And in that one sentence, Wonder Woman, you have encapsulated everything I believe about you and your fellow libtards. Well done.

Regards,
Peter H.

See, American troops don’t leave dangerous explosives where anyone, including civilians, could be injured or killed by them.

The IED’s for the most part are aimed at American troops - it’s part of the asymmetrical warfare in which we’re engaged. Pretending otherwise is simply stupid and dangerous.

The original post highlighted misleading statistics and there were at least two ignorant dolts from your side who didn’t know and/or refused to believe the 126 troop death toll for May. To be so ignorant of what’s going on proves to me they care little for our troops.

Next time, check out the links before you accuse people of ignoring our dead soldiers.

And, by the way, the reason to look at U.S. combat deaths, rather than all violent deaths, is a simple one. It compares apples to apples. See, American troops don’t leave dangerous explosives where anyone, including civilians, could be injured or killed by them. If we did, surely the terrorist death rate would be still higher.

(Apologies to Artie Kane on that one.)

Regards,
Peter H.

Actually what’s funny is…well, you in your satin tights. You’re a Wonder, Wonder Woman!!

What makes this really amusing

Yeah, I forgot, death and destruction are sooooo funny to you and your ilk.

The uncomfortable fact remains that this post used highly misleading data to suggest things were going better in Iraq than they are. And the amazing thing is that so many of you actually believe we lost less than 30 of our troops last month.

Let’s see, who was in the White House then? Oh, yes, I remember now - Mr. and Mrs. “DADT” themselves.

A gay bomb to create instant military homosexuals? Please. It sounds like the next Falcon video production to me. Puts a whole new spin on the phrase “going commando.”

Okay, I’ll stop for now.

Regards,
Peter H.

Of course, lots of American were lost, storming all those fortified beaches. Man, do we owe a lot to our soldiers.

What makes this really amusing is that, if one adds up the World War II military deaths from the main Allied countries (the Soviet Union, the UK, the US, Australia, and Canada) versus the three main Axis countries (Germany, Italy, and Japan), the Allied kill ratio was 0.68 to 1 — meaning that for every Allied soldier that died, two-thirds of an Axis soldier did.

I can’t believe the NYT actually got it right on their editorial page for once. I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Regards,
Peter H.

The typical ratio was 14:1 and you see how that worked out for us.

Of course a liberal media painting our victories as colossal failures, as they’re doing now, helped even less.

Liberal military tactic: Would it help to confuse it if we run away more?

Talk about REALLY keeping your head in the sand. I guess if you ignore terrorism, it will go away, right libtrolls?

Regards,
Peter H.

Regards,
Peter H.

The secret of how republicans sleep at night has been revealed!

Meanwhile, for every one of our soldiers that dies, multiple terrorists are taken down with them — before those terrorists can create a ratio, like on 9/11, where they killed over 150 Americans for each one of them.

Is that how you maintain your support of this war? Through ignorance of their sacrifice?

Of course not.

It is you and your fellow Democrats, keogh, who are calling their deaths “wasted effort”.

We are more than aware that our troops are sacrificing their lives to kill terrorists so that each of those terrorists does not go kill another 157 Americans.

But you and your ally Ian call our troops going after terrorists to be committing “war crimes”.

La-la-la-la-la-la-la I can’t hear you!

it would be interesting to see the national media use these graphs every so often.

No, it would be fraudulent. In the type of asymmetrical warfare employed in Iraq, you cannot ignore the deadliness of the IEDs used by the enemy. BTW, kill-ratios were widely promoted in the late 1960’s to show we were winning the war in Viet Nam. The typical ratio was 14:1 and you see how that worked out for us. In Iraq, a kill ratio incorporating IED deaths is only about 5:1. We’d have to be killing enemy forces in Iraq at nearly two and a half times what we’re presently doing to approach the kill ratios in Viet Nam.

Try again.

Regards,
Peter H.

Sweet featheryJesus are you THAT freaking stupid? Look who I’m asking.

Is that how you maintain your support of this war?

Well, we know that’s how team killing fcuktards like you maintain your opposition. Everytime there’s an announcement of U.S. soldiers dying, you start finger-banging yourself madly. Just admit that you have no idea of what the discussion is about and go back to bed, Keogh.

Apparently, they never visit this site.

Sooooooo…..in other words, you can’t back up your assertions.