U.S. sailor, 4 Marines killed...U.S. deaths in October reach 96 (DemocRATs and MSM very happy)

MSNBC ^ | 2006-10-26 | AP Wire

[jerod]

Updated: 2:05 p.m. ET Oct. 26, 2006 BAGHDAD, Iraq - The number of American troops killed in Iraq in October reached the highest monthly total in a year on Thursday after four Marines and a sailor died of wounds suffered while fighting in same Sunni insurgent stronghold.

The U.S. military said 96 U.S. troops have died so far in October, the highest monthly total since October 2005, when the same number of American forces was killed. The highest monthly death toll prior to that came in Jan. 2005, when 107 U.S. troops were killed.

The spike in deaths has been a major factor behind rising anti-war sentiment in the United States, fueling calls for President Bush to change tactics.

Polls show a majority of Americans are opposed to Bush’s handling of Iraq, and at a news conference in Washington on Wednesday, Bush indicated he shared the public’s frustration even as he pushed back against calls for troop withdrawals... (snip)

[jerod]

It's sad, but unfortunately true. I'm sure the media and the DemocRATs are probably cheering every death.

[BadAndy]

These death counts are getting tedious.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Hmm.. now let's think about this. October, election a few weeks away. Rise in American deaths in Iraq. Democrats screaming Quagmire again.

Coincidence?

Apparently not to the MSM.

[af_vet_rr]

The bad thing is, is that while this is partially tied to us trying to retake Baghdad, this is also tied to us stepping up the tempo against the terrorists. Nobody is talking about what our ratios are, or the fact that we are getting a lot more bad guys than usual.

We could easily sustain five times as many deaths, but even twice as many deaths as we've had and the media would really freak out.

[100-Fold_Return]

The lamestream mess' "sheeple" [their jargon] simply are NOT buying the MSM's lies; thus, your average American is starting to wonder about the CNN's.

[af_vet_rr]

Hmm.. now let's think about this. October, election a few weeks away.

While I'm sure the terrorists are watching our elections, at the same time the US military and Iraqi military has stepped up operations against the terrorists. This could be December or July or August, and we would still have higher casualties than normal, for the simple fact that we have increased the tempo of our activities.

[KellyAdmirer]

Well, to the MSM, the terrorists are like little lab rats who don't know anything at all about the USA or elections or anything like that. The terrorists are just "freedom fighters" fighting for their country. If there is some effect on US politics, it is as it should be, because terrorists couldn't possibly follow US politics through the media or be smart enough to know how to manipulate the press - right?

[Ouderkirk]

The demcRATS are cheering.... 100 dead is not out of reach

[mallardx]

When I see video footage of anarchist protests against the U.S. occuring in Iraq cities, with people burning our flag, and shouting out how America is the great Satan, I am puzzled: why in hell are we not dropping 500-lb bombs into the middle of these events? So what if a few journalists die, they shouldn't be stupid enough to be near these rallies. The rallies themselves should be incineration events, with nothing left behind but rubble and blood.

It is absolutely ludicrous to watch these terrorists stir up anger against America when we are trying so hard to help them. It is ridiculous that we are not killing those that swear their allegience to our enemies. Time to ratchet up the violence and snuff the evil completely. Three years ago.

[af_vet_rr]

When I see video footage of anarchist protests against the U.S. occuring in Iraq cities, with people burning our flag, and shouting out how America is the great Satan, I am puzzled: why in hell are we not dropping 500-lb bombs into the middle of these events?

I'd like to think we wouldn't sink to the depths of a Saddam Hussein, which is what we would be doing.

Believe me, I believe we've been a lot more lenient than we should have been, but we are in control of a country of 25 million people, with less than 150,000 troops. The commanders on the ground have to take this into account.

That brings up something else though. A country of around 25 million people. A 150,000 troops. If every Iraqi truly wanted us out of there, they could kick us out.

The fact is, the media reports on things that don't put them in too much danger while getting them the highest ratings. They "even out" the reporting.

They aren't going to show you soldiers or Marines building schools, walking down the streets where they are greeted by Iraqi civilians, playing with Iraqi kids. At the same time, the media is not going to go into the areas where we won't send troops - the areas completly out of our control. While you or I may not see it on TV, chances are there are usually US military personnel around when newscrews are out, just off camera. What the media does is give you a picture that looks like there is fighting all over the place, when the reality is, there are many places where we are treated as friends and liberators, and there are places where we have no control. You won't see either extreme.

[COEXERJ145]

President Bush was right. This is exactly like the Tet Offensive.

The terrorists in Iraq know that they cannot defeat the U.S. on the battlefield. Their only hope is to defeat us at home. Ho Chi Minh knew this and that is why what became known as the Tet Offensive was launched in 1968 because it was an election year in the United States. Ho was convinced that even if the VC & NVA lost the battle, they would win a propaganda victory in the American media.

[pgyanke]

Didn't I read an article earlier this month on FR that said Ahmadinejad wanted 100 dead US servicemen this month as a run-up to the election? I'll have to find that... too many on the nutcase to wade through...

[SteamshipTime]

That would be what an imperial power would have done. Unfortunately Americans make terrible imperialists. Since we have cast ourselves in the role of bringing democracy to Iraq, then we really aren't in a position to bomb Iraqi voters.

[jerod]

The press supported the Vietnam war... Until Nixon got elected. After he got elected, it became un-winnable. Surprise, Surprise...

[COEXERJ145]

The first Tet Offensive was in 1968 when Johnson was still President. It was right after Tet that the media turned against the war. This is one of the main reasons why Johnson decided not to run again in 1968.

[Sterm26]

I agree. These people are merely "protesting" today, they'll be planting IED's tomorrow. Snuff 'em.

[JOE43270]

Yes, is unfortunately true and the only reason that these RATS can run their mouths is because our Best of the Best in uniform are doing what they are doing.

[oldbrowser]

When I see video footage of anarchist protests against the U.S. occuring in Iraq cities, with people burning our flag, and shouting out how America is the great Satan, I am puzzled: why in hell are we not dropping 500-lb bombs into the middle of these events?

Cause the ACLU says that would be a violation of their freedom of speech. /sarc.