Most of what has been coming out of the NYTimes makes it sound like we''re getting our asses handed to us over there. For our 50+ dead, we have inflicted over 1200 dead and no idea how many wounded on their side.
Residents are praising the US troops and have been tortured and killed under the ""insurgent"" occupation. It''s not like the place was a garden spot before the US started bombing it. There have been numerous stories of the atrocities the terrorists were committing while they occupied the town.
I just find it interesting how different the tone of the NYTimes is from the Times of London. Honestly, from reading most of the press in the US you''d think we were being butchered.
50+ dead is a lot of dead young men and women. I don''t think that is anything to gloss over, regardless of what the Pentagon might prefer.
The NY Times article is an article about the Marines who fought and sacrificed there, not an assessment of their success. You''re comparing apples and oranges. Just because war is ""not a tea party"" you think there should be no reflection on the cost? Sorry, I can''t agree with you there. That''s all I have to say on the subject.
The NY Times article is an article about the Marines who fought and sacrificed there, not an assessment of their success. You''re comparing apples and oranges. Just because war is ""not a tea party"" you think there should be no reflection on the cost? Sorry, I can''t agree with you there. That''s all I have to say on the subject.
It is about their success, otherwise you have nothing by which to guage the loss of life. Fifty men and women loosing their lives isn''t being glossed over and it has nothing to do with politics. The article is written with a great deal of personal opinion, from an individual who isn''t a Marine and who isn''t in the firefight, try as he may, the reporter is an observer.
I have a friend outside of Fallujah as we speak and he emails me frequently, the distinction to be made is that they understand the cost and they measure their sacrifice against the big picture for perspective, marines and those in the armed services use the same formula Jason is to guage how well they fought, how many lives were saved and what the outcome was.
The article describes war, nothing more, nothing less. The reporter may paint as best as he can, a grim and loosing picture, but in the end the Marines dished out more than they ever took in terms of death and suffering.
I see nothing in the article about the ideals the Marines hold dear, the toll the insurgents pay for firing on Marines, the ground they take.
The article only paints half the picture. 50 men and women bought freedom with their lives but to say that is where the article ends denys the other half of the reason.
"We do not come in peace, we come ahead of peace to secure it's arrival by force of arms"
Location: Drinking Wine, Eating Cheese, Catching Some Rays
Monday, November 22nd, 2004 - 2:54pm
"hubbinsd wrote:
"Jason_O wrote:
Most of what has been coming out of the NYTimes makes it sound like we''re getting our asses handed to us over there. For our 50+ dead, we have inflicted over 1200 dead and no idea how many wounded on their side.
Residents are praising the US troops and have been tortured and killed under the ""insurgent"" occupation. It''s not like the place was a garden spot before the US started bombing it. There have been numerous stories of the atrocities the terrorists were committing while they occupied the town.
I just find it interesting how different the tone of the NYTimes is from the Times of London. Honestly, from reading most of the press in the US you''d think we were being butchered.
50+ dead is a lot of dead young men and women. I don''t think that is anything to gloss over, regardless of what the Pentagon might prefer.
The Pentagon doesn''t gloss over combat losses Hub. That is the job of politicians and pundits. The vast majority of men in postions of power in the military feel the losses more acutely than you do because on a daily basis they see young men and women much like the ones they are sending into harm''s way . That and the fact that at times in their careers they have been on teh broken edge of the bottle and remember how they felt being in peril themselves and about the loss of friends. I would guarantee you that you''d see no more somber a view of the human costs of war anywhere else. You may choose to be against the war and I respect that. But denigrating the military command structure for doing what they have been ordered to do does no one any good.
[edit] In the interest of remaining non P&C I''ve deleted my response. Suffice it to say, thanks for respecting my opinion anbd please don''t take my remarks as ""denigrating"" anyone. It''s the policy, not the people, that concerns me.
war is war. It''s not pretty.
Isn''t this for the P&C forums?
It was a very striking, sad, and informative article. I just read it earlier today.
I don''t think it needs to be P&C unless people can''t control themselves.
Xbox Live: hubbinsd
I don''t think it is P&C as it the article has nothing politcal in it. Just war stories.
XBox Live|Tshirts|My Music|GameFly|xfire
I do not want to see this pushed into P&C either, but I must ask, on the other hand of what?
Quote:
XBL Tag: Prederick
50+ dead is a lot of dead young men and women. I don''t think that is anything to gloss over, regardless of what the Pentagon might prefer.
Xbox Live: hubbinsd
The NY Times article is an article about the Marines who fought and sacrificed there, not an assessment of their success. You''re comparing apples and oranges. Just because war is ""not a tea party"" you think there should be no reflection on the cost? Sorry, I can''t agree with you there. That''s all I have to say on the subject.
Xbox Live: hubbinsd
It is about their success, otherwise you have nothing by which to guage the loss of life. Fifty men and women loosing their lives isn''t being glossed over and it has nothing to do with politics. The article is written with a great deal of personal opinion, from an individual who isn''t a Marine and who isn''t in the firefight, try as he may, the reporter is an observer.
I have a friend outside of Fallujah as we speak and he emails me frequently, the distinction to be made is that they understand the cost and they measure their sacrifice against the big picture for perspective, marines and those in the armed services use the same formula Jason is to guage how well they fought, how many lives were saved and what the outcome was.
The article describes war, nothing more, nothing less. The reporter may paint as best as he can, a grim and loosing picture, but in the end the Marines dished out more than they ever took in terms of death and suffering.
I see nothing in the article about the ideals the Marines hold dear, the toll the insurgents pay for firing on Marines, the ground they take.
The article only paints half the picture. 50 men and women bought freedom with their lives but to say that is where the article ends denys the other half of the reason.
"We do not come in peace, we come ahead of peace to secure it's arrival by force of arms"
The Pentagon doesn''t gloss over combat losses Hub. That is the job of politicians and pundits. The vast majority of men in postions of power in the military feel the losses more acutely than you do because on a daily basis they see young men and women much like the ones they are sending into harm''s way . That and the fact that at times in their careers they have been on teh broken edge of the bottle and remember how they felt being in peril themselves and about the loss of friends. I would guarantee you that you''d see no more somber a view of the human costs of war anywhere else. You may choose to be against the war and I respect that. But denigrating the military command structure for doing what they have been ordered to do does no one any good.
You don't have to call me Lieutenant, Rosie......
XBox Live: SwampYankee68
[edit] In the interest of remaining non P&C I''ve deleted my response. Suffice it to say, thanks for respecting my opinion anbd please don''t take my remarks as ""denigrating"" anyone. It''s the policy, not the people, that concerns me.
Xbox Live: hubbinsd
Edited because I like Hub.
You don't have to call me Lieutenant, Rosie......
XBox Live: SwampYankee68