No need to count dead Iraqi civilians b/c we didn't mean to kill them

[BaliBabyDoc]

Gimme back my thread . . . we can talk about Bush lies by commission later. The topic at hand are Bush lies by omission.

 

[kru]

"Many conservatives and supporters of the Iraq War --the mass of Americans who shrug off civilian deaths when they are not American civilian deaths--obviously have a pronounced problem with visualizing numbers and applying moral standards. Or they just don't care."


visual aid for the numerically and morally challenged

 

[DealMonkey]

Yeah, I thought this thread was about the U.S. not caring enough about Iraqi civilians to accurately keep statistics on civilian casualties during OIF. A "precision war" was prosecuted, only we don't really know how precise because there's no figures to back that premise up. We're supposed to take everyone's word for it? Yeah, right . . .

 

[GrGr]

If there is no official count of Iraqi dead and wounded then all counts will be unofficial and since we know how unreliable unofficial numbers are they must be exaggerated to embarass the US which means they are anti-US which means that they are spreading lies about the US and since we know that they are lying in reality there are no Iraqi casulties. All reports to the contrary are anti-US propaganda.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: miguel

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

I'm noticing a pattern with you Bush-haters. As long as there is some kind of snipe agaist Bush, WMD, Iraq, 2000 Election, etc. you are happy. Is that some kind of security blanket? Do you go to bed at night saying "good night, honey. Where's the WMD?"

Not to hijack my own thread . . . but didn't Bush "sell" his war by sending people to bed at night with the thought, "my God, Honey . . . we must stop Saddam, Al Qaeda, and their WMD!?"

Not me and I think not a lot of people, judging from the polls I've seen about support for the war and not caring about whether WMDs are found or not.

Personally, I thought going after Saddam would help in the WoT, because Saddam encourages terrorism by providing $10k checks to suicide bomber's families in Palestine. Stopping him is a step in the GLOBAL WoT. I am disappointed they haven't found the WMDs and Bush will have to deal with that issue pretty soon, but it's not only about WMDs.

Just want to jump in here and ask a quick question. Isn't it true that S. Arabia and Qatar also cut checks for the suicide bomber's families?

yes

During Operation Defensive Shield Saudi Arabian and Palestinian documents were captured, which indicate the systematic and ongoing transfer of large sums of money to the Palestinians by official Saudi institutions for "supporting the Intifada". Among the various institutions, "the Saudi Committee for Support of the Intifada Al Quds" headed by the Saudi Interior Minister stands out.
The captured documents demonstrate that the Saudi support was not only of a humanitarian religious nature, as Saudi spokesmen in the U.S. claim.

The documents clearly reveal that Saudi Arabia transferred, inter alia, large sums of money in a systematic and ongoing manner to families of suicide terrorists, to the Hamas Organization (on the U.S. list of terror organizations) and to persons and entities identified with the Hamas. According to the captured documents, the Saudi Committee for Support of the Intifada was aware that the funds it transferred were paid to families of terrorists who perpetrated murderous attacks in Israeli cities, in which hundreds of Israelis were killed and wounded. An American woman was also killed in one of these attacks

linky

linky2

because some posterboys here are on the moral highground for replacing dictators and sponsors of terrorism I guess they should start with S-A.
Oh wait, they are an ally with a lot of oil. Just like other ruthless dictators that were sponsored by the west in the last 50 years (Sjah, Pinochet, Mobutu, ...)

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

timely confirmation of my premise

In a 147-page report entitled "Off Target: The Conduct of the War and Civilian Casualties in Iraq," Human Rights Watch said Friday in a news release that U.S. and British forces used almost "13,000 cluster munitions, containing nearly 2 million submunitions, that killed or wounded more than 1,000 civilians."

Before Bushies disparage the source, the Bush administration repeatedly cited/cites Human Rights Watch reports about Saddam/Iraq.

"Coalition forces generally tried to avoid killing Iraqis who weren't taking part in combat," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "But the deaths of hundreds of civilians still could have been prevented."

Intent is important but methods matter as well. The USAF has been reducing it's use of cluster munitions from the Gulf War to Afghanistan to Bush War 2003. The Marines tended to call in close air support but also restrained their use of cluster weapons. The Army gorged itself on cluster munitions during Bush War 2003.

Human Rights Watch said while the U.S. Air Force in Iraq has been using fewer cluster bombs in populated areas in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and now Iraq, the U.S. Army in contrast "launched tens of thousands of cluster submunitions in populated areas."

"U.S. ground forces need to learn the lesson that the Air Force seems to have adopted: Cluster munitions cannot be used in populated areas without huge loss of civilian life."

