Skip to comments.
Rice Confronts Rising Iraq Casualty Toll
Ohio.com ^
| Mon, Nov. 10, 2003
| TERENCE HUNT - AP
Posted on 11/10/2003 8:38:34 PM PST by yonif
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration, confronting a rising casualty toll in Iraq, said Monday that "nothing of value has ever been won without sacrifice."
National security adviser Condoleezza Rice also said a surge of attacks against American forces does not represent a return to major combat operations.
"Major combat operations have not resumed in Iraq by really any stretch of the imagination," Rice said. "What has happened is there are some elements of the old regime that are making common cause with some foreign fighters in what I think could classically be described as an insurgency or insurgency plus terrorism."
Rice sat in the White House briefing room before a bank of television cameras to answer questions from local network affiliates. It was part of the administration's strategy to reach beyond the Washington media - what President Bush calls "the filter" - to deliver the White House message across the country.
On a parallel track, Secretary of State Colin Powell told students at City College in New York that "for the sake of civilization, for our security, we must stay the course" in Iraq and also "pay the price."
"There is no question we are being tested," Powell said. But, he said, "we will win - of that there is absolutely no doubt in my mind."
Returning to the college from which he was graduated in 1958 to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of Ralph Bunche, an African American who pursued careers in education and diplomacy, Powell said U.S. troops would destroy the terrorists and remnants of the fallen Saddam Hussein government.
As of Monday, 394 U.S. service members have died since the beginning of military operations in Iraq, according to the Pentagon. Some 256 have died since Bush declared on May 1 that major combat operations had ceased.
"He feels acutely every loss," Rice said. "He understands that he is asking the American armed forces and American families to make the great sacrifices.
"But the fact is that nothing of value has ever been won without sacrifice," Rice told NBC affiliate KING in Seattle.
She spoke on the eve of Veterans Day, when Bush is to make a speech honoring the sacrifices of American forces in Iraq and in earlier wars.
Rice said most of the trouble in Iraq has been confined to the so-called "Sunni Triangle" encompassing Baghdad, Fallujah and Tikrit. "Most of this country is stable," she said. "We will get a handle on this security situation and resolve the problem."
Rice said Bush's strategy calls for increasing the number of Iraqis involved in their own security.
"We have nearly 118,000 Iraqis now involved on a daily basis in their own security," Rice told Fox affiliate WAGA in Atlanta. "Much is at stake for the Iraqi people."
She also praised Saudi Arabia for its role in the fight against terrorism. A weekend bombing killed 17 people at a compound housing mostly Arab foreigners in the Saudi capital.
"The Saudis are very serious partners in the war on terrorism," Rice said. "They understand that these terrorists were not just going after the United States and other members of the coalition. They're going right to the heart of the Saudi kingdom, which is why the attack in Riyadh, by the way, killed more Arabs than anything else. This was an attack on the heart of the Saudis, and they understand that."
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: hypocrisy; saudiarabia; waronterrorism
1
posted on
11/10/2003 8:38:35 PM PST
by
yonif
To: SJackson; Yehuda; Nachum; Paved Paradise; Mr. Mojo; Thinkin' Gal; Bobby777; adam_az; Alouette; ...
"The Saudis are very serious partners in the war on terrorism," Rice said. "They understand that these terrorists were not just going after the United States and other members of the coalition. They're going right to the heart of the Saudi kingdom, which is why the attack in Riyadh, by the way, killed more Arabs than anything else. This was an attack on the heart of the Saudis, and they understand that." Why does this adminstration continue to be blind?
2
posted on
11/10/2003 8:39:33 PM PST
by
yonif
("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
To: yonif
Agreed that we have to fight even if it is hard and difficult.
But sometimes I wonder if GW has his eye on the ball.
3
posted on
11/10/2003 8:42:34 PM PST
by
Sam Cree
To: yonif
Sometimes Yonif, what is said in public and what is said behind closed doors are two different things.
