MERGED-> the surge goes flaccid + Iraq successful: Cheney + US nears 4000 dead

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Irvine511

Blue Crack Supplier
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Messages
34,521
Location
the West Coast
the surge goes flaccid

[q]
Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'

By Cameron W. Barr
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 14, 2008; A10

BAGHDAD, March 13 -- Iraqi leaders have failed to take advantage of a reduction in violence to make adequate progress toward resolving their political differences, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Thursday.

Petraeus, who is preparing to testify to Congress next month on the Iraq war, said in an interview that "no one" in the U.S. and Iraqi governments "feels that there has been sufficient progress by any means in the area of national reconciliation," or in the provision of basic public services.

The general's comments appeared to be his sternest to date on Iraqis' failure to achieve political reconciliation. In February, following the passage of laws on the budget, provincial elections and an amnesty for certain detainees, Petraeus was more encouraging. "The passage of the three laws today showed that the Iraqi leaders are now taking advantage of the opportunity that coalition and Iraqi troopers fought so hard to provide," he said at the time.

Petraeus came back to Iraq a year ago to implement a counterinsurgency strategy, backed up by a temporary increase of about 30,000 U.S. troops, intended to reduce violence so Iraqi leaders could pass laws and take other measures to ease the sectarian and political differences that threaten to break the country apart.

The Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has won passage of some legislation that aids the cause of reconciliation, drawing praise from President Bush and his supporters. But the Iraqi government also has deferred action on some of its most important legislative goals, including laws governing the exploitation of Iraq's oil resources, that the Bush administration had identified as necessary benchmarks of progress toward reconciliation.

Many Iraqi parliament members and other officials acknowledge that the country's political system is often paralyzed by sectarian divisions, but they also say that American expectations are driven by considerations in Washington and do not reflect the complexity of Iraq's problems.

In what appeared to be a foreshadowing of his congressional testimony, which his aides said he would not discuss explicitly, Petraeus insisted that Iraqi leaders still have an opportunity to act. "We're going to fight like the dickens" to maintain the gains in security and "where we can to try and build on it," he said.

While violence has declined dramatically since late 2006, when thousands of Iraqis were being killed each month, U.S. military data show that attacks on U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians have leveled off or risen slightly in the early part of 2008. "I don't see an enormous uptick projected right now," Petraeus said, speaking in his windowless office in the U.S. Embassy, which is housed in Saddam Hussein's former Republican Palace. "What you have seen is some sensational attacks, there's no question about that."

Petraeus said several factors may account for the recent violence, including increased U.S. and Iraqi operations against insurgents in the northern city of Mosul -- which has lately become one of Iraq's most dangerous -- and insurgent efforts to reestablish some of their havens in Baghdad. And Petraeus said U.S. commanders could not discount the possibility that insurgents "know the April testimony is coming up."

The additional forces sent to Iraq last year have begun to depart and will be gone by midsummer, leaving in place a baseline U.S. presence of about 130,000 troops. Petraeus said it would increasingly fall to Iraqi security forces and neighborhood patrols funded by the United States to help keep violence down.

Petraeus also said the United States would temporarily freeze further reductions in its troop presence to allow for a "period of consolidation and evaluation after reducing our ground combat forces by over a quarter." He said he would discuss the length and timing of what the military terms an "operational pause" during his testimony.

Petraeus credited both the mainly Sunni neighborhood patrols known as the Awakening and a cease-fire called by Shiite cleric and militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr with helping to bring down violence. The Awakening fighters include former insurgents who say they have turned against al-Qaeda in Iraq, a largely homegrown Sunni group that Petraeus said is in communication with al-Qaeda leaders abroad. The United States is now paying 88,000 members of the Awakening $300 a month to take part in the neighborhood patrols.

Sadr issued his cease-fire in August 2007 and renewed it last month in an attempt to increase his control over his Mahdi Army militia and expel renegade fighters. U.S. military commanders who once saw Sadr and his forces as enemies now speak deferentially of the cleric, who has maintained his insistence that the U.S. occupation must end.

In the interview, Petraeus conceded that some elements of both the Awakening movement and the Mahdi Army may be standing down in order to prepare for the day when the U.S. presence is diminished. "Some of them may be keeping their powder dry," Petraeus said of Mahdi Army members. "Obviously you would expect some of that to happen.

"The issue is, again," he continued, "how to sort of prolong what has been achieved, in just a host of different neighborhoods, villages, towns and cities, so that the Iraqi structures can continue to gather strength."


[/q]
 
Last edited:
:yawn:

no one cares

the great decider said he would listen to what the commander in the field told him

well, when he didn't like what the guy in charge of the Afghan and Iraq wars told him

the guy had to go




Blackwater shoots up and kills 24 Iraqi civilians and will see no consequences

no one cares



the Democratic Governor of N Y resigned for having S E X



Geraldine Ferraro said Obama is black



Rev. Wright said America has a bad record on RACE


George Bush sang a funny song for reporters
 
This has been obvious for a while.

But I have said here before that the public is tired of Iraq and most don't care anymore one way or another. So of course you can slip anything under the radar.
 
US nears 4,000 dead in Iraq

By BRADLEY BROOKS, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 51 minutes ago



Sometime soon, the U.S. military will suffer the 4,000th death of the war in Iraq.

When the 1,000th American died in September 2004, the insurgency was just gaining steam. The 2,000th death came as Iraq held its first elections in decades, in October 2005. The U.S. announced its 3,000th loss on the last day of 2006, at the end of a year rocked by sectarian violence.

The 4,000th death will come with the war further out of the public eye, and replaced by other topics on the front burner of the U.S. presidential campaigns.

Analysts say the 4,000 dead, while an arbitrary marker, could inject the war debate back into the campaign season, particularly with the war's fifth anniversary on Thursday. Or, with overall violence lower in Iraq, the milestone could pass with far less public discussion than in past years.

Last year was the deadliest for American troops in Iraq, with 901 troops killed. As of Sunday, at least 3,988 Americans have died in Iraq.

James Carafano, a military analyst with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said that the decline in violence since 30,000 troops were sent into Iraq last summer has been more important in the public's eye.

"Americans are not casualty averse. They are failure averse," Carafano said. "They were unhappy with the lack of progress and spiraling violence. That is why you have seen public support rebound after it was clear the surge was working."

The number killed in Iraq is far less than in other modern American wars. In Vietnam, the U.S. lost on average about 4,850 troops a year from 1963-75. In the Korean war, from 1950-53, the U.S. lost about 12,300 soldiers a year.

A 2006 Duke University study found that it was 100 times as likely that an American knew one of the 292,000 Americans killed in World War II than someone today would know a service member slain in Iraq.

Soldiers and analysts alike say the impact of the deaths in Iraq has been largely lost on many Americans who have no personal connection to the war.

"It's still a war that hasn't involved a draft or an increase in taxes," said Jon Alterman, who heads the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "This is a war that most Americans continue to feel they don't have to make sacrifices for."

Alterman said that while the Iraq war has not played as big of a role in the campaigns as once expected, the confluence of 4,000 slain troops, the fifth anniversary and the crucial Pennsylvania Democratic primary could push the war back to the forefront.

"It may be that stacking three things together refocuses the debate," he said. "Or it may be that people are simply tired of the war, tired of talking about it and are wanting to think of something else."

Carafano said that the public's seeming indifference to casualty figures is the rule — not the exception — for most wars America has been in.

"In war and everything else Americans get energized when they are touched in a personal way. In most wars, not just Iraq, that does not happen," he said.

Retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey said during a recent speech at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York that the situation for U.S. soldiers in Iraq is "infinitely better" now that during 2006, when Americans were losing the equivalent of a battalion — about 600 to 1,000 soldiers — a month to deaths and injuries.

But McCaffrey said the U.S. military is being drained of its energy and morale because of the slow pace of training that will allow more Iraqi soldiers to take over the fight. American soldiers, he said, are "becoming increasingly unsure about the position they've been placed in."

