Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. T. who wrote (12690)	10/3/2006 2:49:00 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

We do hear about dead American contractors. Maybe your talking about the local contractors who die? Most of them would be labeled civilian casualties, and we hear about them as well, although we don't have precise numbers. If your point is that the official death figures are reduced compared to previous wars because some of the people who would die are contractors not soldiers or marines, then your probably correct but it probably isn't a very significant factor. The death tolls are still far lower. A lot of that is because of better medical care and more rapid transport to medical care, so the wounded figures haven't decreased as much but they have decreased compared to previous wars as well. In terms of death, the risk that our soldiers is at is closer to that of the risk that people face by living in a very violent American neighborhood than it is equal to the risks that Americans have gone through in previous wars. In wars in the past the American army has had units the size of divisions rendered unable to fight because of combat damage. As late as the Korean war we were almost pushed out of the country by the North Koreans, and then get surprised and smashed pretty hard by the Chinese. By pushed out of the country I don't mean that after some protracted period we decided that we were not accomplishing our aims and decided to leave, I mean we almost didn't have a choice. We were pushed back in to a tiny parameter. In Vietnam unlike Korea we never lost a major battle but the survival of the units at Ia Drang was for awhile a close run thing, and things got pretty hairy in a number of places during the Tet Offensive. In Iraq I don't think we've lost a unit bigger than a squad or had any unit larger than a company or maybe just a platoon face any severe risk of destruction. As for Iraq's society and security - Again I have to disagree with you. Not that things are good, it would be reasonable to say they are lousy, but I don't see them as going down the tubes, as clearly and quickly getting much worse.