Iraqi Death Toll

[Remiel]

For me to give an accurate description of your conclusions, your facts or your intellect, I would be required to break the rules of this forum.

[B. Max]

For me to give an accurate description of your conclusions, your facts or your intellect, I would be required to break the rules of this forum.

That's generally the way liberal types operate and was best summed up some time ago by others.

At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats . (PJ O'Rourke)

[KrustyKidd]

Is it lonely down there in the bunker with just you and the strawmen? Or are they strawgirls? No pancho...the time machine is to correct the 100+ mistakes made. Mistake that are killing people today, not Saddam mind you, these are US mistakes.

I imagine you would have it all under control. Been a long time since I heard the left come up with an actual plan rather than bitching so, go ahead - shoot.

I suppose that makes you sleep better at night...so what ever works for you, valium, delusions what ever....

What? That the US did not find the weapons that the entire planet thought Iraq posessed?

Oh, just wondering, how come people never blame Saddam Hussein for any of the death and carnage whatever number you come up with? I mean, all he had to do was file the correct paperwork, allow immediate and unconditional inspections and adhere to some decade plust resolutions.

Don't think that maybe he might have been able to avert this? I sure do, so, he is responsible for any deaths that occur, not Bush.

How quaint. You think because there was an election, the people are free. WHat a charming notion. I think i will suggest that as a programme for corrections Canada. Why not have elections in prisons...despite not being able to come and go and the atmosphere of pervasive violence, an election will give them liberty....

The poor Baghdad iraqi on the otherhand, risks life and limb to go shopping, pays multiple taxes, sometimes even to the gov't. Gets shot at on a regular basis by foreign contractors for having the nerve of being on the same street as them......endures multiple bombings per day....but deep down he knows he's free....thats why his ak 47 are so near.......

Yes he does. A lot freer than they used to be and, they understand that this is a painful gestation period that will ultimately end. That's why people risked life and limb to vote on so many occasions.

[jbg]

Yes he does. A lot freer than they used to be and, they understand that this is a painful gestation period that will ultimately end. That's why people risked life and limb to vote on so many occasions.

The death and bloodshed of Hungary's 1956 revolt eventually sewed the seeds for Eastern Europe's liberation. The process in the ME may not be pretty but it will be effective.

Bush, despite some faults in exeuction, and more in explanation, has done the right thing, and will leave the world a better place than when he took office. And this if from a Gore voter (in 2000).

[jdobbin]

The death and bloodshed of Hungary's 1956 revolt eventually sewed the seeds for Eastern Europe's liberation. The process in the ME may not be pretty but it will be effective.

Bush, despite some faults in exeuction, and more in explanation, has done the right thing, and will leave the world a better place than when he took office. And this if from a Gore voter (in 2000).

The British Army chief of staff disagrees.

[KrustyKidd]

The British Army chief of staff disagrees.

The heads of state for over ninty countries agree as does the UNSC.

[Remiel]

See, B. Max, that is your whole problem. You make sweeping and grossly uninformed, biased and just plain ridiculous statements, and then back them up with ideological attacks on your foes, as if your accusations carried any weight, which they don't.

Your statement about all of the current problems in Iraq being caused by " Saddam's thugs " is bull. This is sectarian violence, and the two main sides are Sunni vs. Shiite. In case you hadn't noticed, Shiites hate Saddam's guts, but they are just as culpable for the violence as the Sunnis, which may include some of Saddam's lackeys, but are hardly limited to them.

Your clear lack of knowledge about this basic fact throws your feeble talk of " proof " out the window.

[M.Dancer]

I just read a similar article from the Baltimore Sun... the bottom range of the Hopkins estimate was 392,000. I mean, it sickening, and astounding. And the worst part is, the people who started this war will probably get away with it.

And abouit 1/3 of those were caused by the Coalition. How is Arabs and Farsis butchering Iraqis the Coalition's fault?

I think your opinion is shared by heroin dealers world wide........

[M.Dancer]

The death and bloodshed of Hungary's 1956 revolt eventually sewed the seeds for Eastern Europe's liberation. The process in the ME may not be pretty but it will be effective.

I don't want to interupt you while you're being so irrelevant...but the comparison between the liberal western society of Hungary versus the Stalinist USSR and the sectarian anarchy of iraq versus the sectarian anarchy of iraq is even more tenous that a drunken spider's thread.

[sharkman]

A drunken spider's thread? Dude, now I'm starting to wonder why you brought up heroin.

You want to hear some leaps of logic? Critics of Bush are now saying he caused Jong's pushing for nuclear weapons by calling him part of the axis of evil. I am not making this up. What a hoot!

[M.Dancer]

A drunken spider's thread? Dude, now I'm starting to wonder why you brought up heroin.

You want to hear some leaps of logic? Critics of Bush are now saying he caused Jong's pushing for nuclear weapons by calling him part of the axis of evil. I am not making this up. What a hoot!

Interesting but irrelevant

[M.Dancer]

A drunken spider's thread? Dude, now I'm starting to wonder why you brought up heroin.

You want to hear some leaps of logic? Critics of Bush are now saying he caused Jong's pushing for nuclear weapons by calling him part of the axis of evil. I am not making this up. What a hoot!

Heroin dealers don't like to be blamed for their clients drug deaths

[B. Max]

See, B. Max, that is your whole problem. You make sweeping and grossly uninformed, biased and just plain ridiculous statements, and then back them up with ideological attacks on your foes, as if your accusations carried any weight, which they don't.

Your statement about all of the current problems in Iraq being caused by " Saddam's thugs " is bull. This is sectarian violence, and the two main sides are Sunni vs. Shiite. In case you hadn't noticed, Shiites hate Saddam's guts, but they are just as culpable for the violence as the Sunnis, which may include some of Saddam's lackeys, but are hardly limited to them.

Your clear lack of knowledge about this basic fact throws your feeble talk of " proof " out the window.

No I don't see. In fact I don't see you backing up anything you say.

It's called the Sunni led insurgency, they were the rulers of the bathest party. The party of Saddam. They couldn't beat the US so they decided to try and start a civil war and began murdering Shiite's. Of course all the Bush bashers started blaming Bush, in stead of those responsible, and have even suggested putting Saddam back in charge. Once again siding with Islamic terrorists and states that sponsor terrorism.

Same old same old.

http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2003/august/08_26_1.html

[M.Dancer]

http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2003/august/08_26_1.html

Nothing like 3 yeqar old news...........

Since then you have the shiite militia(s).....secular ba'athists.....kurdish......foriegn fighters........

[B. Max]

Since then you have the shiite militia(s).....secular ba'athists.....kurdish......foriegn fighters........

It doesn't change anything, and foriegn fighters have been there for a long time.

[M.Dancer]

Since then you have the shiite militia(s).....secular ba'athists.....kurdish......foriegn fighters........

It doesn't change anything, and foriegn fighters have been there for a long time.

Kudoos for getting one right. Yes the foreign fighters have been there a long time....about 10 months after the invasion I believe....I think their slogan is "Stay The Course"

[B. Max]

Kudoos for getting one right. Yes the foreign fighters have been there a long time....about 10 months after the invasion I believe....I think their slogan is "Stay The Course"

Does that put me one up on you.

[jdobbin]

The heads of state for over ninty countries agree as does the UNSC.

About the conduct of the war, they agree?

I think you are reading too much in a resolution. The British General says the war has been mishandled and made things more dangerous.

[jbg]

a drunken spider's thread.

To quote a renowned poster's made up expression, "advanced pillockism".

[bradco]

The argument is that the war provided for the conditions for the deaths. They are indirect casualties of US intervention.

Do you understand now.

People were dying before the war. Iraq is part of the war on terror. People tend to die in wars that's a fact. The thugs that are still causing problems are saddams's thugs. Proves we were right to go in there in the fisrt place.

Now I know the Bush Administration calls the Iraq war a part of the war on terror. But is it? And why?

[jbg]

Now I know the Bush Administration calls the Iraq war a part of the war on terror. But is it? And why?

1. Saddam was funding terror;
   
2. Saddam was suppressing the Shi'ite and Kurd minorities;
   
3. The invasion breaks up the geographical contiguity of the "ummah" (a desireable objective in itself);
   
4. While democratization has not gone perfectly it's now in the Muslim vocabulary and debate stream;
   
5. I suspect things are going a lot better than MSM portrays. A village developing a civic culture is not news; a roadside bomb is; and
   
6. Most importantly, the West cannot allow the "mouse to roar" with impunity.
   

[gc1765]

Now I know the Bush Administration calls the Iraq war a part of the war on terror. But is it? And why?

1. Saddam was funding terror;
   
2. Saddam was suppressing the Shi'ite and Kurd minorities;
   
3. The invasion breaks up the geographical contiguity of the "ummah" (a desireable objective in itself);
   
4. While democratization has not gone perfectly it's now in the Muslim vocabulary and debate stream;
   
5. I suspect things are going a lot better than MSM portrays. A village developing a civic culture is not news; a roadside bomb is; and
   
6. Most importantly, the West cannot allow the "mouse to roar" with impunity.
   

Are all of these things worth somewhere between 30,000 and 600,000 lives (whichever number you believe to be correct), as well as somewhere around 400 billion dollars? How many lives were saved by removing saddam from power? How many lives were lost? How many additional lives could 400 billion dollars save?

[jbg]

Now I know the Bush Administration calls the Iraq war a part of the war on terror. But is it? And why?

1. Saddam was funding terror;
   
2. Saddam was suppressing the Shi'ite and Kurd minorities;
   
3. The invasion breaks up the geographical contiguity of the "ummah" (a desireable objective in itself);
   
4. While democratization has not gone perfectly it's now in the Muslim vocabulary and debate stream;
   
5. I suspect things are going a lot better than MSM portrays. A village developing a civic culture is not news; a roadside bomb is; and
   
6. Most importantly, the West cannot allow the "mouse to roar" with impunity.
   

Are all of these things worth somewhere between 30,000 and 600,000 lives (whichever number you believe to be correct), as well as somewhere around 400 billion dollars? How many lives were saved by removing saddam from power? How many lives were lost? How many additional lives could 400 billion dollars save?

Sure are. Would destabilizing Hitler have been worthwhile in 1934, given what happened?

[gc1765]

Are all of these things worth somewhere between 30,000 and 600,000 lives (whichever number you believe to be correct), as well as somewhere around 400 billion dollars? How many lives were saved by removing saddam from power? How many lives were lost? How many additional lives could 400 billion dollars save?

Sure are. Would destabilizing Hitler have been worthwhile in 1934, given what happened?

Yes. Hitler killed millions, and if he had not stopped he could have wiped out every jew, black etc... many millions more people would have died.

How many people did saddam kill? How many more would he have killed? How does that compare to the number of lives lost in the iraq war?

What is the maximum number of lives that 400 billion dollars can save?

[KrustyKidd]

Jdobbin

About the conduct of the war, they agree?

I think you are reading too much in a resolution. The British General says the war has been mishandled and made things more dangerous.

JBG origionally said;

Bush, despite some faults in exeuction, and more in explanation, has done the right thing, and will leave the world a better place than when he took office. And this if from a Gore voter (in 2000).

Then you said;

The British Army chief of staff disagrees.

Then I said;

The heads of state for over ninty countries agree as does the UNSC.

This means that the heads of state for over ninty countries have aided the US in this endeavor. Not the UNSC. Basicly what I am saying in response to your post about the General is agreeing with JBG in that the military, intelligence and strategic portions of the invasion could have gone a lot better than they did, the overall rationale and objective is a good one and is widely supported.

Bradco

Now I know the Bush Administration calls the Iraq war a part of the war on terror. But is it? And why?

What's interesting is that so many on the right are quick to say Saddam was a key in the war on terro but really, he had nothing to do with it save being a dictator in the wrong place at the wrong time with a target painted on his head. Pretty much the US required a key piece of real estate with which to pressure Saudi Arabia with and, the options were few save, a dictator who was so vulnerable to action (as in fourteen resolutions all promising force if he did not comply) and invading Saudi Arabia itself to take on Al Queda there as the Saudis refused to take on this unpleasant task was not even an option.

As well, but very secondary was the pain in the ass which Saddam was. Playing cat and mouse games while children died on CNN and drawing attention to himself while the US footed the bill was and, if played out long enough would have seen sanctions lifted and him up to the old games again of invasion and WMD aquisition. In order to focus on terror and Jihadists, Saddam was more of an asset gone than in power.

The Iraqi people themselves are an asset int e WOT in that democracy is the wooden stake to their heart. A Jihadist can find recruits much easier in repressive societies who have no outlet for disention other than radicalism whereas in a democratic one, people find much easier ways to express themselves and, have a life and choices other than all or nothing. Hence, the side benifit of creating a democracy which is Arabic and Muslim which powers itself by oil would be an example to other nearby countries that Jihadists find a nest in.