What that position is will largely be determined by who wins the presidency in November.

"The military is very conscious of the long-term costs of the war," Alterman said. "But we have a civilian-led military and it is for the civilians to decide when we fight and how we fight. As much as the military is conscious of the costs of continuing to fight, they are also aware it isn't their decision whether to stop or not."
 
[Q]A 2006 Duke University study found that it was 100 times as likely that an American knew one of the 292,000 Americans killed in World War II than someone today would know a service member slain in Iraq.[/Q]

Well, I have a dead paritioner and a dead student. Nobody I served with has been killed.

I wonder how many in our little forum know someone who died.
 
2 former students, a neighbor's son and a colleague's stepdaughter.
 
Dreadsox said:
[Q]
I wonder how many in our little forum know someone who died.



i sort of played intramural water polo in college during the few months before swimming season began. we'd have a big initiation part the "first friday" in september after classes had started, and it was tradition for seniors to take freshmen around a circle of upperclassmen and play the "name game" -- either the freshman knew the upperclassman's name, or you made that freshman drink some of his beer. and there were a whole lot of names. and you then looked after that freshman for the rest of the evening.

the freshman i looked after that night went on to become captain of the swim team his senior year.

he was killed december 9, 2006 in al-Anbar.
 
oh eff ... i tried to edit it but it doesn't seem to have taken.

can a mod do something about that?

this is a very, very important topic ... and, yet, no one is replying.

:sigh:
 
Iraq invasion was "successful endeavor": Cheney

By Tabassum Zakaria
5 minutes ago



U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday declared the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq a "successful endeavor" in a visit to Iraq that was overshadowed by a suicide bombing that killed at least 25 people.

"If you look back on those five years it has been a difficult, challenging but nonetheless successful endeavor ... and it has been well worth the effort," Cheney told a news conference in Baghdad after meeting Iraqi leaders.

The Iraq war is a major issue in the U.S. presidential campaign. As it enters it sixth year, the war has cost the U.S. economy $500 billion and seen nearly 4,000 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis killed.

Shortly after Cheney spoke, a woman wearing a suicide vest blew herself up in a cafe in the southern holy Shi'ite city of Kerbala, killing 25 people and wounding 50, police and health officials said. Bombs in Baghdad killed four and wounded 13.

Cheney, an architect of the invasion, arrived as Republican presidential candidate John McCain was meeting Iraqi leaders as part of a Senate Armed Services Committee fact-finding mission.

"I was last in Baghdad 10 months ago and I sense that, as a result of the progress that has been made since then, phenomenal changes in terms of the overall situation," Cheney said after meeting Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

Cheney said there had been a "remarkable turnaround" in security after 30,000 extra troops were sent to Iraq last year to help reduce sectarian violence that threatened civil war.

Despite the improved security, however, some 4 million Iraqis are still displaced, and the International Committee of the Red Cross said in a report on Monday that millions were still deprived of clean water and medical care.

Like McCain, Cheney is in Iraq as part of a wider tour to the Middle East. Cheney will also visit Saudi Arabia, Jerusalem, the Palestinian territories, Turkey and Oman on a nine-day tour.

Both men have been staunch supporters of the U.S. troop build-up that Washington says helped drag Iraq back from the brink of all-out sectarian civil war between majority Shi'ites and minority Sunni Muslims who were dominant under Saddam.

"The surge is working," McCain, referring to the troop build-up, told CNN in an interview in Baghdad.

(Writing by Paul Tait and Ross Colvin, additional reporting by Sami al-Jumaili in Kerbala; Editing by Richard Balmforth)

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
That prick Cheney should not have anything to do with any other country ever again as long as he lives. At the very least he should be barred from visiting them.
 
Poor Cheney, he just wants to be heard. He's probably one of the most irrelevant VPs we've had in awhile. The only time you ever heard about him the last 6 years(for he was somewhat "vital" in the beginning) is when he was being hospitalized or when he was supporting torture.
 
Anyone that wants to get

Out of Iraq

there is only one candidate to support.

Clinton says "we cannot win" Iraq war
Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:32pm EDT

By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Hillary Clinton charged on Monday the Iraq war may cost Americans $1 trillion and add strain to the sagging U.S. economy as she made her case for a prompt U.S. troop pullout from a war "we cannot win."

This week marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but the economy's woes competed for attention as the top issue facing voters when they choose their next president in November.

Clinton, the former first lady who is trying to convince Americans she has foreign policy gravitas, hurled criticism over Iraq at her two rivals, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.

New York Sen. Clinton pointedly noted that while Obama insists he will withdraw U.S. troops in Iraq within 16 months of taking office, his former foreign policy adviser, Samantha Power, had said he might not follow through on the pledge.

"In uncertain times, we cannot afford uncertain leadership,"
 
deep said:
Anyone that wants to get

Out of Iraq

there is only one candidate to support.


SOME of us

knew back in 2003

that we cannot win this war.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Poor Cheney, he just wants to be heard. He's probably one of the most irrelevant VPs we've had in awhile. The only time you ever heard about him the last 6 years(for he was somewhat "vital" in the beginning) is when he was being hospitalized or when he was supporting torture.

What about when he dropped the F-BOMB on Pat Leahy or accidently shot his friend?

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree. :up:
 
INDY500 said:


What about when he dropped the F-BOMB on Pat Leahy or accidently shot his friend?

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree. :up:

How could I forget those? My point is I actually think Cheney's legacy will be worse than Bush's...
 
INDY500 said:

But, if your point is that you're tired of Dick Chaney as vice-president and can't wait for Mitt Romney to take over the office...then I agree. :up:




let it be known.

i would prefer Mitt to Dick.

(that almost sounds heterosexual).
 
(CBS/AP) On the eve of the five-year anniversary of the start of the war with Iraq, Americans continue to think the results of the war have not been worth the loss of American lives and the other costs of attacking Iraq, according to a new CBS News poll.

Today 29 percent of Americans say the results of the war were worth it; 64 percent say they were not.

In August 2003, less than six months after the beginning of the war, Americans were divided as the whether or not the results of the war were worth it. Opinion reached a low point in March 2006 - when only one in four Americans said the war was worth the costs.

Support today breaks heavily along partisan lines. Sixty-two percent of Republicans say the results of the war with Iraq were worth the costs, while only 10 percent of Democrats and 25 percent of Independents agree. In fact, belief among Republicans that the war was worth it has risen 11 points since March 2006, while support among Democrats and Independents has remained largely the same.


Meanwhile, in Iraq on Tuesday, Vice President Dick Cheney played the part of backroom power broker for two days and came away with pledges from Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds to firm up a new blueprint for U.S.-Iraq relations that will stretch beyond the Bush presidency.

Cheney flew in a cargo plane to Iraqi Kurdistan in the north to finish two days of private meetings with powerful politicians in Iraq. On Monday, he had talks with officials in Baghdad - even venturing outside the secured Green Zone to dine and have private discussions.

Topics ranged from security in Iraq to Iran's rising influence in Mideast, but a key item was about crafting a long-term agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, plus a narrower deal to define the legal basis for continued U.S. troop presence.

The deal would take the place of a U.N. Security Council resolution that expires in December, the same time Bush will be packing up to leave office. The administration says the deal will not seek permanent U.S. bases in Iraq or codify troop levels, nor tie the hands of a future commander in chief as some Democrats fear

Administration officials say they probably will not seek Senate approval of the plan because the agreement will not be a treaty that provides Iraq with specific security guarantees. This position has prompted a backlash in Congress, where Democrats have proposed legislation that would render the agreement null and void without the Senate's blessing.

Democrats and some Republicans have questioned whether the 2002 authorization of force in Iraq still applies legally because it referred to the need to get rid of Saddam Hussein and eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 2003 invasion, Hussein has been captured and executed, and no weapons of mass destruction were ever found.

Cheney advisers said that President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, made clear on Monday that even though the Kurds have a seniautonomous region in northern Iraq, they were completely committed to making the area work within an Iraqi state.

Cheney was warmly greeted in Irbil by Massoud Barzani, head of the regional administration in the semiautonomous Kurdish area. "We are certainly counting on President Barzani's leadership to help us conclude a new strategic relationship between the United States and Iraq, as well as to pass crucial pieces of national legislation in the months ahead," Cheney said.

Barzani said the Kurds are committed to being "part of the solution, and not part of the problem."

"I would like to reiterate our commitment that we will continue to play a positive role in order to build a new Iraq - an Iraq with a foundation of a great federal, democratic, pluralistic, free Iraq," Barzani said.

Cheney spent Monday night at Balad Air Base, northwest of Baghdad. On Tuesday morning, before he headed to northern Iraq, he spoke at an outdoor troop rally, saying that as long as freedom is suppressed in the Mideast, the region will remain a place of "stagnation, resentment and violence ready for export."

Later in the day, Cheney flew to Oman, continuing his 10-day trip to the Mideast, which will include visits to Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Palestinian territory and Turkey.


This poll was conducted among a random sample of 844 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone March 15-17, 2008. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.
 
Irvine511 said:
(that almost sounds heterosexual).

:lol:

I disagree with your statement that Cheney is the most irrelevant VP ever, BVS. In terms of impact on policy, Cheney may actually be one of if not the most relevant VP we've had. Unfortunately.
 
By Farah Stockman
Globe Staff / March 20, 2008

WASHINGTON - On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war, President Bush delivered a speech yesterday at the Pentagon warning of "serious consequences for the world's economy" if the United States were to withdraw from Iraq and Al Qaeda were to seize control of the country's vast oil resources.

Later in the president's speech, when addressing the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush talked not only of the Americans who lost their lives, but of the large number who lost their jobs.

"More than a million Americans lost work" following the attacks, he said.

Bush's speech, which otherwise dwelled on the importance of military victory and the cost of defeat, was a quiet attempt to link Al Qaeda to America's economic woes, some analysts noted. They said the president was seeking to reshape his case for staying in Iraq in a way that would resonate with an American public that is increasingly worried about high oil prices and the likelihood of a recession.

"I think he's trying to make a case that the Iraq war is integral to resolving our economic difficulties, which he knows the public is weighing more heavily now than they have in the past five years," said Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist with the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress, who just returned from a trip to Iraq.

Antiwar protesters also sought to link the war to the economy by blockading the offices of the Internal Revenue Service to draw attention to the high cost of the conflict. Dozens were arrested outside IRS headquarters in Washington, and hundreds protested across the city.

Bush, in his speech, contended that estimates of the war's costs have been overblown. But he also acknowledged that the "battle in Iraq has been longer and harder and more costly than we anticipated."

He said security gains made by US troops over the past year are "fragile and reversible," signaling that he is unlikely to order further troop reductions in Iraq beyond those already planned. He said the war, which has cost nearly 4,000 US lives and roughly $500 billion in direct expenses, is poised to give the United States a major strategic victory against Al Qaeda.

"We're witnessing the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden," Bush said, referring to Sunni tribes who have sided with the Americans. "The significance of this development cannot be overstated."

But some of Bush's strongest words were when he described what he said would be the consequences for pulling out of Iraq: imperiling the world's economy and putting the country's oil wealth in the hands of terrorists.

"An emboldened Al Qaeda with access to Iraq's oil resources could pursue its ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction to attack America and other free nations," he said.

The argument that US troops need to stay in Iraq to protect the country's oil is not new, but has gained potency as oil prices hit historic highs. As far back as 2005, Bush warned that if bin Laden gained control of Iraq, his group would "seize oil fields to fund their ambitions."

Around then, Melvin R. Laird, Richard M. Nixon's defense secretary, wrote an article in Foreign Affairs magazine arguing that the United States can't abandon Iraq, as it did Vietnam, because it depends on oil from the region.

