March 24, 2008 6:20 AM
Iraq war deaths reach grim milestone - 4,000
The helmet of Maj. General Andrew Olmsted rests atop his rifle after his funeral in January.
U.S. deaths in Iraq have reached 4,000 after a roadside bomb killed four American soldiers in Baghdad.
An Iraqi military spokesman said Monday that troops had found rocket launching pads in different areas in predominantly Shiite eastern Baghdad that had been used by extremists to fire on the Green Zone, which houses the U.S. Embassy and the Iraqi government headquarters."We hope to deal with this issue professionally to avoid civilian casualties," said spokesman Qassim al-Moussawi.
The four soldiers with Multi-National Division - Baghdad were on a patrol when their vehicle was struck at about 10 p.m. Sunday in southern Baghdad, the U.S. military said. Another soldier was wounded in the attack - less than a week after the fifth anniversary of the conflict.
Navy Lt. Patrick Evans, a military spokesman, expressed condolences to all the families of soldiers killed in Iraq, saying each death is "equally tragic."
"There have been some significant gains. However, this enemy is resilient and will not give up, nor will we," he said. "There's still a lot of work to be done."
Seventeen graves in Fort Logan Cemetery are the resting place of men killed in the Iraq war. James B. Meadow reports on the simple inscriptions on the markers.
The short eulogies that waft through Fort Logan come from the headstones, from the flowers and the keepsakes that hug the graves. They rise from the ground that covers all the fallen, ground dampened by tears that will flow as long as there are mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters left to mourn. Because there is no statute of limitations on a broken heart.The name etched on one headstone reads GREGORY P RUND.
All capital letters. No punctuation. Simple, economic, final. This is the marker that guards the Easter chick. Perhaps it has since DEC 11 2004. Four Easters come and gone and so many more to be lost. The headstone says he was a lance corporal, US MARINE CORPS. That he was a little past 21 when he died and that the family he left behind believes with all its heart that HE CHANGED THE WORLD.
Fourteen U.S. troops with Colorado ties have died in Iraq since Jan. 1, 2007.
Will the milestone of 4,000 combat deaths a little more than a week after the fifth anniversary of the start of the war increase the pressure to significantly reduce U.S. troops in Iraq?
March 24, 2008
8:03 AM
vw writes:
I think so.
This war now has a 70% disapproval rating. People now think it wasn't worth it. They are upset because they were not told the truth at the outset and they would've never authorized this war.
It costs more that initally presented. We were told it would only cost 50 billion and that Iraqi oil would pay for this. The taxpayer is on the hook for all of it. It would be nice if we got some Free oil to pay for this.
Very little progress has been made in reconciling Sunni and Shia factions. So the likely scenario is Iraq will break up. We can leave on our terms, or eventually we will get kicked out. The population there doesnt want us there. They don't like us.
Take a good look at the decades old Iraeli occupation of Gaza for security purposes. They occupied and settled there. The result was endless death and Sharon the war hero eventually left. The gaza occupation was a failure. We can learn from this.
March 24, 2008
8:28 AM
Tree writes:
Happy Monday. When I think of the Bush/Cheney tag team, I think of this. Could you imagine if our country was run like this? And you guys think I have problems.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zvJeKZ3wmU
March 24, 2008
8:37 AM
Tree writes:
Oh, I've got more. How about D. Rummy rolling a fatty. He's so funny. Mr. 6 days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5P6MLiKEJI&feature=related
March 24, 2008
9:06 AM
Shaggy: aka Obamas typical white person writes:
Lets put this in perspective.
4000 American deaths in five years fighting a War.
On average 12 Americans die daily at the hands of illegals.
Thats 4380 American deaths here at home in America PER YEAR.
So in 5 years, 4000 Americans have died in War while 21,900 Americans died at the hands of illegals in America.
March 24, 2008
9:14 AM
Chickenhawk writes:
You're doing a heckuva job Bushie
March 24, 2008
9:18 AM
jay writes:
900 dead american soldiers since the surge started....and it STILL hasn't accomplished its stated goal of providing enough stability to foster political progress.
March 24, 2008
9:34 AM
Anonymous writes:
Shaggy
Lets put this in perspective. Trillions of taxpayer dollars rebuilding Iraq
Practically nothing spent on keeping illegals out. (If you could spend the trillions here at home....)
March 24, 2008
9:42 AM
Typical Brainwashed Right-Wing Tool writes:
Reporting the number of brave Americans who have died in the Iraq Debacle is just another example of the liberal media.
