss of life is sad on both sides of the equation.

I think our mistake was trying to "liberate" a country filled with hatred for the west. Especially, the United States.
Don't liberate a group of people that hates you. Still, at least Sadam is out of power.

I don't think the US can ever wash it's hands of it. Maybe Americans feel this way, but that's the kind of attitude that makes many countries hate you guys so much IMO. Come in, fuck up a country and then go home...ya that's good policy:rolleyes:

It's a shame so many people have died in this war.

When Bush declared combat over in Iraq last year...I laughed. I knew there was no way that was gonna happen so soon. Of course, he had to give us a bunch of bullshit so we'd feel good about his useless war.

No iraqi asked to be "liberated in the first place", and as i recall it, the war started because of the Weapons Of Mass Destruction, the Iraqi liberation came after nothing was found.

good riddance.

I understand very well that you don't like soldiers and the fact that sometimes they have to kill people, but honestly - not everyone killed was in a combat mission - some were medics and non-riflemen. Just flat out saying good riddance is not thoughtful at all to the sacrifices that they make.

Fine, let me rephrase, good riddance to the soldiers that killed people.

I dont have anything against you personally, but we will never agree on this. I was just at the thread where the soldier got a award for killing 20 enemies in that ambush or whatever, and how everyone is praising him. Im thinking to myself ,this is unreal, this guy is a hero for killing 20 people, it just doesnt make sense to me. He is the devil in my eyes, but thats me, sorry if you dont agree.

Major combat with a legally respected enemy was over when Bush declared as such, all forms of the baath'ist regime were destroyed and the feedyaeen was no better off. Were people so ignorant as to expect no infiltration from insurgents from Iran and Syria and other western hating factions. hell I'll even concede nationalist parties in Iraq...?

What they're arguing about, Mojo, is that major fighting is still occuring just not against what we recognized as the Iraqi Army before the war...

But of course, IMO, the Iraqi army was better off running because they were an ineffective force anyways.. it was stupid of them in teh first place to declare any operations over or whatever when the real challenge consists of those who are more fanatical and motivated to fight, not cheap conscripts who hate their officers

It just seems another "mistake" by the administration, to claim an end to major conflict. It is obviously still going on. This whole fiasco is nothing but a string of mistakes, that is costing alot of people thier lives.

Iraq is the next Vietnam.

I disagree for a lot of reasons. First, Vietnam wasn't declared a mess until after six years in country - after a little more than a year, people are already whining about Iraq.

Second, we know what we want to accomplish in Iraq (establish a Democratic government and then get out), where we were just flailing around fighting with the NVA for years on end in Vietnam.

Then again, back in the Vietnam era, we didn't have the internet, CNN, ABC, CBS or any major newspaper reporters in vietnam do we?

I'm not dissing your post but back then, the people of America wasn't well informed about the Vietnam war until its veteran returned with stories about it...

We also knew what we wanted to accomplish in Vietnam. Namely: establish a Democratic government and then get out.
The question was whether that was a worthwhile and tenable goal. We eventually determined that it wasn't.
Sadly, I have a feeling we'll come to the same conclusion here in Iraq.

Agreed,

I mean I'd really like to know what the current administration defines as a successful war in Iraq right now. Frankly the chances of democracy being established and maintained in Iraq are almost non-existent.