"Picture those oil reserves in the hands of religious extremists whose idea of utopia is to knock the world economy and culture back more than a millennium to the dawn of Islam," Laird wrote.

But some specialists took issue yesterday with the idea that Al Qaeda would get control of Iraq's oil in the event of a US withdrawal, because the oil is in Shi'ite and Kurdish areas that are hostile to the group.

"The idea that Al Qaeda is going to gain control over Iraq and export oil is a fairy tale, James Bond stuff," said Ilan Goldenberg, policy director at the National Security Network, a liberal group of defense and foreign policy specialists.

Michael Makovsky, who served as special assistant on Iraqi oil in the office of the Secretary of Defense from 2002 to 2006, said criminal gangs and Shi'ite militias in southern Iraq pose a more significant threat to Iraqi oil exports than Al Qaeda.

Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank based in Washington, said "the idea of Al Qaeda taking over the oil is stretch."

But Rubin said Bush's decision to raise the issue was probably an attempt to get the attention of Americans who are already anxious about today's record-high prices for gasoline.

"With oil going through the roof, it's a linkage which a lot of people will make," Rubin said.

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said Bush's remarks about oil and lost jobs were meant to highlight the economic effects of a setback in the war on terror.

"We know what the kind of impact that the 9/11 attack had on our country," she said. "Our stock markets went into a turmoil, and we had to take significant action in order to help right our economy."

But Goldenberg said Bush's attempt to use economic concerns to bolster support for his war in Iraq was unlikely to succeed.

Citing a CNN poll released yesterday, Goldenberg said 71 percent of Americans believe the war is partly responsible for the country's economic troubles.

"That's not the kind of number that President Bush can turn around," he said.
 
US air strike kills 'Iraq allies'
Awakening Council members at the site of the air strike near Samarra on Saturday 22 March 2008

Six people have been killed in a US air strike near the Iraqi town of Samarra, with some reports suggesting they were US-allied anti-al-Qaeda Sunni fighters.

The US denied claims by a police source and a militia member that those killed at the checkpoint were members of an Awakening Council.

The US-funded groups are credited with helping to curb the level of violence.

It came as four more US soldiers were killed in Iraq, bringing the death toll since the 2003 invasion close to 4,000.


of course you know this is a lie.




4000 really
how many American CONTRACTORS have died?
And if they were shipped to a Hospital in Germany and died 2 months later, they don't count.
and of course 4000 AMERICANS are all that matters
a human being of a different nationality "does not count
Rumsfeld "We don't count dead Iraqis."
 
[q]
US Death Toll in Iraq War Hits 4,000
Mar 23, 10:45 PM (ET)
By ROBERT H. REID

BAGHDAD (AP) - A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in Baghdad on Sunday, the military said, pushing the overall American death toll in the five-year war to at least 4,000.

The grim milestone came on the same day that rockets and mortars pounded the U.S.-protected Green Zone, underscoring the fragile security situation and the resilience of both Sunni and Shiite extremist groups despite an overall lull in violence.

A Multi-National Division - Baghdad soldier also was wounded in the roadside bombing, which struck the soldiers' patrol vehicle about 10 p.m. in southern Baghdad, according to a statement.

Identities of those killed were withheld pending notification of relatives.

The 4,000 figure is according to an Associated Press count that includes eight civilians who worked for the Department of Defense.

Last year, the U.S. military deaths spiked along with the Pentagon's "surge" - the arrival of more than 30,000 extra troops trying to regain control of Baghdad and surrounding areas. The mission was generally considered a success, but the cost was evident as soldiers pushed into Sunni insurgent strongholds and challenged Shiite militias.

Military deaths rose above 100 for three consecutive months for the first time during the war: April 2007, 104; May, 126 and June at 101.

The death toll has seesawed since, with 2007 ending as the deadliest year for American troops at 901 deaths. That was 51 more deaths than 2004, the second deadliest year for U.S. soldiers.

The milestones for each 1,000 deaths - while an arbitrary marker - serve to rivet attention on the war and have come during a range of pivotal moments.[/q]
 
Back
Top Bottom