Quoting Snark:

Quote:
The invasion was a US-British show, but the US was calling the shots.  That's reality.  The remaining forces were nickel and dime at best. 

You can say it's justified Skip, but the facts simply don't bear it out.  It was the UN's mandates that were violated and it was on the UN to enforce them if it chose to do so.  Of course it did not.

I would agree that the casualties for "our" side of the current war in Iraq are mostly American (for non-Iraq citizens) but to reduce the ultimate sacrifice of just one soldier regardless of which country he/she is from as "nickel and dime," is amazing even coming from you. Perhaps you would have a different point of view if you were the one who's job it is to inform the families. I'd hate to see the look in your face after you said your "nickel and dime" comment to just one of the mothers of a soldier who gave his or her life.

Here is the casualty list posted on Wikipedia.
Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam): 9,771 police/military killed

Coalition dead (4,186 US, 176 UK, 138 other): 4,500

Coalition missing or captured (US): 1

Coalition wounded: 30,723 US, ~400 UK

Coalition injured, diseased, or other medical:**28,645 US, 1,155 UK.

Contractors dead (US 249): 1,193

Contractors missing or captured (US 4): 18

Contractors wounded & injured: 10,569

Awakening Councils:
650+ killed

Turkish Armed Forces:
48 killed

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
I would agree that the casualties for "our" side of the current war in Iraq are mostly American (for non-Iraq citizens) but to reduce the ultimate sacrifice of just one soldier regardless of which country he/she is from as "nickel and dime," is amazing even coming from you. Perhaps you would have a different point of view if you were the one who's job it is to inform the families. I'd hate to see the look in your face after you said your "nickel and dime" comment to just one of the mothers of a soldier who gave his or her life.

Here is the casualty list posted on Wikipedia.
Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam): 9,771 police/military killed

Coalition dead (4,186 US, 176 UK, 138 other): 4,500

Coalition missing or captured (US): 1

Coalition wounded: 30,723 US, ~400 UK

Coalition injured, diseased, or other medical:**28,645 US, 1,155 UK.

Contractors dead (US 249): 1,193

Contractors missing or captured (US 4): 18

Contractors wounded & injured: 10,569

Awakening Councils:
650+ killed

Turkish Armed Forces:
48 killed

I wasn't talking about casualities Dan.  I was talking about who went in on the initial invasion.

The loss of any human life in the operation was tragic and avoidable.

Quoting sugarjoe:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Here is the casualty list posted on Wikipedia.
Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam): 9,771 police/military killed

Coalition dead (4,186 US, 176 UK, 138 other): 4,500

Coalition missing or captured (US): 1

Coalition wounded: 30,723 US, ~400 UK

Coalition injured, diseased, or other medical:**28,645 US, 1,155 UK.

Contractors dead (US 249): 1,193

Contractors missing or captured (US 4): 18

Contractors wounded & injured: 10,569

Awakening Councils:
650+ killed

Turkish Armed Forces:
48 killed

Interesting that you do not mention the Iraqi civilian casualties.

Also I think you are getting Snarks remarks out of the context. He said the 'remaining forces' were 'nickel and dime' referring to the absolute numbers of forces in this war. No connection has been made between the number of non US casualties and the term 'nickel and dimes'.

I think you mean to direct that to Wikipedia. Those are the number they report. I did not edit their list.

I took nothing out of context. We are talking about a war effort. If you reduce their effort to "nickel and dime" then you reduce their sacrifice as such.

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
I would agree that the casualties for "our" side of the current war in Iraq are mostly American (for non-Iraq citizens) but to reduce the ultimate sacrifice of just one soldier regardless of which country he/she is from as "nickel and dime," is amazing even coming from you. Perhaps you would have a different point of view if you were the one who's job it is to inform the families. I'd hate to see the look in your face after you said your "nickel and dime" comment to just one of the mothers of a soldier who gave his or her life.

Here is the casualty list posted on Wikipedia.
Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam): 9,771 police/military killed

Coalition dead (4,186 US, 176 UK, 138 other): 4,500

Coalition missing or captured (US): 1

Coalition wounded: 30,723 US, ~400 UK

Coalition injured, diseased, or other medical:**28,645 US, 1,155 UK.

Contractors dead (US 249): 1,193

Contractors missing or captured (US 4): 18

Contractors wounded & injured: 10,569

Awakening Councils:
650+ killed

Turkish Armed Forces:
48 killed

I wasn't talking about casualities Dan.  I was talking about who went in on the initial invasion.

The loss of any human life in the operation was tragic and avoidable.

Stop denying that your comment was something you should never have said. You were talking about war effort participation. Invasion force or not, this is what occurs in all war efforts. If you can say that just one soldiers combat effort is "nickel and dime" you demean them all. Never been there, have you?

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
I took nothing out of context. We are talking about a war effort. If you reduce their effort to "nickel and dime" then you reduce their sacrifice as such.

Questioning the decision to go to war in no way dimishes the sacrifices of those who fought or died.  It's simply cheap rhetoric to try and cast it as somehow "reducing their sacrifice".  Whether the decision to go to war was right or wrong they acted bravely and with honor.

You called it "nickel and dime," not me!

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
You called it "nickel and dime," not me!

Whatever Dan. 

Amazing!!! You go from calling the war effort of any of the "invasion" soldiers who were not American or British "nickel and dime" to a "whatever" position!!!!!!!

You're quite a guy!

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Many who had access to the intelligence information in this regard would disagree with your "opinion".  I think I'll trust the people who actually saw that intelligence over your view!

And as we now know many of them agreed with my "opinion" at the time.  And of course we know what really turned out to be the case.

If that were the case, we would never have gone to war.  The fact of the matter is...regardless of revisionist history...most, if not all, of our 'leaders' believed the intelligence.

Quote:
If there's a grave threat of course we act on our own.  But the evidence provided even if taken at face value didn't suggest "grave threat".

Unless you have some clearance, that you have failed to mention, I doubt very seriously that you were privy to all the evidence.  Congress gave Bush permission to go to war.  They gave him permission based on something.  Though they are trying to pretend otherwise now, they agreed that Iraq posed a threat that waranted military action.

Snark:

Here's the problem with your thinking. It's easy to play armchair quarterback since hindsight is 20/20 always. we now know historically that FDR carefully led this country to war in World War II, not only wisely but in hopes that a war footing would shake the country out of our economic doldrums. We know that LBJ invented the Gulf of Tonkin incident. We know a lot of things that are historically important and even interesting, but it is not for condemnation that we note these things. the democrats have hda a hard on fro George Bush from Day One, with all sorts lies and very few truths, including "stealing" not one but TWO elections. Shall I point at Nancy Pelosi and say that it was she who over two years ago promised to reduce the price of gasoline at the pump, and instead oversaw driving it through the ROOF, and then ask why in god's name would you vote for these people. Shall I point at the absolutely absurd comments made by Jack Murtha, not to mention his public conviction of Marines WITHOUT a trial, and wonder why in God's name would you democrat. Shall I point at the two-faced person who is your candidate for President who says one thing to the face of Pennsylvania and then belittle them at a fund-raiser in San Francisco with his fellow elitists, and wonder why in God's name would you be willing to vote for such a character-less personality. Should i wonder why, despite the evidence of corrupt land dealings in Nevada involving Senator Harry Reid why you would support this party. Or Congressman Jefferson caught with $90,000 in marked FBI funds in his FREEZER and yet still serves as a Congressman and continues to insult the intelligence of the American public by claiming innocence......PUHLEASE, amigo.

The Republican Party generally disposes of it's own trash, either voluntarily or involuntarily as the case warrants. Neither Party is politically or morally pure. But one party talks a good game about ethics and throws out al;l the lovely platitudes, and points out things that are broken and need to be fixed, but NEVER does anything, nor will they EVER do anything that runs counter to their own appetitie for infinite power, even IF it is good for the country. I will be the very first to stand up and condemn ANY Reublican misdeeds, including the two jerks in California who have been caught trying to register illegal voter registration cards, if they are guilty throw them in the slammer and let them contemplate their navels for awhile. But even their misdeeds pale in comparison to ACORN and the numerous other occassions in elections where similar Democrat misdeeds have not only been alleged but documented going back over 50 years or more, including one of the closest elections in history which we know was stolen.

So, please stop the rote condemnation and talking points. You are much smarter than that, my friend. Neither party has clean hands, to pretend otherwise is simply absurd.

Skip