They aren't reporting the "good things." Not to the extent of the negative ones. And you know it.

I started out writing a more detailed point-by-point reply, but gave up. You know, I've never been in the military, and am not really qualified to answer this. I wish someone who has been would.

Put it this way: if my kid was going off to war, I'd much rather Patton was giving him the sendoff speech than you.

Once you get the idea that you really morally shouldn't be shooting at anyone, the guys who will wrap their own children in dynamite to kill you, will win. This doesn't mean you have to be Psycho Trooper, but killing the bad guys is the objective.

but for you to be upset that some damn loyal soldier felt for the loss of his comrades is kinda unpatriotic... care to explain your traitorous comments Tom?

I believe I mentioned more than once that I did not consider what the soldier said to be in any way wrong, and speculated that many of his fellows felt the same way. What I was pointing out is that the editor who selected that quote was trying to emphasize the casualities in Iraq during a celebration of the safe return of some soldiers. Is that really the most critical point here? Why? When polled, most military people in Iraq believe they are accomplishing something important over there. Did not a single returning soldier say something about that? Isn't that an important point, too?

But if we go to war for a just cause then hearing the sad results shouldnt bother you.. right?

Of course they bother me. My brother is in the military. He is not in harm's way now, but he was in the Middle East during the first Gulf War. The difference is I don't consider casualties as a reason to surrender, or a sign of military failure, like many others seem to.