 

[DoubleL]

BaliBabyDoc
You ever been in a war, Didn't think so

 

[CaptnKirk]

For the good of the Iraqi People, we dicided to kill them first with cluster bombs . . .
before Saddam had the chance to kill them. He does kill his own people you know.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

BaliBabyDoc
You ever been in a war, Didn't think so

Have you ever been a decent human being . . .

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

I'd like to see this count completed so we can SUBTRACT it from the number of people Saddam and his regime have brutally murdered for having their own OPINION over the last 24 years. Does *anyone* look at the big picture? Who the hell taught we IDIOTIC Americans that people have a "right" to dictatorial government that doesn't even *recognize* rights? Don't you get it? There can be NO SUCH RIGHT! It's a contradiction in terms! What you *REALLY* mean when you say such things is that some people have the right to do with others as they please, which is the same thing as saying "I BELIEVE IN SLAVERY." It's precisely this twisted thinking that's lead to the current Welfare state in America and that lead to the MURDER of more than FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE under former Soviet Union rule.

For Goodness sakes, people, recognize that ALL human beings have rights and that NO ONE, NO PERSON and NO GROUP has the right to violate the rights of others. You people are SMARTER than this, stop buying the BS propaganda and Socialist education you got in the public school system!

Jason

EDIT: I might add, for those who think this war was "unjustified," that regardless of whether Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, the FACT is that he was a cruel dictator running a regime of brutal savagery that regarded neither man nor woman as creatures with rights. That ALONE is justification to overthrow their government. Theoretically YES, the Iraqi's should have done it themselves, but history shows us *clearly* that is is very, VERY rare for a people to do so. The American example is an HISTORICAL ANOMALY. Most people need HELP to break the pattern, just as psychologically most people need the help of a Psychologist to break difficult patterns learned from their upbringing. Don't criticize these people for their suffering, help lift them out of it!

 

[boran]

on the topic of bush actually lying, I think that's quite a far shot, what he said about WMD might end up not being true, but it might just be a case of sequential blowing things up. intelligence agancy 1 finds 1 bomb, they say iraq has bombs, intelligence agency 2 gets the report and slightly adds a bit more, and finally at the end of the chain is the man whoose job it is to tell it to the public, and what he sais might have little resemblance to what actually is a fact, but it's hard to point out a single department or structure that actually lied about it, they might all have added just that little bit more of assumption into the deal, with the end result being what the public gets to hear.

also, iraq aint no small country, and saddam might have had the brains to actually spend time destroying and deconstructing his WMD's if they're hidden somewhere overthere, well imagine a "where's wally" poster the size of new york. and try to find wally.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
I'd like to see this count completed so we can SUBTRACT it from the number of people Saddam and his regime have brutally murdered for having their own OPINION over the last 24 years. Does *anyone* look at the big picture? Who the hell taught we IDIOTIC Americans that people have a "right" to dictatorial government that doesn't even *recognize* rights? Don't you get it? There can be NO SUCH RIGHT! It's a contradiction in terms! What you *REALLY* mean when you say such things is that some people have the right to do with others as they please, which is the same thing as saying "I BELIEVE IN SLAVERY." It's precisely this twisted thinking that's lead to the current Welfare state in America and that lead to the MURDER of more than FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE under former Soviet Union rule.

For Goodness sakes, people, recognize that ALL human beings have rights and that NO ONE, NO PERSON and NO GROUP has the right to violate the rights of others. You people are SMARTER than this, stop buying the BS propaganda and Socialist education you got in the public school system!

Jason

EDIT: I might add, for those who think this war was "unjustified," that regardless of whether Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, the FACT is that he was a cruel dictator running a regime of brutal savagery that regarded neither man nor woman as creatures with rights. That ALONE is justification to overthrow their government. Theoretically YES, the Iraqi's should have done it themselves, but history shows us *clearly* that is is very, VERY rare for a people to do so. The American example is an HISTORICAL ANOMALY. Most people need HELP to break the pattern, just as psychologically most people need the help of a Psychologist to break difficult patterns learned from their upbringing. Don't criticize these people for their suffering, help lift them out of it!

So why didn't Bush try to sell the war to the American People on that merit alone? I can tell you, because he wouldn't have been able to do it. Man you sound more like a Bleeding Heart Liberal than most Democrats!

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

LOL, Red. I *always* thought that he should have sold it on those merits, because then all idiot countries like France and Germany would have been able to reply with would be "We don't care if everyone has freedom or not!" That's also largely true of the American public, however, which is pretty sad, given that we should have a better understanding of the importance of Liberty than anyone else in the world. I've always said, the citizens who appreciate and understand their freedom most of all in America are the ones who came here from crappy socialist nations.

Now, it's *awfully* peculiar to say I sound like a bleeding heart, LOL. I'm far from that. I tilt toward the cause of Liberty, whereas your average bleeding heart tilts toward the enslavement of those who WORK to those who DON'T. I'd never do that.

Jason