Article

2007-05-11

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2007-05-11 11:09|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [1740 views ] Top

1 Thanks for keeping tabs on this, Chuck, in the midst of your other responsibilities. I'm awfully glad your lovely wife is continuing her recovery! :-)

Posted by trailing wife 2007-05-11 12:24|| 2007-05-11 12:24|| Front Page Top

2 She's scooting around the house in her walker. Other than a nagging cough, she's well on the way to a modest recovery.

I still cannot connect to the JTF-82 site for Afghan activity. http://www.cfc-a.centcom.mil/ is one URL, and I was given http://214.13.74.131 as well. The operation times out. Oddly, when I was last at the ambulance base, in late April, I could connect from there. Any help would be appreciated.

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2007-05-11 12:33|| http://northshorejournal.org]">[http://northshorejournal.org] 2007-05-11 12:33|| Front Page Top

3 Since the terrs supposedly "love death", would this be a joyous milestone rather than a grim one?

Either way, keep sending the jihadists on as long as they are stupid enough to keep coming.

Posted by eLarson 2007-05-11 13:09|| 2007-05-11 13:09|| Front Page Top

4 Terrorist Death Watch Update

ahhh... cockles getting all toasty...

thanks Chuck S

;-)

Posted by RD">RD 2007-05-11 13:15|| 2007-05-11 13:15|| Front Page Top

5 A grim milestone, indeed.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-05-11 14:35|| 2007-05-11 14:35|| Front Page Top

6 Sea, I think you meant 'GRIN'.....

Posted by USN. Ret. 2007-05-11 15:02|| 2007-05-11 15:02|| Front Page Top

7 Are they out of "virgins" yet??

Posted by illeagle 2007-05-11 16:02|| 2007-05-11 16:02|| Front Page Top

8 Less than two to one overall is a losing ratio for the US military. Six to one in combat is terrible for us; as I recollect it was more like 100:1 in the initial drive to Baghdad.

How can these figures be accurate unless most of our 'combat' losses are due to snipers? The combat numbers don't jibe with the action reports we see, which are usually something along the lines of 15 enemy losses and no Coalition losses.

Posted by KBK 2007-05-11 16:56|| 2007-05-11 16:56|| Front Page Top

9 As for a discussion of the ratio of kills, please see:

http://northshorejournal.org/index.php/2007/05/terrorist-death-watch-and-our-losses

I propose excluding IED losses. That boosts the kill ratio much, much higher.

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2007-05-11 18:17|| http://northshorejournal.org]">[http://northshorejournal.org] 2007-05-11 18:17|| Front Page Top

10 What odds that the enemy casualty loss counts only those that can be proved, not bodies carried away or turned to a pink mist in the explosion? In which case the ratio would be much more to KBK's liking. I'm just throwing out my personal belief, but I'd love to hear from someone more knowledgeable on the subject.

Chuck, scooting around is a big step! I'm thrilled for you both.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-05-11 20:24|| 2007-05-11 20:24|| Front Page Top

11 Not enough. It should be 4000 per month.

Posted by Sneaze 2007-05-11 20:47|| 2007-05-11 20:47|| Front Page Top

23:30 Chomock Wittlesbach8440
23:27 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:24 JosephMendiola
23:12 JosephMendiola
23:04 Zenster
23:01 JosephMendiola
22:56 Zenster
22:53 Alaska Paul
22:38 Alaska Paul
22:33 Zenster
22:31 Asymmetrical T
22:28 gorb
22:23 gorb
22:16 Glenmore
22:10 JosephMendiola
22:10 JosephMendiola
22:09 JosephMendiola
22:08 Deacon Blues
22:07 Pappy
22:05 JosephMendiola
21:57 JosephMendiola
21:53 trailing wife
21:50 JosephMendiola
21:47 CochinoMarrano
Merry-Go-Blog