world

Bush says American lives lost in Iraq were not in vain

55 Comments

U.S. President George W Bush pledged Monday to ensure "an outcome that will merit the sacrifice" of those who have died in Iraq, offering both sympathy and resolve as the U.S. death toll in the five-year war hit 4,000.

The U.S. military death toll in Iraq hit 4,000 after the slaying of four soldiers in Baghdad, prompting Bush to send his "deepest sympathies" to the bereaved families on Monday.

The four were killed when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb in south Baghdad late on Sunday, a U.S. military statement said, adding that another soldier was wounded by the blast.

"I offer our deepest sympathies to their families," Bush said, vowing "to make sure that those lives were not lost in vain," on what he called a "day of reflection" honoring the US war dead.

The chaotic conflict, now in its sixth year, has killed 4,000 U.S. soldiers and wounded more than 29,000, according to a tally based on independent website www.icasualties.org.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said earlier Bush mourned the loss of every single soldier killed since the conflict started in 2003.

"And he bears the responsibility for the decisions that he made and he also bears the responsibility to continue to focus on succeeding."

Perino said it "may be possible" Bush will decide by Friday on a future drawdown of troops after an ongoing drawdown ends by July.

But the top U.S. commander in Iraq General David Petraeus and Defense Secretary Robert Gates favor a pause before any further withdrawal.

Perino said it was "not unlikely" that Bush would accept a pause after July, saying: "The president thinks that there's some merit in that recommendation."

The icasualties.org website, based only on published reports, shows that around 8,000 members of the Iraqi security forces have also been killed since the March 2003 invasion.

At least 97% of the deaths occurred after Bush announced the end of "major combat" in Iraq on May 1, 2003, as the military became caught between a raging anti-U.S. insurgency and sectarian strife unleashed after Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated regime was overthrown.

According to the icasualties.org website, 81.3% of military deaths were in attacks by al-Qaida in Iraq fighters, Sunni insurgent groups loyal to Saddam or radical Shiite militias.

The remainder died in non-combat related incidents. Roadside bombs caused most of the fatalities, with gunfire the second biggest killer.

The U.S. dead include 102 servicewomen.

The military death toll is a key issue for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as they battle to be the Democrat candidate in this year's U.S. presidential election. Both want U.S. troops out of Iraq.

"It is past time to end this war that should never have been waged by bringing our troops home, and finally pushing Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future," Obama said in a statement on Monday.

Clinton also promised to bring the troops home.

"I have looked those men and women in the eye. I have made that promise. And I intend to honour it by bringing a responsible end to this war, and bringing our troops home safely," she said.

The deadliest war for the U.S. military, apart from the two world wars, has been Vietnam, with 58,000 soldiers killed between 1964 and 1973 -- an average of 26 a day. On average just over two U.S. soldiers die in Iraq every day.

The icasualties.org statistics reveal that the deadliest year for the military in Iraq was 2007 when it lost 901 troops after a controversial "surge" which saw an extra 30,000 soldiers deployed in a bid to end the violence that has killed tens of thousands of Iraqis.

That figure compares with 486 deaths in 2003, the first year of the conflict, 849 in 2004, 846 in 2005 and 822 in 2006.

This year 96 soldiers have died.

American commanders in Iraq acknowledge that putting extra troops on the ground has exposed them to more attacks, but they also say it has helped curb violence and that attacks have dropped 60% since last June.

The western Sunni province of Anbar witnessed highest overall U.S. casualties, with 1,282 losses, according to icasualties.org, followed by Baghdad with 1,255, Salaheddin with 376, and Diyala with 238.

© Wire reports

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

55 Comments
Login to comment

Before some get too excited and start rubbing their hands together let's do the Death Metrics.

Cause of Death Total Percentage Hostile fire 3270 81.8% Non-combat related 730 18.2% Total 4000

Oh no!

Country of Death Total Percentage Iraq 3780 94.5% USA 89 2.2% Germany 54 1.4% Kuwait 49 1.2% Qatar 8 0.2% Int'l waters 8 0.2% Bahrain 7 0.2% United Arab Emirates 2 0% United Kingdom 1 0% Intl airways 1 0% Spain 1 0% Total 4000

2.2% percent of the 4,000 occured in the U.S.A.? 1.4 percent in Germany?

It started out so good, didn't it?

"The death toll also includes 102 female service members."

Emote that. So much for "equality." (You cannot have it both ways, MSM.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

are you out of your mind? read the article and then post again..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Woo woo! Congratulations! 4,000 lives completely wasted. -_-

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Woo woo! Congratulations! 4,000 lives completely wasted. -_-"

Can I call 'em or what?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bush says American lives lost in Iraq were not in vain

It just boils down to priorities: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=5y

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Darned right Bush bears responsibility for many of these lost lives. His stubborn refusal to properly acknowledge the burgeoning insurgency, as well as the total inept and corrupt handling of post war Iraq by his administration, has led to many of those lost lives.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think the U.S. voting public should be rather more concerned by the number of Iraqi civilians that have been killed as a consequence of the U.S. invasion. After all, U.S. casualties are between one-twentieth and one-hundredth of the civilian death toll, depending on your degree of 'optimism', so it's merely a small fraction of the misery inflicted on the people that you have supposedly 'liberated'

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the President spent even one minute mourning the loss of every single military member killed in this conflict since this conflict began, he would have spent 5 1/2 working days--assuming he works a 12-hour day. And this would be speed mourning. Imagine how much of his time would be consumed if he truly mourned.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Perspective: The flying Jihadists killed that many in one day in NY. And many times that will die when they manage to set off their dirty nuclear bomb in a US city.

Which is of course not to say that the Iraq invasion was well thought-out or well executed. But these death-matrices are meaningless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

even one life is one too many. What will happen when they pull out?? didn't think that one too good, did he?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zaphood - in the extremely unlikely event that the "terrorists", or anyone else for that matter, manage to set off a 'dirty bomb'the damage will be minimal. Such a bomb - which as far as I know has never been used anywhere - would spread very low level radiation over a relativly small area. No one will be vaporised and buildings will not fall down (unless charges have been placed in them). It would cause panic way out of scale to the problem which no doubt your (almost) military goverment would exploit to the maximum.

Anyway, nice to see that seven years on your fear is only a dirty bomb. What, no longer worried about the smoking gun being a mushroom cloud?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

.

What did you expect him to say . . . . it was amistake?

.

Not only did the US suffer 8 years under a rogue president, but he carelessly and arrogantly encroached the sovreignty of a country (Iraq) using the pretext of WMD .

Then under his incentive he not only destroyed a county over seas, but sacrificed American sons and daughters for a cause that was lOST from the start.

.

Shame shame shame

:(

0 ( +0 / -0 )

they were not in vain! hahaha!! what a huge business it has been!!! yeah!! btw, what's the proportion between, let's say, Iraqis being slaughtered at home and Americans? How many are killed in USA by guns? around 10,000 deaths in homicides involving firearms in USA in a year....USA it's kind of more dangerous!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

God I hope its not in vain? Your running a close second to Nixon as the worse liar in Presidential History and nick and nick with LBJ for the most incompetent commander in Chief during war time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

kagunlapell

Seems like theres a big business in knives here in Japan. Oh wait don't forget the 1 suicide every 15 mins year around in Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

semperfi

Whats worse is the Iraqs will never truly honor the dead and sincerely appreciate the sacrifices that wives/husbands/moms and dads made when their loved one died in the sand and dust for their freedom. I can still hear Colin Powell's warning about this war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"What did you expect him to say . . . . it was amistake?"

How about "My friends and I have gotten even richer! Thank you for your donations of blood!"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't think the deaths were in vain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

President Bush continues to vow that the 4,000 American deaths in Iraq will not be in vain. The problem is that this is just one more big lie from a man whose arrogance and incompetence has resulted in a total disaster for America. These deaths were in vain, no matter what kind of positive spin the Bush Administration cynically tries to put on them. The ones responsible for the loss of so many of America's brave military personnel can be clearly identified: President Bush, Vice-President Cheney and Secretary Rumsfeld. May the gods have mercy on their undeserving souls.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you really expect that george bush would come forward and tell you anything different. This is the president that hasn't made any mistakes.

Why should he admit that they died in vain?:

he started a war based on lies?

he used the lies created by dick cheney and doug feith!

The ones who have died in Iraq were only pawns in the oil industry's/presidents retirement plan. <:-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Was zdaydream before. Change in handle due to new Japan Today. <:-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush says so it must be true. I know they resisted comparisons to Vietnam but here is my case for a similarity. We are essentially defending an inept and possibly criminal government who is doing nothing to help themselves and actually assert control over their own country. Our troops are allowing the Malaki clan to do nothing while sectarian violence rages out of control. The Iraqi government keeps saying they need more time but I say they need to put in more effort. If we pulled out today Iraq would collapse like a house of cards. If no political solution is found then when we pull out in 5 or 10 years the end result will be the same. Oh yeah, that doesn't sound anything like South Vietnam, my bad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I absolutely agree with you guys... they didn't die in vain if you consider the different (economic) agendas of the Iraq war that no one can/will mention.

Furthermore, “And he bears the responsibility for the decisions that he made and he also bears the responsibility to continue to focus on succeeding.”

1) It's too late. 2) Why is the spokesperson saying this and not Bush? 3) Other than monetary compensation to military families, exactly how is Bush going to take responsibility????? (wouldn't removing himself from office be the next biggest way of taking responsibility instead of staying in office and making things worse?)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

george bush will never take the responsibility of starting a war based on lies. he will continue to lie till he dies.

It's the American people who will have the burden of picking up the pieces, paying the price and moving on without loved ones who have died.

Let's not place all this blame totally on george bush, I mean he is the one who started it, but:

dick cheney and doug feith created the lies.

dick cheney's energy meeting was a foremention to the energy giants to start getting ready.

donald rumpsfeld's military genius allowed an unequipped military to go to war.

colin powell lied to the world at the U. N.

condi rice was one of the biggest liars also. she doesn't talk to the public much anymore.

dick cheney still tells the same old lies at American Legion meetings.

this administration has been an embarrassment.

<:-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hey lets boycott American products since we want to boycott the olympic games! Want they are doing in Iraq is just as worse as what they are doing in Tibet right? Wrong! The American govt controls the media under the guise of free speech (i.e CNN) and it was through their propaganda that the American people were mislead into the unjust war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

VoxMan: well, the difference between homicide and suicide, despite the 'cide' which is the Latin ending for killing, is that in the latter one decides to die, while in the first this question is not asked before being shot. Just a little difference, don't you think so?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well in a way can anyone really fault Bush for saying the lives lost were not in vain? Really what other option does he have, does anyone in their right minds think that he would admit that it was in vain when he personally is responsible for the deaths of so many?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well anyone can give an answer to the question, "Were the deaths in vain?" I think the key is removing answers from those who are making a case from a political standpoint. Those belong in the garbage can. :)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The death were what they are, unfortunate and not neccessary in the great scheme of things. America has further alienated herself but doesn't seem to be too troubled as they are deep in their neocon imperial empire mode at the moment. They'll trip up, big clumsy kids always do when trying to learn to walk and fight at the same time..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And I can only see more wars on the horizon as their economy nose-dives further. End of an empire, possibly, maybe in 100 years when someone looks back from China..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I support the war in Iraq. Although they did not have any WMD we were still right in sending our troops to topple the Hussein dictatorship and bring freedom to the Iraqis. We have brought democracy and free speech to them and once again America has brought light into a dark part of the world. Bush is a patriot and years from now we will be calling him a hero. He is a true champion of freedom and the truth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I agree with you Jackaroo. What I have noticed about this website is that it contains a bunch of ex patriot America haters who can't hack it in the States. Therefore, they gather here and bash on the good ol' USA.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ROTORHEAD77 Hacked it quite well in the States thank you. Next time you are home check and see how many support your view. It's not just expats that think Bush should be held accountable for his lies. The last time I looked it was less than 30% who supported the war in Iraq. Keep in mind that doesn't mean they support immediate withdraw of troops either. I bet I am in the majority which is to say furious with Bush for waisting lives and money on a failed campaign in Iraq but mindful that now that we are there we have no choice but to see it through. I am not against military action so long as it benefits the interests of the US. Tell me how the involvement in Iraq has done anything but stretched our military thin, taken the eye off Afghanistan and put us deeper in debt?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Jackaroo, I'm sorry but in saying that America has brought free speech to Iraqis, you are just plain wrong.

Please do yourself a favor and research how the Iraqi "liberation" has affected the women of Iraq. They are hardly more free than prior to the invasion and they definitely have far fewer rights.

Here is just one of many news stories on their plight:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/08/iraq.peterbeaumont

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Saying the war was wrong and that Bush and his cronies messed this thing from the start is hardly anti American or "liberal" bias. In fact it is VERY American to criticize an administration that has continued to jerk around the American public in regards to this FUBAR mess. Rumsfeld and his cronies screwed this whole thing up royally while Bush asked for American patience year after year after year after year, while coalition forces continued dying. I wonder how the architects of this war sleep well at night with all the blood they have on their hands.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

FUBAR - That is a term I have not heard in a loooooong time. With regard to the Iraq disaster, it was based on false (or falsified) evidence, a clear lack of understanding regarding the region (Saddam was a dictator not a terrorist), poor planning vis-a-vis winning the peace, lies, etc. The net result of this is that the U.S. is damned if its stays in the region (because of perceptions that this is the new Crusade), and damned if it leaves (like a dog with its tail between its legs). However, what happens next. This time next year Bush will be bank in Texas on his ranch (animal husbandry), his kids will still have their silver spoons wedged in their mouths), and American and Iraqis will still be dying in their hundreds in the quagmire that has become Iraq. What can be done? If Bush and the rest of the chicken hawks (not John McCain) really believe in this cause, they should send their own kids to fight as a sign that they are willing to put their blood where their mouth is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mr Bush like to tell voter that itis ok in Iraq, and he is right. But he dos not mention Iraq was weak and cannot attack USA.Maybe not deadly as Vietnam, but very deadly for thousands severly injured or dead. catostrophy for USA, not victory.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If you ask me, I think that Mr Bush was not thinking when he send troops over there in Iraq. It set a bad example for the US and the United Nations. Everyone still does not know why they are over there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lives lost, not in vain, says bush. Because of vanity, on the other hand...

