Surely you saw the news today:
"WASHINGTON - The number of U.S. military deaths in the Iraq war has reached 2,500, the Pentagon said on Thursday, more than three years into a conflict that finds U.S. and allied foreign forces locked in a struggle with a resilient insurgency. In addition, the Pentagon said 18,490 U.S. troops have been wounded in the war, which began in March 2003 with a U.S.-led invasion to topple President Saddam Hussein. Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed." - Yahoo! News
Any military death is one too many, but if you looks at this number - which you will see time and time again today, courtesy of the drive-by media - it averages to about 833 deaths per year. The United States had 12,658 murders last year alone. And we are talking about 2,500 deaths . . . from the armed forces . . . in an active military conflict.
Before folks start jumping off buildings, let's take a step back and put this number into context, shall we?
I'll put it into context for you: "Your president is a fuck-tard." That number could be zero if he wasn't such an a-hole.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we could have spent some of the billions of war dollars on crime-fighting in the U.S.; but nooooooo, his daddy and the rest of the fag republicans had to "Go Get'em!"
Well, I'm sure Ann Coulter thinks that all of the military widows are enjoying their husbands deaths, too. (stupid, man-looking whore)
Could someone please run over Randal, asap!
ReplyDeleteRandal, so who would you rather have fighting this war? Or are you one the real FAG side, the side that thinks we shouldn't be there and everything Bush does is wrong! Did you think getting that murdering scumbag Zarqawi was a bad idea too? Pleaaase!
ReplyDeleteThank you Wyatt. As you know, I have and do support many of our deployed military. They do not think our President is a fucktard, but I'm sure they'd love to have Randall come visit.
ReplyDeleteI do feel bad for the 2500 lost, and their families, but seriously, 2500 in 3 years ain't not bad. Look at history kiddies, 2500 people could be a bad twenty minutes in World War I or World War II.
ReplyDeleteAll those 'billions of war dollars' being wasted?
Wake up schmuck. Our country spends those billions of dollars on our war efforts and defense budgets so no one can waltz in here and make a mess of things, kind of like what we do when you piss our armed forces off.
The money is necessary, the deaths are unfortunate and terrible, but wake up hippies! We don't live in fantasy land where everyone can sit down at a table, have tea, and discuss issues. Raw naked force is sometimes the best, and only way to solve a problem. Bart Simpson said it best to all you hippies out there: "Damn liberals, we need another Vietnam to thin out the ranks.
ssssteve - We are there for the wrong reasons; it has nothing to do with freeing the Iraqi people or those phantom weapons of mass destruction.
ReplyDeleteBush doesn't do everything wrong, just most things (Did you see his Rose Garden news conference today?).
Was killing Zarqawi a bad idea? of course not, but don't tell me that it will stop the suicide bombers or the radical Islams over there.
sk - my comments have nothing to do with our troops. I support them 150%. I also don't think that they deserve to die for the wrong reasons.
biggest cuz - I think the defense budget should be huge, but spend it to support and protect the U.S. troops. You tell me why Cheney's buddies (Halliburton et al.) are getting the billions and our soldiers have to weld makeshift armor onto their Humvees.
Will you all please stop watching the Fox News Channel (the Al-Jazeera of the Bush administration).
Long live the Quick-Stop.
Well said!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteJust think Wyatt, if Murtha, Kerry, Pelosi and Feingold spent time actually working on real punishment for murder, instead of trying to give killers more rights we might some day get the murder number down to 2500 a year.
ReplyDeleteRandal, I've seen troop die for the wrong reason, because fucktards in policy decisions decide they should have loaded weapons in the middle of a civil war, or that we shouldn't directly attack warlords who don't give the same courtesy. When they die to give a country freedom, and ability to make choices for all of it's people instead of a 20% minority, it's the right reason.
Don't get me wrong, it's sad everytime one of them is killed, but it's not for the wrong reason.
I agree, Wyatt. Hmmm...which is more important to cover zealously? Roethlisberger's idiotic desire to drive a crotch rocket or children endangered by violence? Hmmmm....
ReplyDeleteOkay, kids. While I do not censor comments, "frak" tard is pushing the envelope here. My aunt reads this, so clean it up, or you're off!
ReplyDeleteThat being said, while I do not censor comments (except for blatant personal attacks of language) you should all know this: Randal doesn't get it. And by "it," I mean SYLG. He doesn't get it. He never did. Hell, for the first 11 months, he never even read this blog - and he's family! Nine times out of ten, he makes comments to rile people up - and you let him get to you. Don't.
End of rant.
so when's "Randal" gonna start a blog?
ReplyDeleteWyatt - you see, I DO get it. It's pretty obvious that some of my comments are posted to stir the pot (e.g. - All cops like jelly donuts.).
ReplyDeleteEveryone has 'lived' in this blog with little to no disagreements for a long time. Seriously, take a look at some of the responses; there's a lot of butt-smooching going on; Wyatt's butt is big enough, but c'mon. Some of the comments should have "Shiny, Happy People" playing in the background.
So many of you get all crazy-mad when someone disagrees with Wyatt. Perhaps Wyatt is incorrect or perhaps there is more than one point of view in a discussion.
Just trying to open some of your minds, kind with a devil's advocate approach.
Oh, and for the record, I've only personally attacked one person here...and that's because she really is a tool.
Oh, and Randal will not be starting a blog; I have to work at the video store and then I have a hockey game at 2 o'clock.
Well done, Randall. Got 'em to put down their freshly-printed copy of the Limbaugh letter for a minute!
ReplyDeleteWyatt, I apologize about the language. But that's all;)
ReplyDeleteIt's 2500 people killed for the wrong reason. The war is a farce designed to make you forget about Bin Laden(why does Bush say he can't hide? He obviously can do it very well). It's to make you think that something is being done to protect us, when nothing has changed at all. I get accused of not supporting our troops, which I can't understand since I'm the one who wants them to not be killed in some shithole country for no reason.
ReplyDeleteOr do you still believe the weapons of mass destruction thing?
Exactly. And if we were in the business of liberating people of their country's dictators, we'd have to be in a lot more countries than we're in right now, unseating a lot nastier leaders than Saddam was. If we really gave a rat's rear end about liberating people, we'd have had a force in Darfur about three years ago. And the Congo three years before that - probably the biggest case of mass genocide since the holocaust. Point being that those who think we're in Iraq for any reason other than to liberate their oil, they have the wool pulled over their eyes.
ReplyDeleteBut to someone who's been hanitized, you're not allowed to support the troops without agreeing to why they're there to begin with. Can't say that if it was one of my sons who was taken out by a roadside bomb in that s-hole, I'd be saying the 2500 dead is a "light" number by any means.
grimjack, vincent....is that fresh air I smell?
ReplyDeleteoh, wait, I just farted.
I didn't even have to pull your finger!
ReplyDeleteGJ, you're accused of not supporting the soldiers if you don't support their mission, which is what they believe in. Have you talked to any of the soldiers, read any milblogs? Most of them will tell you that they're fighting there so they won't have to fight here. And the 2500 will not be forgotten nor do I think of it lightly. They're real people with real families, just like all the other war dead. When a reporter gets killed it's
ReplyDeletebig news for days. Yet, when A soldier is killed it's barely mentioned by the MSM. I think about the soldiers everyday.
And if you've looked at any pictures of Afghanistan, it isn't hard to see why OBL is so hard to find, but just like Zarqawi, his clock is ticking.
Linda- I agree with one thing: When soldiers are killed it should be headline news. Every day, with pictures and stories. Then show the funerals. Maybe it will make more people say "What the hell are we doing there".
ReplyDeleteGJ, the only reason funerals should be shown is out of respect. Otherwise, you're no different than the weasals on the air. Where should we be? We were pretty much sitting at home with folded hands during Clinton's rule, and the twin towers were attacked the first time. USS Cole, etc. If he had shown some backbone the second atack and destruction of the towers might not have happened. He was more concerned with what was going on in his pants to take care of the real business.
ReplyDeleteAnd btw, we read Wyatt's blog because we like him and his humor. I respect his job, just like the soldiers. There is a difference between sarcastic humor and just being mean and calling people names.
linda- I actually haven't called you any names (although I'm a weasal?).
ReplyDeleteIraq didn't knock the Twin Towers down. They had nothing to do with it. We should not be there. You have completely bought into the farce that is our invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Out of respect and support of our local gunfighter, I'll move this over to my blog. Feel free to comment there.
weasals on air=msm
ReplyDeletewasn't calling you a name caller
I tried to say good luck with the baby on your site but blogger won't let me without an "account" and not sure I want one.
Actually, there is a very convincing case that the weapons were moved into Syria.
ReplyDeleteThe President actually once reiterated that idea in an interview, but he has since towed the "common knowledge" position.
Also, see Saddam's Secrets by General George Sada.
Grim - You're right: Iraq NEVER had WMD's. Those Kurds just died from Randal's rectal gas. As for bin Laden, everyone of your bleeding heart liberals said we wouldn't get Zarqawi, either. First, he was an evil mastermind that played the U.S. like a fiddle. He would never be caught. Then the day we caught him, your pals at CNN said he wasn't a big player to begin with. Unlike John Kerry, you can't have it both ways.
ReplyDeleteVinnie - Are you taking Jameson's shots again? Your pals Kerry and Murtha are crying about Iraq. How much support do you think Bush would garner for going into the Congo and Darfur? I am so glad we liberated Iraq's oil. How much are you paying a gallon this week? Maybe Halliburton is hoarding it for the wealthiest 1%? Whew!
Grim - "Iraq didn't knock the Twin Towers down. They had nothing to do with it." Turn off MSNBC for a minute and read "The War Against America: Saddam Hussein's War Against America, by Laurie Mylroie - a former Clinton advisor to Iraq. As Randal would say, "Just trying to open some of your minds." Of course, you won't read it. Your mind is made up.
Damian - Don't bother, they tuned us out. Not even the admission of Hussein's Air Vice Marshal that he transported WMD's to Syria would convince them. It's all a vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
Randal - You're not even worth a response.
Turn away Earpster--I'm not attacking anyone, see (turning hands over)no weapons!
ReplyDeleteI'd rather be called a tool, by a fool
than to ever let slip from my lips
the saying the troops detest hearing:
I support you but not your mission