It is not newsworthy, it is only reported to make Bush look bad.
March 24, 2008
9:47 AM
Anonymous writes:
4000 soldiers who have died for nothing and how many wounded for nothing. In today's military, you must only consider your service to each other - watching you fellow soldier's back and dying for your fellow soldier, not the conflict. To think of the latter would only bring a lack of meaning to the whole thing.
The USA is the aggressor nation in this conflict and that is what is truly sad.
March 24, 2008
9:49 AM
Shaggy: aka Obamas typical white person writes:
Trillions huh...link please.
March 24, 2008
9:53 AM
Usama Bin Laden writes:
Has the war in Iraq been a success?
Let's see.
4,000 Americans DEAD
Literally BILLIONS of dollars belonging to US taxpayers SPENT
America stretched thin and less able to defend itself
al Qaeda- formerly a non-factor in Iraq- is now a force to be reckoned with there.
So, YES... the war has been a FANTASTIC success.
March 24, 2008
10:04 AM
Anonymous writes:
Anotehr fine example from our mexican friends:
http://cbs4denver.com/local/nunn.crash.woman.2.683475.html
March 24, 2008
10:23 AM
jibbons writes:
This is truly tragic.
However, someone has to ask how many PEOPLE have died because of this invasion?
While counting casualties based on which side a person is on may serve military needs, it does not represent the whole of the suffering.
The last time I checked the number of Iraqi casualties is near 1 million.
What about the number of people permanentlty disabled by the conflict. While the American death toll does not yet compare to the American death toll of Vietnam, we have to remember that the current medical care is saving the lives of thousands of US servicemen, saving them from death, but not from dismemberment, or emotional and brain trauma's. While we absolutely owe these men and women everything we can give them to make their lives whole again, this will be a much higher veteran's care bill as the years go on.
March 24, 2008
10:30 AM
Tony "too bad I'm not part of the number" Snow writes:
It's just a number
March 24, 2008
10:46 AM
Anonymous writes:
http://www.powells.com/biblio/62-9780393067019-0
Shag
This is a good book. 3 trillion dollars
"The true cost of the Iraq War is $3 trillion—and counting—rather than the $50 billion projected by the White House.
Apart from its tragic human toll, the Iraq War will be staggeringly expensive in financial terms. This sobering study by Nobel Prize winner Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard professor Linda J. Bilmes casts a spotlight on expense items that have been hidden from the U.S. taxpayer, including not only big-ticket items like replacing military equipment (being used up at six times the peacetime rate) but also the cost of caring for thousands of wounded veterans—for the rest of their lives. Shifting to a global focus, the authors investigate the cost in lives and economic damage within Iraq and the region. Finally, with the chilling precision of an actuary, the authors measure what the U.S. taxpayer's money would have produced if instead it had been invested in the further growth of the U.S. economy. Written in language as simple as the details are disturbing, this book will forever change the way we think about the war"
March 24, 2008
12:05 PM
Kim Stonaker writes:
What a shock.......I thought I got the Denver Post at my front door this morning!!!
What a waste of newsprint. Are you trying to create a new image for the Demo's Convention this summer?
Did you run a similar story during WWII?
March 24, 2008
12:08 PM
Kim Stonaker writes:
What a shock.......I thought I got the Denver Post at my front door this morning!!!
What a waste of newsprint. Are you trying to create a new image for the Demo's Convention this summer?
Did you run a similar story during WWII?
March 24, 2008
12:12 PM
history buff writes:
I agree, Kim. We should look at the bright side. Look at all the money the companies like Blackwater, Halliburton, Titan, etc. have made from the war. That means jobs. All they had to do was make a huge donation to the GOP. As taxpayers we should be happy to give our tax dollars to Republican insiders.
March 24, 2008
12:45 PM
Jeff writes:
These are America's heros and should always be treated as such. They made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation and our people. It's a shame that the liberal leftist media didn't feel the 1499th or 3999th caualty merited the same respect and attention as they did for the 4000th. Will the Rocky have '4001' on it's front page when it happens? Doubt it, because it's not as important to the editors although it will still break the hearts of many loved ones and the military will treat it with the same respect paid to #4000.
Democrats have been frothing for weeks, just waiting for the magic number 4000. Every article written had statements like 'almost 4000' and 'nearly 4000' rather than statements such as 'lower than any previous war' or 'nowhere near the levels reached in similar timeframes in prior engagements'.
4000. Sensationalized in writings so as to evoke emotional reactions from their readers to influence their decisions rather than just reporting in unemotional, unbiased terms. Why milestones like this are so important to the left yet the daily sacrifices of our men and women in uniform command so little attention and respect shows where the liberal left stands on protecting America and supporting our troops. Treasonous, Anti-American actions.
The attacks on recruiting stations are a grim reminder that the enemy isn't always as visible or as forthright as it seems. We are battling an enemy here at home in the media, congress and liberal organizations bent on their own power goals rather than winning the war on terror.
This enemy won't go away, be persuaded or appeased. It must be destroyed violently and without restraint. These men and women paid with their lives to complete this mission. Abandoning it uncompleted disrespects the sacrifice they made.
March 24, 2008
1:19 PM
Chickenhawk writes:
ditto Jeff
March 24, 2008
1:35 PM
Anonymous writes:
"Abandoning it uncompleted disrespects the sacrifice they made."
Almost as much as giving up the freedoms they are fighting and dying for in the name of perceived saftey does.
Congrats Jeff, you belittle their sacrafice every day.
March 24, 2008
2:23 PM
Anonymous writes:
Un Otro ejemplo bueno de nuestros amigos mexicanos:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15689582/detail.html
March 24, 2008
2:36 PM
Holier Than Thou writes:
The Rocky would do better to publish the number of soldiers killed since Bush stood under the banner that said, "Mission Accomplished" in his heroic flight jacket.
March 24, 2008
3:07 PM
Tired of Liberal BS writes:
Why doesn't the Rocky report that the deaths of U.S. soldiers was cut by 1/3 since the surge?
Is Temple one of those same Politicians who think the public is stupid?
Does he want to control peoples thinking?
This was done on purpose.
Hows the ratings been Temple?
Still tumbling like all the Liberal news medias are while the medias who give both sides are flourishing?
Who is the stupid one here?
I guess ratings answer that question...
March 24, 2008
3:17 PM
Tree writes:
FYI
PBS starts a show tonight at 8pm on the Iraq conflict. How we got there and what do we do know. Should be a "good refresher course" - Fletch.
Yeah, I know, you guys watch Bill O'Hannity or nothin'.
March 24, 2008
4:43 PM
Anonymous writes:
Tree,
Is Micheal Moore doing the narrating?
March 24, 2008
5:52 PM
Holier Than Thou writes:
Scenario #1. A mass murderer is on the loose in the world, invading other countries and committing unimaginable atrocities to his subject peoples. A reluctant nation wants nothing to do with him but helps allies. The leaders of the reluctant nation are hesitant, knowing that they govern a nation of peace-loving people who want to live and let live. Finally, when the nation is attacked, the people join together to defeat the tyrants who attacked them. Then they help rebuild the nations of their former enemies after the war.
Scenario #2. A nation is eager for war and its leaders are spoiling for a fight. Their leaders exploit the paranoia and fear of the mob. They make lucrative deals, spread propaganda and lies, and whip up war hysteria until they obtain authorization for a preemptive invasion of another country. After the invasion, the war does not go well. It drags on and on. Rather than admitting mistakes and resigning, the leaders make excuses for themselves, blame everyone else, accuse their opponents of being unpatriotic, and even dishonor returning veterans who oppose continuation of the war. Many honorable fighting men are killed and maimed. Some are abandoned to the streets. Their wives and children are cast out of their homes and forced to live with relatives because they cannot make their rent or mortgage payments. The nations of their enemies are trodden down into a state of abject poverty, murderous chaos, mob vigilantism, and complete disarray.
Question #1: which of these two nations truly honors its veterans and fallen dead?
Question #2: in what way does killing yet more people honor those who have fallen in combat?
Question #3: if a national leader tells lies to incite a war that kills thousands of people then what makes them better than someone who incites a mob to massacre innocent people for any other nonsense?
March 24, 2008
6:11 PM
Tree writes:
Let me open up my TV Guide from the Sunday paper thrown from a car doing about 30 down my street at 5am Sunday morning all courtesy of my subscription to the RMN. Come on people, buy the paper, let Mark Wolf retire in peace.
The show is called Frontline, "Bush's War". Well, someone got that right. Let's see, no mention of Michael Moore. 4:43- if your itching for classic Michael Moore, watch the 1980 hit Roger and Me. My home town. Then read the book " It can't happen here" I think it was written in '34. Then grow a spine.