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good one taka!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

FUBAR nah its more of a SNAFU these days.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Im wondering when the Iraqi lives will not be lost in vain, Or do they not count Mr dubya. Presumably your intention was to save the lives of said victims of your war machine.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here's the brilliant commander in chief speaking oh so eloquently again:

Bush: Iraq violence a defining moment

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080328/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_29;_ylt=AlmdJd_yT.deWoD7.FEEdT8UewgF

(Defining moment? Didn't he say that during the eve of the invasion? Or was it during the third year with mounting casualties. Or perhaps it was when Zarqawi was killed? Or darnit, maybe he said it during the surge. Or better yet, perhaps all of the above? Folks, this tragic comedy of errors is a farce)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, I guess the more American lives that are lost, the more Americans will realize what a big mistake going to war was.

So in that sense, yes, "not in vain."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Well, I guess the more American lives that are lost, the more Americans will realize what a big mistake going to war was"

Or, the more Americans will realize that freedom isn't free. So in that sense, yes, "not in vain."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"freedom isn’t free"

yap, especially when it's based on lies, egocentrism and big money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Freedom, uh, sarge?

Who's freedom are "you" fighting for again over there?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

FreedomTM isn't free. It costs freedom.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge

Im wondering when you will be moving to Iraq. I mean your in japan now, and that cost how many US lives. Remember when they would kill you without remorse and Togo lived in his many luxurious palaces.

So by your theory which died in Vain WW2 or current MIL personal?. Which freedom cost more?.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts - "( Whose ) freedom are "you" fighting for again over there?"

( sigh ) Our freedom, including your freedom to ask impertinent questions like that one.

BTW, Madverts, I like the addition of the "M" to your handle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think many of you are too hard on Sarge. He believes in the right things and his heart is in the right place. I believe in the same things but have become disillusioned at the poor handling of this mess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

4000 lives down the toilet.

That's the truth that is hard to swallow but that is the truth. The war was necessary. Saddam was not a danger and he had no ties to Islamic extremists (generically referred to as al Qaeda), had nothing to do with 9/11 and did not try to kill Bush the First. After the Kuwait disaster he tried to be a good little neighborhood dictator, oppressing his people but bothering no one. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Lies, lies and more lies spread by Bush and his gang started this immoral, illegal and ill-fated war.

If you have somehow suffered because of this evil war you have my sympathies. Those sufferings were unnecessary.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Out of 4,313 coalition deaths in Iraq, 4005 are American. According to my calculations, that's 93%. The vast majority of these 4,005 deaths are after May 1, 2003 when Bush officially declared an end to major combat operations. Agree or diagree with the liberation of Iraq or the legality of it, the fact is Americans have borne a grossly unfair brunt of deaths in the fight against evil men in Iraq.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Freedom. Hmmm... For Irakis dependeds on who you ask.

If you ask to the Kurds is freedom for the kurds in Irak, Turkey and Iran. So if you support their freedom, then maybe you support their terrorists... ops..! freedom fighters acting in Turkey and Iran and the separatists in Irak.

If you ask to the Sunies, maybe is their freedom from the Shiites.

If you ask to the Shiites, maybe is freedom from the Sunies.

And if you ask to the nationalists, can be freedom from foreigner influence, the US or Iran or Al-Qaida or maybe two or all of them.

Honestly, today Irak is so divided and so many are mesing with their internal affaires that is dificult say that all of them think that freedom means fight the same enemy.

Freedom? High word that sounds like just PR in the ears of common citizens. I guess that the majority of the normal people just want that others stop manipulate them. More than talk aboit freedom I think that is just about bring security, the rest is useless rethoric.

The fact that the US cant give control to Irak's forces, is because the generals are afraid of give heavy weapons, aircrafts and other things like advanced comunications to armed forces that can turn against the american soldiers or just make a civil war even more bloodie (sounds logic to me). So, until things get more stable, send another "surge" of 30.000 for pacificate Basra and maybe in 2018 the US can get out of Irak.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Freedom isn't free"

Yes it is - when somebody else is doing the dying for you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites