BAGHDAD, Dec. 31, 2006
U.S. Military Death Toll Hits 3,000
Texas Specialist Killed By Small Arms Fire Last Week; Caps Deadliest Month Of 2006
-
A Defense Department-supplied photo of Spc. Dustin R. Donica, 22, of Spring, Texas. (CBS/DoD)
-
Interactive Battle For Iraq The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.
-
Interactive Iraq Study Group Report Bipartisan commission warns that situation is "grave and deteriorating."
-
Photo Essay Saddam's Final Moments Saddam Hussein went to the gallows Dec. 30, 2006. Contains photos some may find disturbing.
The latest death came during one of the most violent periods during which the Pentagon says hate and revenge killings between Iraq's sects are now a bigger security problem than ever.
The death of a Texas soldier, announced Sunday by the Pentagon, raised the number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq to at least 3,000, according to an Associated Press count, since the war began in March 2003.
Spc. Dustin R. Donica, 19, of Spring, Texas, was killed by small arms fire in Baghdad late last week. The announcement caps the deadliest month for U.S. forces in Iraq in the past year.
"The hardest decision the president ever has to make is to send our men and women into harm's way," said White House Deputy Press Secretary Scott Stanzel, with Mr. Bush in Crawford, Texas. "The president believes that every life is precious and grieves for each one that is lost. He will ensure their sacrifice was not made in vain."
In other developments:
President Bush is struggling to salvage a military campaign that, more than three-and-a-half years after U.S. forces overran the country, has scant support from the American public. In large part because of that discontent, voters gave Democrats control of the new Congress that convenes this week. Democrats have pledged to focus on the war and Bush's conduct of it.
Three thousand deaths are tiny compared with casualties in other protracted wars America has fought in the last century. There were 58,000 Americans killed in the Vietnam War, 36,000 in the Korean conflict, 405,000 in World War II and 116,000 in World War I, according to Defense Department figures.
Even so, the steadily mounting toll underscores the relentless violence that the massive U.S. investment in lives and money — surpassing $350 billion — has yet to tame, and may in fact still be getting worse.
A Pentagon report on Iraq said in December that the conflict now is more a struggle between Sunni and Shiite armed groups "fighting for religious, political and economic influence," with the insurgency and foreign terrorist campaigns "a backdrop."
From mid-August to mid-November, the weekly average number of attacks in the country increased 22 percent from the previous three months. The worst violence was in Baghdad and in the western province of Anbar, long the focus of activity by Sunni insurgents, said a December report.
Though U.S.-led coalition forces remained the target of the majority of attacks, the overwhelming majority of casualties were suffered by Iraqis, the report said.
The American death toll was at 1,000 in September of 2004 and 2,000 by October 2005.
Mr. Bush told an end-of-the-year press conference that the deaths distress him.
"The most painful aspect of the presidency is the fact that I know my decisions have caused young men and women to lose their lives," the president said.
"We will be fighting violent jihadists for peace and security of the civilized world for years to come. The brave men and women of the U.S. military are fighting extremists in order to stop them from attacking on our soil again," Stanzel said.
Mr. Bush was spending the holiday weekend at his Texas ranch.
In an interview on Dec. 21 with The Associated Press, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the war was "worth the investment" in American lives and dollars.
In his strategy reassessment, President Bush has consulted Iraqis, his uniformed and civilian advisers, an outside bipartisan panel that studied the failing war, and other defense and foreign policy experts. New Defense Secretary Robert Gates journeyed to Iraq in his first week on the job in December to confer with American commanders and Iraqi leaders.
Among the president's options was a proposal to quickly add thousands of U.S. troops to the 140,000 already in Iraq to try to control escalating violence in Baghdad and elsewhere.
Others believe too much blood and money already have been sacrificed. Democrats have wanted Bush to move toward a phased drawdown of forces, while the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended removing most U.S. combat forces by early 2008 while shifting the U.S. role to advising and supporting Iraqi units.
Having launched the war against the advice of a number of nations, the Bush administration never got a huge international contribution of troops, meaning foreign forces helping the Iraqis are overwhelmingly American.
