96

7:45 pm EST October 26th, 2006 | News | 8 Comments

The latest from Iraq.

The number of American troops killed in Iraq in October reached the highest monthly total in a year Thursday after four Marines and a sailor died of wounds suffered while fighting in the same Sunni insurgent stronghold.

The U.S. military said 96 U.S. troops have died so far in October, the most in one month since October 2005, when the same number was 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.

But then, you know the President won’t do that. He’s more interested in:

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

8 Responses to “96”

  1. buma says:
    October 27, 2006 at 12:49 am

    Reward incompetence.
    Vote GOP.

  2. Dugger says:
    October 27, 2006 at 9:52 am

    typical BS. The overall total is low for a war. if october is a high month, then there would have to have been low months. Did you make a big deal out of them? “Causalties in month X were only Y therefoer Iraq is a good war.” And if you ridicule that, why not ridicule the exact inverse – OWs position?

  3. BD says:
    October 27, 2006 at 10:38 am

    The point is not that October is a high casualty month, it is that it is a high casualty month so late in the war. If things are getting better, one should expect a dropoff in violence and casualties, not an increase.

  4. Oliver Willis says:
    October 27, 2006 at 12:14 pm

    “the overall total is low for a war”

    Of course, those 96 people mean nothing to Dugger – just vote GOP!

  5. Duros62 says:
    October 27, 2006 at 12:44 pm

    Well, if you beleive Rumsfeld(!), this is probably just a spike in casualties before the insurgents go on vacation for the winter.

  6. Dugger says:
    October 27, 2006 at 4:12 pm

    My point stands. Both parties voted for war. Casualties in Iraq are very low – for a war. The positon here is all fine if you oppose all wars equally but to suggest casualty count is any kind of particular argument against this war is dumber than dogsh*t.

  7. Jody says:
    October 27, 2006 at 5:38 pm

    Wow Dugger.

    Here we go again with the while whiny “b-b-but the Dems did it too!” horse hockey. This war was Bush’s idea. He’s the decider. It’s on him.

    Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties and yet somehow the total is ‘very low’. As if ANY casualties are acceptable in a war of choice, waged on a lie.

    I submit that you sir, are in fact ‘very low’, and your talking points invalid and churlish. Your trolling has been particularly vapid as of late. Feeling worn out from all this defending of the indefensible?

  8. midderpidge says:
    October 27, 2006 at 8:32 pm

    Dugger, Dugger, Dugger. Both parties did not support this war. Remember? Bush lied. There were no WMDs, there were no terrorist ties, no threat from Iraq, and no one voted for the war we got that BUSH FUCKED UP ALL ON HIS OWN. It’s kind of like saying to your wife, yeah, maybe we should get a new car and you come home from work the next day and there’s a 1974 Dodge Dart in the drive with a $5 million price tag.