The Numbers Ghouls: 3 Years = 2 D-Day's

Then there's the combined Union and Confederate body count for just one day of Civil War fighting-- Antietam, 1862-- 3,654. That's not counting the 17,500 wounded. Those men died or suffered serious injuries to preserve the country these morons hold so cheap.

Thanks for another thoughtful post.

Posted by Connecticut Yankee at January 3, 2007 2:18 AM

I think the body count on D-Day was higher, but wait, we're not counting the allies, right?

Anyway, I like comparisons with the American Civil War better. I mean, pick almost any big battle and there were more dead Americans in a few hours than in 3 years of fighting in Iraq.

So, was *that* worth it?

Posted by Eric Blair at January 3, 2007 5:41 AM

I'm surprised none of the TV outlets have hired Jerry Lewis and Ed McMahon to do the casualty reports.

"Yeah, oh yeah..."

Posted by Rich Fader at January 3, 2007 6:59 AM

And we only had 14,643 murders in the U.S. in eleven months of 2006, down from about 17,000 in 2005. We seem to beat the Iraqs' at everything.

Posted by RunningRoach at January 3, 2007 8:08 AM

Spending men and material in war is often necessary, but in WW2 there was a clear and quantifiable objective. There is no equivalent to the occupation of Germany and the destruction of its army as a fighting force in this current conflict.

This war does not conform to the Powell Doctrine: force, when used, should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy; there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public; and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the military is engaged.

In these circumstances the press can and will whip up hysteria with any and all news from the front. What else do you expect?

Posted by Al - London at January 3, 2007 12:00 PM

D-Day wasn't a misguided, pointless, unjust waste of time and effort lead by fools. Our effort in Iraq is. Makes a difference in how one views the casualty toll -- at least to those of us with consciences.

As for the dead at Antietam: many died there not to "preserve the country" but to divide it and maintain the right to own other humans.

Posted by mbowdoin at January 3, 2007 1:19 PM

Plus, it's only mentioned many many paragraphs down in these MSM articles (if it's mentioned at all), that 20% of US deaths in Iraq have been non-combat related.

And this is the same MSM that was so upset about body counts of the enemy in the Vietnam War--so much so that enemy body counts are no longer routinely released by our military. Therefore, the body counts that remain--the ones the MSM feasts on with barely-contained shadenfreude--are our own.

Posted by neo-neocon at January 3, 2007 1:57 PM

mbowdoin: And your proof that Iraq is what you say is what exactly?

Al-London: Exactly when are the troops supposed to be coming home from Germany? (or Japan?)

Posted by Eric Blair at January 3, 2007 3:15 PM

No one opposes the Iraq war out of mere "feelings." We oppose it because it's a gross strategic blunder. We oppose it because its apparent outcome will be the creation of a Shiite ally of Iran; because the neo-con plan to demonstrate our willingness and ability to bring the fight to the enemy has demonstrated the opposite; because the overthrow of a secular Baathist regime as a means of taking down radical Islamicists was, shall we say, counterintuitive.

Dress it up as a fine-grained forward-thrusting foreign policy if you like, and pretend that it's we who don't quite grasp the situation to your heart's content. Events have already proved you wrong.

Posted by Kyron at January 3, 2007 4:49 PM

If you think that Iraq is all that is in play in the forward movement of US foreign policy in this area, lets meet again to discuss in two years. As was once said on that holy of holy, The West Wing, "See the whole board."

Posted by Gerard Van der Leun at January 3, 2007 5:03 PM

Ghouls??!!, you mean all the alleged pro lifers who go into orgasms celebrating death and war? Go to Iraq and get killed, you stupid gung ho Nazi and stuff your crummy blog!

[Editor: This unaltered comment has been brought to you by the typist with the stuck ? and ! keys who signs himself as "Dumbo" and whose email handle is "dumass." Draw your own conclusions.]

Posted by Dumbo at January 3, 2007 5:10 PM

"[Editor: This unaltered comment has been brought to you by the typist with the stuck ? and ! keys who signs himself as "Dumbo" and whose email handle is "dumass." Draw your own conclusions.]"

Kill the messenger, don't discuss the message! After all, God is on your side, so intelligently debating a point is unnecessary, just beat, shoot and blast all your enemies. After all, anyone who disagrees with Bush and you is the enemy. Why should I reveal my bonsfides to hostile, fascistic people like you?

[Editor: Thus doth the Dumbo drive off in a blue 1969 Huff. Pssst, Dumbo, it is ... bona fides. ]

Posted by Dumbo at January 3, 2007 6:21 PM

These "people", these "Iraqis", they just slaughter each other with blind abandon. What on earth can we do?

There are largely the Shia, the Sunnis, and, the Kurds. None are fighting for Iraq, but rather their "grouping". Then there are the neighborhood militias, criminals, down to the bona-fide "terrorist cell". All of them in a mad race to see just how many civilians they can slaughter in a days time.

How is all this butchering going to manifest itself into a nation?

To hell with the Arabs! They are incapable democracy. They need the heavy hand of government about their necks or order issolves completely. We should leave now and let them have at each other in their never ending blood lust. You cannot advance such violent people a thousand years in a decade, or even two. Its not worth it to try.

Let it be known, any nation threatening us or harboring those that attack us, we will invade and leave their nation destroyed, their leadership dead. We will leave them at each other's throats and do it again and again if necessary!

Simply deny them the possiblity of insurgency against us by not being there.

Posted by Sal at January 4, 2007 1:30 AM