March 24, 2008
7:17 PM
The Truth writes:
There will never be enough death to satisfy Shaggie and friend's blood lust.
March 25, 2008
6:39 AM
L. E. Bell writes:
Are there any Republicans who read the Rocky Mountain News????
March 25, 2008
8:10 AM
JW writes:
Tree,
What did you think about Frontline last night? It was a mash up of a bunch of other ones that have been done since the war. Ive seen them all, so I was flipping back and forth between that and the AVS game. I figure its enough to make your blood boil, and make Shaggy go into seizures because he cant just say "I hate Dems!" and make it go away. Not that he would watch it. "Thats liberal bias" is good for ignoring anything you dont want to deal with, and its even better for making sure you never even see stuff you cant explain away by saying "thats liberally biased", you know, like Armitage talking about Tennet lying to Powell about the evidence used for the UN speech, or Shinseki and White telling congress we will need hundreds of thousands for the occupation of Iraq, and then Wolfowitz and Rummy effectively telling the press "those guys are full of crap and dont know what the hell they are talking about".
March 25, 2008
8:23 AM
jay writes:
damnit i missed that frontline.
March 25, 2008
8:29 AM
JW writes:
Its a two part, three hour one Jay. You can catch part two tonight. Again though, much of it was mashup from others you may have seen. They've just taken them and put them together in what amounts to a "Greatest Hits!" of the the last 7 years that have put us where we are now.
Also, you NEVER need to say "damnit! I missed Frontline!" They are available online! :)
March 25, 2008
9:24 AM
JMH writes:
Five years later and 4,000 dead, over 30,000 more injured and handicaped and Billions upon billions wasted... Let's just remember what we were told...
* Feb. 7, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy: "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
* March 4, Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a breakfast with reporters: "What you'd like to do is have it be a short, short conflict. . . . Iraq is much weaker than they were back in the '90s," when its forces were routed from Kuwait.
* March 16, Vice President Cheney, on NBC's Meet the Press: "I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months." He predicted that regular Iraqi soldiers would not "put up such a struggle" and that even "significant elements of the Republican Guard . . . are likely to step aside."
This occupation is the biggest shame in our country's history and the biggest foriegn policy blunder every commited by America. Let's just never forget it was all based on lies and wasn't even nessicary!
Way to go NeoCons... Some pile of dung you will be leaving America to clean up for you guys. Lying bastards and traitors to America... one and all!
March 25, 2008
9:48 AM
Tree writes:
JW-
I missed it too, was out last night. Nothin' I can't view online.
Rummy's my favorite liar liar pants of fire.
Billions and billions just vanish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eootfzAhAoU
March 25, 2008
1:54 PM
Jeff writes:
JMH Get a clue,
With time, history generally remembers things more clearly and will have a more favorable take on today's Iraq situation. Our perspectives and bias' factor in heavily upon the way we look at present day events. Without that bias history is free to recall more accurately the successes and failures. 10 years from now I'd like to have your address so I can say "See, dumbass, I told you so".
Course that's only if the GOP wins, it won't matter if the Democrats win this year. 10 years from now the historical account will be written by mullas who will lambast the war on terror as a lie while praising Allah. Oh wait, we've already got that happening today, it's the Democratic party with that dodering fool, JMH leading the parade.
March 25, 2008
2:36 PM
just sayin' writes:
Jeff- how do you think history is treating Vietnam?
March 26, 2008
12:29 PM
am 760 writes:
Jeff, saw your little rant about how we on the left we just waiting for the 4000 death to celebrate. Yeah, all us dems had a secret party celebrating the 4000 death of our brave soldiers.
Dude, do you even believe what you say.
I mean that has to be the most assine comment to date. Of course, ever time the 2000, or 3000 death # came around the right wing talking heads said the same thing, boy those dems were just waiting to celebrate this. Its a freaking milestone idiot that is being pointed out, no one from either side is celebrating.
PS, please go join up Jeff, put your money where your mouth is.
March 26, 2008
2:18 PM
bropous writes:
Liberals do not stand up for oppressed people, only for dictators.
Want your freedom from oppression? Don't ask the liberals.
March 26, 2008
4:03 PM
am 760 writes:
bropous, another ridiculous comment from the right.
"Liberals don't stand up for oppressed people." Are you freaking kidding me idiot.
That is why the dem party has the majority of gays, blacks, women, hispanics, etc..., i.e. people who have been oppreseed, supporting it.