The death toll shows it. As of late December, the British military has reported 126 deaths in the war so far; Italy, 33; Ukraine, 18; Poland, 18; Bulgaria, 13; Spain, 11; and Denmark, six. Several other countries have had five or less.
©MMVI CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 41 CommentsI wonder if the strategist planning the "new way forward" realise that we no longer call the shots in Iraq. Rather, we are one of a number of factions operating within a fragmented stucture. Surely, the so-called "new way forward" is just another delusion or at worst a deception.
Here are four reasons why:
1. No militarily solution - although we have the most sophisticated war machine and finest troops in the world, nearly 5 years into the war we have yet to tame a determined enemy deploying "dumb" munitions. Our own generals have put it like this: "Iraq is not winnable militarily."
2. The will of the Iraqi's - at the moment the Iraqi's are playing out their own "vision" of the future. It is sectarian, violent and fuelled by historical tensions of which we know little and can do absolutely nothing about.
3. Syria & Iran - there will be no peace in Iraq (of any description) without Syria and Iran being part of that solution. At the moment the administration refuses to speak to either nation and in response both have ensured that Iraq remains ungovernable. Syria and Iran have as much, if not more influence in Iraq as we do.
4. We are seen as part of the problem - with intervention comes expectation. 5 years into the war, beyond a government that cannot seem to govern and troops whose loyalty is questionable, little has been achieved by the US led invasion. Our troops are now a cause of violence and tension. Our days in Iraq are numbered.
Arab laws are anti women. You have honor killing in Arab countries so any woman can be slaughtered by the father or brother if her "passion" dishoners the family. Your gov't are very, very intolerant, Look how many Christians have been driven from Lebanon by Hezbollah, and assasinated the leaders. The West Bank under Hamas has outlawed YMCAs, and Bethleham has been cleanesed of the Christian population. Jews ? In Europe, the young Islamic mob tortured a young Jewish boy picked at random, for weeks and then killed him. Very little said. And more. And more. Jewish women are targeted for terrorism far more than soldiers. I am speaking out as a true progressive, Iso-Islamic Woman , but have had threats made because I dare to be free of male dominated dark ages tryanny.
And Gareebturbinhead - man, you are moral idiot. IDIOT.
Go back to Egypt.
Denial can be a valid short-term reaction to uncomfortable reality, but it becomes a problem in its own right if it becomes a habit. He plays his patriotism against anyone remembering his champagne flight admission to the closed to entry Texas Air Guard, there must be some good reason to risk any other people%u2019s life and limb instead of his own, since he's such a patriot. He's not really a quivering coward, He's Not! Bush uses slogans and zingy one-liners to stir the patriotic spirit to help extend both his and the peoples' state of denial. It goes back to the beginning of this not so brief epistle that gwb is almost addictive the regular repetition becomes comforting. Repetition of a mantra reinforces believability, that's why it has taken so long for a majority of Americans to make it past the symbolic distractions to the stark reality that he has honest to God been telling whopper after whopper. Maybe the big lie is really more likely to be bought into as truth.
In the New Year, I'll try to be more considerate with those who haven't gotten through the obstacles so carefully placed in their way to the reality that the lies are piled high atop each other. I'm equally sure that when I fail, someone will point it out to a traitor, idiot or moron such as I.
I apologize for the length of this post, I'll work on brevity. To all of good heart, Happy New Year!
My gratitude, respect and wishes for a safe and Happy New Year to all our brave military members, wherever you serve. God Bless each of you!
2007 seems a lot like 2006. gwb is still almost a form of addiction, he uses phrases that recall our justified pride in America to lead us down unworthy paths. It's called manipulation of symbols. Reagan was the master combining the best of PT Barnum with the skills he learned as an actor. A speech by the President to a Joint Session of Congress, with the Speaker and the Vice-President behind him, the flag, the historic house chamber, the traditional introduction, "Mr. Speaker, The President of the United States," provide the ultimate patriotic frame for the word pictures the President paints. Our national group consciousness subliminally sends us the feeling of pride in our founding fathers and all the good that has started in that place that put us where we are. The chest-expanding throat-tightening awe of it all make it difficult to think that anybody would be so disrespectful to our Nation and our heritage as to be able to lie to us in that setting. Our automatic responses are correct, it should be next to impossible to do it. Hope, faith, trust and forgiveness are all important parts of our character as a people. After the State of the Union, those same responses are recreated in other settings. At a press conference, the intro and the brisk stride to the podium are subliminal reminders of the more formal setting.
now America cann't go out of Iraq,the soldiers are screaming like old ladies,and the american flesh seems very tasty in Iraq,besids America inside is still unsafe,because revenge is not taken yet.a uniqe situation in history,more soldiers to hill for nothing and Usama bin Ladin is watching tv in peace and thnking for the his next step. you'r stupid criminal Mr Bush, ND YOU BELIEVERS AS WELL.
Hitler at one time relied on his generals to do the fighting (and winning) for him. His mistake came when he decided that he knew better than all of his generals, and as soon as a general would tell Hitler the truth, he would be sacked.
Bush has some of those characteristics - a megalomaniac.
Despite the fact that Bush is the Commander in Chief, he has this mistaken belief that he knows how to lead an army.
Bush would be better off letting his generals make the decisions and him supporting them in those decisions.
Maybe if he had, things would be different in Iraq.
If this is WWIII then Britney Spears is Mozart.
Only in P. Diddy'd America does 300 guys in the desert wearing bedsheets become WWIII. Ooooh, they might use box-cutters again, oooh they might fly some planes into a building, oooh.
Ever read about London and the battle of Britain? It was like 9/11 .... 1000 times over. Living Hell raining out of the sky for months. Death and bombs everywhere, every day, every night, all over the place. Lots and lots and lots of buildings were blown up. And then some more. And then ... don't like that .. too bad some more.
The Axis was Italy and Germany and Japan and other countries. They were some of the biggest, most powerful countries on earth at that time. Their equipment was awesome; the Nazis ultimately had over 1 million fighting men, highly trained, absolutely disciplined, with one of the world's most advanced countries behind them. The United States was not the world power at that time as they are today.
For example, the Nazi fighting machine could invade today's middle east and lay to ruin easily, even with their 1938 equipment, I think. It was an awesome war machine, like the world had never seen and hasn't seen since.
That's just Nazi Germany, there was Japan as well. That was a serious threat to America and to the world.
Osama Bin Laden has an organization of a couple hundred guys. He is a spoiled dsaffected rich boy without even a country. If he had all of Pakistan, and all of Afganistan, he would be nothing, a drop of nothing, compared to the Nazi power. Nothing at all, he doesn't register. He got lucky with those planes, that's all.
a little history lesson for you kids.
"I agree with Hamilton Graduate guy. He is very on target and obviously smart and organized."
Maybe you two could read comic books together. He likes the Joker vs Batman, you know.
Americans just don't believe that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US. They just don't believe that there is a pressing American interest in fighting Islam. So in democracy, we would never have a war.
Bush usurped the processes of democracy to get a war when he hadn't convinced the public of his theories about "Islamic-fascism" or whatever. He started a war without legal process, without Congress declaring it.
so we aren't helping him much, its not working, we're not getting "tough" in that sense, because its his personal war, his personal decision, and he circumvented democracy.
This just isn't like WWII. That was much more serious, the Nazis had 1,000's of tanks and planes, the best technology on earth, the Japanese millions of soldiers, a vast Pacific empire, and they had 1/2 of China conquered. Al Quiada was about 300 guys. It's just not the same. I understand Bush wishes it was the same, but its not.
"by being tough means: 1. We do not allow our enemies to have their own sanctuary where we are restrained to bomb them. Think Pakistan, or the Joker vs. Batman...You Cedarhead nimbobs like to swear *** because you can't think logically. We are in WWIII and better be TOUGH."
And you resort to comic book characters because you're tough and a logical thinker?
Bullsh*t - you're an idiot.
Now get off your butt and enlist, redneck.
For all you way our liberals who believe that all cultures are the same, or that we are the bad guys, I think that you are all insane, or even worse went to graduate school !
Are you **()** nuts ? Our enemies would kill all of us if they could, and it is only because of President Bush and his policies that we can have the security to have 1 million people pack time Square, and of course our fighting men and women. We owe them a tremendous amount of RESPECT. So to the rest of you liver liberal (@)holes, Jerk!ff.
That was a good book. But Philip K. *** was saying something complicated, like we are our own jailers, that kind of thing.
The fascist pattern is certainly an accurate analogy for some of the recent developments in America, but of course its unique in every country.
One of the big differences between Bush and the fascists of the last century is that they were proud to call themselves by that term, while Bush claims vehemenently that he is not a fascist, his enemies (the tooth fairy or whomever) are the fascists.
So since he won't accept the label it is difficult to pin it on him. That's the American way -lot's of PT Barnum. So Bush calls his philosophy "caring and loving and gentle Christianity" when it is by its actions more like "hating and killing and oppressive devil worship". That's the Rove way, its very effective witness the number of elections they've forced an unacceptable candidate on America.
So bush, if accused
Jerks have been saying this kind of *** ever since Vietnam. There is this infantile fantasy that somehow if we just "get tougher" we can win wars that are losing. That's ***. That's horrible and stupid. There is no historical precedent for that, no military reasoning for that, just dumb emotion. If a football team is losing, is "getting tough" the way to win, or is executing the ganeplan and the plays. Give me a break. That's a loser's concept. Eisenhower didn't "get tough" in WWII, he developed an careful plan, worked hard every day to outthink and outplan the enemy, then executed the plan without anger or other wasteful emotions. There isn't some shortcut that avoids good military strategy simply by "being tough" or "playing by tough rules" or some *** like that. That's just a lazy shortcut. There isn't any victory ever for lazy people.
That's classic Bush. Torturing people and breaking the Geneva Conventions was his secret to victory. Yeah right. He forgot the hard work and have a strategy part. I'm sick of hearing you loser right-wing fanatics whining about how you were "restrained" like you were just about to win vietnam, but God stopped you from using your brilliant tools of torture or genocide or whatever you think is such a great way to take a shortcut in life. Those aren't winning strategies, those are the acts of angry losers.
WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!
V for Vendetta
A Scanner Darkly
Easy Rider
Equilibrium
Star Wars - The (American) Empire
The Matrix
Apocolyse Now - Francis Ford Copolla
System of a Down - "We Don't Live in a FASCIST Nation"
*** Pistols - "God Save the Queen from this FASCIST REGIME"
Pink Floyd - The Wall
Rage Against the Machine
Queensryche - Empire
Genesis/ Disturbed - Land of Confusion
Living Colour - Cult of Personality
The Doors - Jim Morrison
John Lennon - Revolution / Xmas (War is Over)
1984 Orwell
Fahrenheit 451
Brave New World
Tyranny of the Majority - Toqueville
Batman: Dark Knight Strikes Again by Frank Miller.
Marvel%u2019s Civil War series
prisonplanet.com
whatreallyhappened.com
Project for the New American Century
FASCIST REGIMES IN AMERICA
Bush/Cheney
NIXON
Lyndon B. Johnston
McKinley 1897 %u2013 1901
MCCarthy
Lincoln
Salem Witch Trials
Interesting. The president has no legal authority to make decisions to send our men and women into battle.
Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have the power ... to declare war ... to provide for calling forth the militia ... (etc.)
Article II, Section 2: The President shall be commander in chief of the army and navy of the United States ... (etc.)
Clearly, the president is commander in chief, but has no power to start a war or call up the national guard. The separation of powers is that the president executes a war as commander, but only after the war is declared and funded by Congress.
Yet Bush and his people seem to believe they have the power to "decide" when to make war, rather than how to make war once one is declared. That makes Bush a dictator and usurper. That makes him a traitor and enemy of the United States of America.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 41 Comments