|
bobd1953
Jul 20, 2005, 1:23 AM
Post #1 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
From Reuthers: BAGHDAD - U.S.-led forces, insurgents and criminal gangs have killed nearly 25,000 civilians, police, and army recruits since the war began in March 2003, according to a survey by Iraq Body Count, a U.S.-British non-government group. Nearly half the deaths in the two years surveyed to March 2005 were in Baghdad, where a fifth of Iraq's 25 million people live, according to media reports monitored by the group. Of the total, nearly 37 percent were killed by U.S.-led forces, it said. The U.S. military disputed the findings and said it did not target civilians.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Jul 20, 2005, 5:14 AM
Post #2 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: The U.S. military disputed the findings and said it did not target civilians. i certainly hope so. but if they didnt target them it doesnt mean they didnt kill them...
|
|
|
|
|
ikefromla
Jul 20, 2005, 7:04 AM
Post #3 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1216
|
i think i want to cry. :cry: for once i'm not even joking.. that fuckin sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jul 20, 2005, 7:30 AM
Post #4 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: From Reuthers: BAGHDAD - U.S.-led forces, insurgents and criminal gangs have killed nearly 25,000 civilians, police, and army recruits since the war began in March 2003, according to a survey by Iraq Body Count, a U.S.-British non-government group. Ah, Bob... why do you persist? :) In Bosnia, the death rate has been reported as upwards of 20,000 per year... YES, PER YEAR... and yet your Golden Child, Former President Clinton, did nothing. Nothing. 20,000 a year. For three years. While the USA stood by silently and did nothing. Think on that for a while.
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 8:04 AM
Post #5 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
The fact that people were killed in bosnia and herzegovina is not related to the deaths in Iraq and does not excuse them. Similarly, the fact that the deaths in bosnia were not stopped by clinton does not excuse our continuing to kill people in iraq. In fact I'm unclear why you mention it at all, reno.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 12:09 PM
Post #7 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: The fact that people were killed in bosnia and herzegovina is not related to the deaths in Iraq and does not excuse them. Similarly, the fact that the deaths in bosnia were not stopped by clinton does not excuse our continuing to kill people in iraq. In fact I'm unclear why you mention it at all, reno. It could be due to the fact that the Bush detractors love to get all indignant about this, primarily because it resulted from Bush's policies. It's not the "what", but the "who" that drives this outrage. BTW Tradman. Are you still going to assert that Bush murdered over 25,000 innocent civilians even though this report puts the number of deaths caused by US-led forces at less than 10,000?
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 12:14 PM
Post #8 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
So do you feel no outrage at 25,000 deaths, thorne? And would you think that 10,000 dead civilians is okay? We started this war. These deaths would not have occurred if we hadn't. Yes, they're our fault.
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 12:33 PM
Post #9 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: So do you feel no outrage at 25,000 deaths, thorne? And would you think that 10,000 dead civilians is okay? I addressed neither point. Just looking to shed some light on one of your frequent bullshit assertions. Shall we talk about Bush, the mass murderer? To answer your questions - - Not sure if outrage is the appropriate word. Deeply saddened is more fitting. - No. Absolutely not!
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 12:49 PM
Post #10 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
I'm glad that you agree that the deaths are entirely unacceptable. You are very amenable today. As for Bush being a mass murderer, I've asked several times if anyone can give me a defence against these deaths that would stand up in court. As yet, no-one has been able to do this. If you say this assertion is "bullshit", then why do you say it is "bullshit"?
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 12:53 PM
Post #11 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
What crimes, specifically, should he be charged of committing? By specifically, I mean which actual laws have been broken?
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 1:08 PM
Post #12 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
International law states that it is unlawful for any country to wage a war of agression against any country which does not threaten it. For Bush personally there are articles under the heading of crimes against humanity which render the leader of any country committing those acts responsible for them. And you didn't answer my question.
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 1:16 PM
Post #13 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
I assume you're talking about the "bullshit" assertion. I say bullshit because I don't know of any specific charges that have been filed against Bush. You throw out inflamatory phrases like "mass murderer", and I wonder where are these crimes being prosecuted.
|
|
|
|
|
uberdb
Jul 20, 2005, 1:17 PM
Post #14 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Posts: 77
|
Just a quick interjection here, I know the death toll looks horrendous (and is), but did you realize that the number of Iraqi deaths per year (including Kurds, Assyrians, Chaldeans and Turkoman - not just the Arabs) has dropped SIGNIFICANTLY since Saddam's regime was removed ? There are many, many years that his annual killings within his country far exceeded the total civilian casualties for the entire war to date. Yup, Bush is Soooo evil :wink: - DB
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 20, 2005, 1:19 PM
Post #15 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
Keep in mind, that "civilians" takes into account the terrorist infiltrators that have died, because they are not fighting as an organized military. Also, it goes witout saying (but I'm saying it anyway) that the huge majority of casualties amongst women and children have been the direct result of torrist suicide & roadside bombings. This was also happening long before the US & our Allies steped foot in the sandbox, and the mass graves that contain hundreds of thousands of bodies of men, women and children prove this. One only needs to weigh the difference between the number of casualities since the onset of war, as opposed to the numbers Saddam inflicted upon his own people during "peace time"... War is an ugly business, but in situations such as Iraq, it's for the greater good to rid the world of a tyrant. I guess some could surmise that Hitler should have been left unchecked as well...................... :?
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 1:23 PM
Post #16 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
Actually uberdb, we've covered that already in previous threads: according to Human Rights Watch, Saddam was responsible for between 50,000 and 100,000 iraqi deaths, but that was over a period of 30 years. The death rate is astronomically higher under the current occupation - 25,000 in just 2 years. If we stayed for 30 years, at our current rate of killing we'd slaughter 375,000 civilians. Aside from that, as I said earlier, how does the fact that Saddam was an evil monster make it okay for Bush to kill 25,000? I don't understand your reasoning.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 20, 2005, 1:35 PM
Post #17 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
It's the Saddam supporters/terrorists that have killed the largest numbers of people, and Bush is there to kill them! Curoiusly though, why was it okay for Clinton to send troops in during his administration, yet it's NOT okay for Bush..? More are dying, because Bush is serious about seeing this through, unlike when either Clinton or Bush,Sr had the opportunity. I do however recall the Clinton administration "declaring war" on our own US civilians in Waco though, murdering a 13yr boy & his mother in Ruby Ridge, then finally deporting a 6yr old refugee back into the hands of an evil dictator but not w/o a full-scale tactical assault. Now, lets imagine how the headlines would read if Bush had been the President during any of these 3 incidents... :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
uberdb
Jul 20, 2005, 1:36 PM
Post #18 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Posts: 77
|
I can assure you that neither U.S. Forces, nor Bush personally, have killed 25,000 Iraqis. I'm a career soldier, and most of my friends are currently over there, or have been there, or have been there twice. I'm going in October. All the stories my friends relate to me (besides, yes, the occasional shooting of someone - always with hostile intent) also include dissidents, insurgents and foreign fighters performing executions in towns that don't support them, bombings in markets and other public places and suicide attacks all over the place ... A lot of these attacks are focused on Iraqi civilians and infrastructure. At this stage of the conflict our fires are very discriminating ... it's the non-compliant forces that are doing all of the major damage now. Also, when an Iraqi civilian picks up an RPG and fires it at my friend, he's no longer a civilian. When his buddy runs out into the street to pick it up from his now defunct friend and tries to reload it, he's also no longer a civilian. The death toll does not account for non-uniformed combatants. - DB
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 20, 2005, 1:36 PM
Post #19 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: I can assure you that neither U.S. Forces, nor Bush personally, have killed 25,000 Iraqis. I'm a career soldier, and most of my friends are currently over there, or have been there, or have been there twice. I'm going in October. All the stories my friends relate to me (besides, yes, the occasional shooting of someone - always with hostile intent) also include dissidents, insurgents and foreign fighters performing executions in towns that don't support them, bombings in markets and other public places and suicide attacks all over the place ... A lot of these attacks are focused on Iraqi civilians and infrastructure. At this stage of the conflict our fires are very discriminating ... it's the non-compliant forces that are doing all of the major damage now. Also, when an Iraqi civilian picks up an RPG and fires it at my friend, he's no longer a civilian. When his buddy runs out into the street to pick it up from his now defunct friend and tries to reload it, he's also no longer a civilian. The death toll does not account for non-uniformed combatants. - DB Perfectly stated!
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 1:46 PM
Post #20 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
Uberdb, I neither said that Bush personally nor US soldiers in general had killed 25,000 Iraqis. I simply said they had been killed, in the context of comparing body count. If you have difficulty with this, read this web site. You'll find all the deaths accounted for. Your portrayal of US forces as pure saints who never, ever commit crimes is very strange. I don't particularly want to talk about the torture, rapes and murders committed by US troops in this war since it's fundamentally off-topic and frankly disgusting, but if you insist on playing that ridiculous victim card and looking for sympathy, we can go into it as a way to debunk your claims, okay?
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 1:51 PM
Post #21 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: Actually uberdb, we've covered that already in previous threads: according to Human Rights Watch, Saddam was responsible for between 50,000 and 100,000 iraqi deaths, but that was over a period of 30 years Where do you get these numbers? Here's something I found:In reply to: The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"
In reply to: The death rate is astronomically higher under the current occupation - 25,000 in just 2 years. If we stayed for 30 years, at our current rate of killing we'd slaughter 375,000 civilians. Nice extrapolation. How about looking at the numbers for the last 6 months. I wonder how many innocent civilians were killed by our troops.
|
|
|
|
|
thorne
Deleted
Jul 20, 2005, 2:12 PM
Post #24 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: according to Human Rights Watch, Saddam was responsible for between 50,000 and 100,000 iraqi deaths, but that was over a period of 30 years. The source you quote says - In reply to: Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds. You say "over a period of 30 years. Your source says "1987-1988 campaign of terror ". Such dishonesty is becoming more and more frequent.
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Jul 20, 2005, 2:16 PM
Post #25 of 146
(4078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
No dishonesty intended thorne. Saddam was in power for just over 30 years. Those deaths occurred in 2 of those years. If you know of other deaths in the 30 year period, please go ahead and include them. It doesn't really strengthen your claim that saddam was killing so many people if you point out that he was in power for 30 years but there were only substantial deaths in 2 of those years. If those deaths occurred in 1987-88, remind me why we invaded almost fifteen years later? I'll ask it again: In what way do deaths under Saddam legitimise deaths under our occupation?
|
|
|
|
|
|