America's Hidden Battlefield Toll

This last post is plain confusing. Would you like to clarify what you mean by ,"should be discussed at all"

I have not called you one name, I have described your behavior and nature of your posts. This is another example of straw man ,leftist debate tactics. Just because you say so does not make it true. So the hysterical woman thing is working just fine for me. It is true.

Have you indeed verified the numbers presented in the article, by crediable sources? I doubt that seriously. They are skewed. Further they are presented here, in a way for maximum emotional impact.

The fact is you are a woman, and the fact is that you are driven by emotional issues here. That is fine, but the problem is that you are allowing emotions to dicate to you how to debate a political issue. This is a problem many women make. Here it is dangerous because the media is looking to pray upon emotionaly driven people for leftist politcal gain.

I believe those are important facts. Gravely important. You want to post pro-female vanity threads here at freerepublic.com, yet you seem to be offended that anoter poster would bring up the fact that you are a woman? I do so when discussing the need for people to be level headed and not emotionaly driven to read, to believe , and to repeat articles in the leftist media?

Huh? You know you are debating a conservative, on a conservative forum, presenting yourself as a conservative while discussing the use of leftist media durring a ramp up to election time, when the leftists and the media are out to smear the president on the war in Iraq. You do realize all this, dont you?

You are calling names and telling me how wrong and sick I am because I say "don't use proven liberal ,anti- American news sources as crediable". Okay ... you do understand the difference between a conservative a liberal , don't you?

Being a Republician or a conservative is not just a way to meet cute men. It really means something to some of us, and some of us are ready to fight for it. If you think I have been sick, mean or nasty you are wrong. I have not even taken the gloves off yet.

I am respectfuly trying to point out a flaw in your logic, and show some kindness to the new kid on the block... just one woman to another.

Just to clarify, the numbers do match up, both from unofficial and official sources.

I'm one of the few who lump all deaths and wounded together - I don't distinguish between somebody being shot and somebody being killed in an aircraft crash, or somebody being wounded by shrapnel, and somebody being injured in an accident.

To me, if they are killed or wounded in Iraq, they are killed or wounded fighting for us, and their sacrifice is in no way diminished.

I think the numbers are manipulated by both sides of the political spectrum though - I see some in the media ignoring our soldiers because they don't find their stories and sacrifices as interesting now that nobody is speeding across the desert on a tank giving live reports every fifteen minutes. In a way it's a manipulation, by ignoring it, the truth is not coming out.

I see some on the left playing the numbers up when there has been a high number of deaths or casualties in one day (amazing that just a few decades ago, in war, three or four dead and ten or fifteen wounded would be a very low number)

I see some on the right ignoring many deaths and casualties because they don't want to think about the high price that freedom costs, or they want to keep the numbers low to say "see, see, victory in Iraq was cheap". Those people are just as bad, if not worse than the ones on the left, because they are basically saying nobody cares if somebody died in Iraq because their vehicle rolled over or they got some weird disease that is cripppling them.

I agree with you. Anyone who dies in service dies as a hero. A person who is doing their patriotic duty to their country . I agree with you that there is manipulation of data , to some extent,on both sides. I disagree that the leftists are as bad as the conservatives. I never believe anything I read in a liberal paper. I just don't. They have proven their bias, and their agenda. I am never going to buy it, no matter what it says.

Since I am a conservative, and I want all leftist and socialist proaganda burrried in this country, I do not want to see people aid the left. To me it is that simple. I make no appologies for not reading or believing what I see in the media presented by the left.

I have to say , though, that the liberals I know are much more prone to ignore the deaths of soilders than anyone I know on the right. The leftist I know claim to care about the deaths and injuries, but they only care if they are using it to try and isslustrate how evil the right is for sending men off to die. War is death. Freedom is not free.

There are some who would sacrafice their own lives for the chance for their children to be free. Some who would sacrafice themselves for their families to be free. The injuries and deaths are sad, but that is what war is about.

I don't like it when the topic becomes a tactic of the left to try and show these brave men died in vain. They did not die in vain if people are able to acknowledge that war is hell, and they died for our freedoms. Yes, they died, and some are injuried ,and they will never be the same. But what is the alternative?

Why should we allow the leftist media to stir up emotions on the topic ,and open the can of worms of guilt, and blame, and division. The people who appreciate their freedoms, and understand the sacrafice of heroes do not need some leftist paper telling them how to feel about death of a countrymen. Espicially when the point is being drafted by the paper to put political pressure upon the President to act by their will.

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.