Escalation.
By on Sep 24th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Bush Legacy
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Franken
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Krauthammer
Kyl
LGBT
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Wow! Look at that Progress! Progressive escalation, that is.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:03 pmAll these graphs are giving me hives.
Oh, it's not the graphs. It's the apples and oranges that just got spilled on the thread.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:08 pmSurge is workin', Cletus! I done seent it on the foKKKs "news"!
September 24th, 2007 at 10:09 pmStill less casualties than WWII, Korea, or Vietnam.
Comment by Jake D. — September 24, 2007 @ 10:06 pm
Um, yeah, so was 9/11 so I guess that's no big deal either.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:24 pmhmmm...general petraeus.....tell us again where the surge is working?
September 24th, 2007 at 10:28 pmStill less casualties than WWII, Korea, or Vietnam.
Comment by Jake D. — September 24, 2007 @ 10:06 pm
Since Iraq's population is 27 million, it is not possible to inflict as many casualties on them as WWII (40 million). We have made 20% of their people dead or refugees. What if 60,000,000 Americans were killed or made refugees? Would that be all right with you, Jake?
What if one in eight American children died before the age of five? Would that be all right with you, Jake? What if the US became the second-worst failed state in the world?
By your logic, it is all right for the Nazis to kill 6 million Jewish civilians---because it was not as many as the Russians they killed.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:58 pm8 - Keith, you're just not using "idiot math". If you did, the whole thing would make perfect sense.
September 24th, 2007 at 11:15 pm#9 tombaker, you are on a roll!!!!
ROFL!!!!
September 24th, 2007 at 11:24 pmIf you really want the war to end, don't vote for Nancy Pelosi. Vote for me if you live in San Francisco:
http://www.cindyforcongress.org
September 24th, 2007 at 11:45 pmSee? There is a decrease between May and August of this year.
Success!!
/sarcasm off
September 24th, 2007 at 11:57 pmWow! That was really Cindy? I admire what she has done.
September 24th, 2007 at 11:58 pmWhat else could the surge have accomplished besides more killing? This is what Bush and his lap dog general call success.
Jake is only doing what he does every day. He tries to get people off topic with his idiotic remarks, and guess what? It works every day.
September 25th, 2007 at 12:10 amJake makes me laugh every day (in the "at him" way, not the "with him" way). i'm a mean lefty, cause i laugh at idiots.
September 25th, 2007 at 12:45 amAs the administration begins bringing home the troops they send for this "Surge", they'll aslo reduce the troop numbers in the field.
The good part of this is that will reduce the casualty rates. The better part (if you're a "Fred Head") is you can point to that reduction as another indication the surge worked.
Yea us!
September 25th, 2007 at 1:00 amJakey, The word is "fewer" when it is a count noun, not "less". Moreover, the psycholgical casualties are greater than any other war we've fought due to the lack of downtime for troops which your coven is so keen to maintain. Perhaps the hardest element of all for our troops is that there is no "enemy" despite the repated mantra of the mouthpieces of the right--almost anyone and everyone is a danger, because it is a CIVIL WAR and everybody is grinding an axe and almost everybody there wants US out!
September 25th, 2007 at 6:39 amhttp://www.islamicmediacity.com/ cms_files/ news_images/ 1190391250.jpg
there you go jake…. the democratically selected leader of free Iraq shaking hands with the president of Iran… theres your “Iraqi freedom†for you, bought and paid for with american blood and treasure… I guess at least one good thing about saddam hussien was that he wouldnt be caught dead shaking hands with the leader of Iran.
Jake "it hasnt killed as many people as vietnam so it must be a good idea" Dort strikes again...
September 25th, 2007 at 6:58 amit is true, the death count in which you all speak of so easily has escalated since the beginning. I have been here for 12 months, and have seen it with my own eyes, many of which were dear friends. But please understand with all your education, and refinement, that this is a struggle to preserve something that has been bled for time and time again. Not a count of numbers, or illogical comparisons between wars. We are not fighting a uniformed foe, we are fighting a mentality; one which would justify shooting you all dead where you stand for the mere words you have spoken. So please, as difficult as this war has been, understand that there is no formulaic plan. And statements such as these, provide support to the mentality in which me and my brothers fight against. This is a war of winning the people over, and if you don't support us, then by default you are against us. .....i mean no disrespect, God bless America
September 25th, 2007 at 8:29 amMost of the "escalation" appears to be toward civilian casualties. A formidable accomplishment, when you consider that so many civilians are fleeing the country. More of them are getting killed while there are less of them to kill. Remarkable.
September 25th, 2007 at 9:04 amThis is a war of winning the people over, and if you don’t support us, then by default you are against us. …..i mean no disrespect, God bless America
Comment by timf4072 — September 25, 2007 @ 8:29 am
You are confusing Afghanistan and Iraq. One war was to go after Osama Bin Forgotten, the other was started for Lies ( OIL).
And the "you are with us, or against us" bullshit is disrespectful of the Constitution and the citizens of the US.
September 25th, 2007 at 9:18 amwow!...it doesn't take long for a retort, but im pretty sure i haven't confused the two theaters, im in iraq and am out in the fight every day. Where do you guys get your information?
September 25th, 2007 at 9:29 amBut please understand with all your education, and refinement, that this is a struggle to preserve something that has been bled for time and time again.
The stability of the petrodollar?
We are not fighting a uniformed foe, we are fighting a mentality; one which would justify shooting you all dead where you stand for the mere words you have spoken. So please, as difficult as this war has been, understand that there is no formulaic plan. And statements such as these, provide support to the mentality in which me and my brothers fight against. This is a war of winning the people over, and if you don’t support us, then by default you are against us. …..i mean no disrespect, God bless America
Comment by timf4072 — September 25, 2007 @ 8:29 am
Thank you for your service. I just don't know what it is you're really fighting for. What mentality are you speaking of, exactly? Because from everything I see, you and your fellow servicemen are refereeing a war between competing mafia groups. You're not fighting to preserve our freedoms, because our freedoms at home are not affected by the outcome in Iraq. You're not fighting "terrorism," because you can't fight a technique. So what is it?
If there is a mentality you're fighting, it's the age-old quest for power and domination that has marked human history since the beginning of recorded history. Whether we leave Iraq tomorrow or in ten years, that mentality will still be strong in the region unless there is political progress, because the war you're fighting can not be won militarily.
I hope you don't interpret these statements as being "against you." I'm not. I just don't think your life - and the lives of your fellow service members - should be lost in a quest for empire.
September 25th, 2007 at 10:14 amAnd who takes the real brunt of the violence, the innocent civilian population. GWB should be sooo proud.
September 25th, 2007 at 11:19 amYou’re not fighting to preserve our freedoms, because our freedoms at home are not affected by the outcome in Iraq. You’re not fighting “terrorism,†because you can’t fight a technique. So what is it?
Comment by toasterhead — September 25, 2007 @ 10:14 am
after experiencing all that i have here, i do believe that the outcome here will affect our freedoms at home. We enjoy so much freedom in the states that it has blinded many to the dangers of a small group facilitating terrorist acts. Acts which if not confronted elsewhere (not in the US), could very easily begin to make their way to "battle" against societies which they deem "evil". It seems we are a target of such groups, and many of these groups are here in iraq, as well as other places. If we let this place fall into chaos...it will be a victory for these terrorist groups. And if we pull out and leave, this will be just that...chaos, and breeding grounds for more terrorists....i have seen just that happen in the anbar province. But we didn't let up there, and now it is on its way up. THe people there never stopped thanking us....we will find a way through all of this...it is a very difficult situation.
September 25th, 2007 at 11:36 amThe stability of the petrodollar?
Comment by toasterhead — September 25, 2007 @ 10:14
September 25th, 2007 at 11:49 amWhat makes you think this about Oil? I have not heard that in a long time, and i have seen no evidence here that would point to that. Is there something in particular that makes you think that? What i was referring to was the inate right to preserve liberty in our nation....through taking the fight against this terrorist mentality to its origin, rather then waiting to address it once it is a stateside problem.
26- if they told you guys that it was for oil, then even more than 72% of you would think we should not be there now. it's just "morale management".
September 25th, 2007 at 12:31 pm27....who would "they" be? Do you think before you post these.....or does it just come spilling out?
September 25th, 2007 at 12:49 pm"they" who sent you to Iraq. or did your batallion just take a vote and decide to go over there yourselves?
i've spent 40 years thinking about a lot of things, son.
September 25th, 2007 at 2:11 pmWhat makes you think this about Oil? I have not heard that in a long time, and i have seen no evidence here that would point to that. Is there something in particular that makes you think that?
The Iraq Hydrocarbon law and the western oil companies who are chomping at the bit waiting for its passage so they can sign PSAs with the Oil Ministry.
The fact that Saddam Hussein switched to selling oil in Euros in 2000.
The fact that the U.S. military prioritized oil wells and facilities over critical infrastructure and munitions dumps in the initial invasion.
Just a few things...
What i was referring to was the inate right to preserve liberty in our nation….through taking the fight against this terrorist mentality to its origin, rather then waiting to address it once it is a stateside problem.
Comment by timf4072 — September 25, 2007 @ 11:49 am
The origin of the "terrorist mentality," whatever that is, was never Iraq. Invading a country that posed no threat to us has done nothing to protect our right to preserve liberty in our nation.
September 25th, 2007 at 2:19 pm