4
posted on
11/10/2003 8:47:45 PM PST
by
Cindy
To: yonif
She also praised Saudi Arabia for its role in the fight against terrorism. Could someone help me out, please? I'm drawing a blank. What exactly has Saudi Arabia done to fight terrorism?
To: yonif
"He feels acutely every loss," Rice said. "He understands that he is asking the American armed forces and American families to make the great sacrifices.And leftist Democrats and the press are doing everything in their power to make sure their sacrifices are in vain, like they did to us in Vietnam, where 57,000 dead apparently was not too large a number to prevent us from walking away, if only to shut up the smelly hippie communist bastards, some of whom are now running around in Congress
6
posted on
11/10/2003 9:00:04 PM PST
by
Rome2000
(McCarthy was right!)
To: yonif
What is the difference between "major combat operations" and what we are seeing now?
7
posted on
11/10/2003 9:45:29 PM PST
by
Cacophonous
(War is just a racket.)
To: Cacophonous; swarthyguy
If you need to ask, then you have a lot to learn. I would argue that nothing we have seen since Vietnam's heavier engagements have been major combat operations. Really, the most recent truly major ones were 1953. With today's technology, death rates approaching 50000 per day are not unthinkable. And to think that everyone in today's pampered age are alarmed about the hundreds who have perished thus far in Iraq. WE HAVE YET TO PASS EVEN 1000 DEAD OVER THE COURSE OF 7 PLUS MONTHS! THIS IS NOTHING!
8
posted on
11/10/2003 9:55:58 PM PST
by
GOP_1900AD
(Un-PC even to "Conservatives!" - Right makes right)
To: belmont_mark
We didn't have over 200 casualties during the "major combat pahse" of the war (and there must have been a "major combat phase" or President Bush would not have declared it over). So given that we have seen more casualties (still blessedly low) AFTER the major combat phase was over than BEFORE...what distinguishes the two?
9
posted on
11/10/2003 9:59:08 PM PST
by
Cacophonous
(War is just a racket.)
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
Comment #11 Removed by Moderator
To: Yehuda
True. But at least the Israeli government views Saudi Arabia as a terror state.
12
posted on
11/10/2003 11:01:22 PM PST
by
yonif
("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
Comment #13 Removed by Moderator
To: Yehuda
In my opinion it comes down to the fact the Israeli government does not want to hurt the reputation of the US in the eyes of the Arab world (a reputation which already is greatly hurt. In addition the US has not realized this and continues to play to them using nice words and military aid specifically to Saudi Arabia and Egypt).
14
posted on
11/10/2003 11:23:45 PM PST
by
yonif
("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
15
posted on
11/11/2003 7:04:24 AM PST
by
SJackson
To: belmont_mark
I teach at a small Catholic college in the Midwest. Before the start of the Battle of Iraq in March, I asked my students how many casualties they would accept in order to achieve the goals of regime change in Iraq. Most hesitated to say anything. At the time, I took SH at his word, that he had BCN weaponry at the ready to hit our troops. So I admitted that I fully expected 10,000 causalties, and that I could accept that number. Not to be too crass about it, because even one death diminishes us, but the butcher's bill for the Battle of Iraq is very, very, very small.
16
posted on
11/11/2003 7:10:03 AM PST
by
Remole
To: Cindy
Agreed.
Publicly the administration seems to be "supporting" the Saudi's.
But judging from the new line the Saudi's are taking against terrorists, it seems we've been applying some pressure on them behind the scenes.
Why else would they have cracked down on the Wahhabi schools? And allowed us access to one of their prisoners the day after we told them to "haul a$$" when the Saudi prince came to Washington to ask for the "28 pages" to be released?
The Saudi's actions are telling me that they've been given a clear message.
That's my take, anyway.
To: nuffsenuff
re post no. 17...
And that's sums it up pretty well nuffsenuff.
Adding on to your comment, maybe the Saudis
have a general idea what's in store for them (by
the jihadi types) and it's not a rosy picture. Maybe
they have an idea the U.S. is going to play hardball
from now on.
18
posted on
11/11/2003 11:22:29 AM PST
by
Cindy
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson