Private study estimates Iraqi war dead at 13,000

[syzygy]

Originally posted by: Doboji
Ok so let me get this straight.... thousands of people didnt die in Iraq of sanctions?.... Ok but I'm gonna hold you to that... no hypocritical switch later when you use the sanctions to prove how "mean" the US is. But even if we discount the starvation deaths... what about the hundreds of thousands killed by Saddam for the 91' uprising?

Saddam also did things like, allow terrorists to train in Iraq, he sent money to the families of Suicide bombers in Israel. I know you're going to say thats Israel and not the United States... but anyway you look at it, Saddam Hussein was an open supporter of terrorism. To me the biggest hypocracy of the Bush administration is not it's decision to go into Iraq, it's Bush's refusal to be tougher on other terrorist states. (although we're getting off to a good start with Syria).

Hey man look... noone wants people to die... I dont want anyone to die. But isn't your argument kinda like the argument for not bombing the concentration camps in germany?... Yes if those camps had been bombed tens of thousands of innocent people, but many more millions would have been saved. And I'm not saying I'd be happy being one of those bombed... but if I were permitted retrospect, I still would have considered it the right decision.

Fact is we didnt do this simply to punish Saddam for his actions decades ago, or even in the most recent decade. We did this because eventually Saddam Hussein and Iraq needed to be dealt with... the whole containment theory no longer works.... (take North Korea as an example)... And while I agree with you, that Bush lied about the threat of Iraq, Iraq was no immediate threat.... However I do think that the fickle american public is and was... and that is why Bush lied... Do I think that makes it ok?... No... Do I condemn it? Yes.... we should live or die by our democracy.... even though I think that in our present crisis... it is our democracy that will kill us. Bush needs to go... even if I support his decisions in Iraq... his domestic policy scares me... and he did lie.

-Max

the sanctions arguement is idiotic. the money, resources, and logistical ability was there to provide for the iraqi people but saddam, sons, and
company horded the loot for their own personal needs. this is common knowledge. on top of the money available from the fuel-for-food program,
is the bounty accrued through sanction evasions with his neighbors, syria, jordan, and turkey. billions accumulated illegally.

while the imminent threat was not there, the failure of the sanctions regime left saddam with the funds to re-start his wmd programs when the
political climate cooled. dr. kay's findings proved the wmd infrastucture was preserved intact but was in abeyance.

 

[Doboji]

the sanctions arguement is idiotic. the money, resources, and logistical ability was there to provide for the iraqi people but saddam, sons, and
company horded the loot for their own personal needs. this is common knowledge. on top of the money available from the fuel-for-food program,
is the bounty accrued through sanction evasions with his neighbors, syria, jordan, and turkey. billions accumulated illegally.

while the imminent threat was not there, the failure of the sanctions regime left saddam with the funds to re-start his wmd programs when the
political climate cooled. dr. kay's findings proved the wmd infrastucture was preserved intact but was in abeyance.

I agree.... my point was simply that you can't both argue that the sanctions were killing thousands each month, and then turn around claim noone was dying in Iraq under Saddam.

Fact is... Saddam killed hundred of thousands, and the sanctions killed noone.

As for the WMD issue, to me it's still related to Sanctions, so long as the Sanctions were in place, the WMDs were not an imminent threat. However the minute the sanctions are lifted, they ARE an imminent threat, because like you said, the WMD program can be spun up right quick.

In my mind the sanctions were not helping at all, and were not a viable situation for much longer. Thus the military action was warranted and needed.

-Max

 

[EXman]

You sir are a dumbarse 13k is a guess while Saddam has conservative estimates of 500,000 to 1 million murders that were malicious (sp).

Think about it this way if Saddam was still in Power all this time you think there would be less than 13k dead? No I don't think so...

Why do you all keep posting this crap like this

Combattants or civilians, a life is a life, and those lives would not have been lost had we not started a pointless war.

it is so wrong it is beyond laughable.

I guess You'd rather Have Qusai still sendind his minions to the schools looking for the prettiest 10-17 yo to bring back to his palaces to rape? Not that rapes are not happening now but Saddam and his Sons were some sick puppies. Think about what you are saying.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: EXman
You sir are a dumbarse 13k is a guess while Saddam has conservative estimates of 500,000 to 1 million murders that were malicious (sp).

Think about it this way if Saddam was still in Power all this time you think there would be less than 13k dead? No I don't think so...

Why do you all keep posting this crap like this

Combattants or civilians, a life is a life, and those lives would not have been lost had we not started a pointless war.

it is so wrong it is beyond laughable.

I guess You'd rather Have Qusai still sendind his minions to the schools looking for the prettiest 10-17 yo to bring back to his palaces to rape? Not that rapes are not happening now but Saddam and his Sons were some sick puppies. Think about what you are saying.

blah blah blah blah. You sir are an even bigger dumbass cause you would rather have Americans and Iraqis alike die for reasons that are at best debatable and you keep a liar with the IQ of a doughnut in office. What's wrong with me saying: "Combattants or civilians, a life is a life, and those lives would not have been lost had we not started a pointless war."? Does it go too far in proving how neo-con scum like yourself have no regard for life? and the best part is how you people play it off like you had the Iraqis best intentions at heart all along. As brutal as Saddam is, there are people many times more brutal who we still bankroll. The hypocracy is scary. Do you honestly think the terrorists on 9/11 thought they were doing something wrong? For them, be it right or wrong, it's a war that must be fought. I know a lot of you find 3,000 Americans a lot harder to digest than any number of Iraqis so don't give me the altruistic spin.

EDIT: and no, I do not apolagize for this remark. If there is one thing that is starting to become clear to me after participating in these forums it is that an appaling number of people have no concept of death and to them numbers are just numbers if they don't involve dead Americans or Israelis. Pathetic and yes, I will keep making statements like: "Combattants or civilians, a life is a life, and those lives would not have been lost had we not started a pointless war." because I, and many others, beleive in them.

 

[Corn]

Do you honestly think the terrorists on 9/11 thought they were doing something wrong? For them, be it right or wrong, it's a war that must be fought.

What are/were those terrorists fighting for? Freedom? The same brand of freedom the Taleban brought to Afghanistan?

Guess what, your argument can be used to support our war in Iraq, for us, be it right or wrong, its a war that must be fought.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Corn

Do you honestly think the terrorists on 9/11 thought they were doing something wrong? For them, be it right or wrong, it's a war that must be fought.

What are/were those terrorists fighting for? Freedom? The same brand of freedom the Taleban brought to Afghanistan?

Guess what, your argument can be used to support our war in Iraq, for us, be it right or wrong, its a war that must be fought.

What do you think those terrorists are fighting for? They have a whole list of grievances that have nothing to do with "freedom" - although you and dubya seem to have the same lead curtain around your heads. Right, so let's ignore any actual reasons the terrorists have cited as impetus for waging war vs the U.S. and let's continue framing it as a war against freedom.

 

[Doboji]

What do you think those terrorists are fighting for? They have a whole list of grievances that have nothing to do with "freedom" - although you and dubya seem to have the same lead curtain around your heads. Right, so let's ignore any actual reasons the terrorists have cited as impetus for waging war vs the U.S. and let's continue framing it as a war against freedom.

Ok ok... lets play this game... what reasons do the terrorists have that justify the delibrate targeting and murder of innocents?

-Max

 

[EXman]

OK Mr. Guy I just flipping channels and they viewed newly declassified footage from a tape brought to American forces by a local shortly after the fall of Baghdad where public Iraqi tortures in town squares showing among other things in plain sight of many women and children a man getting his arm cut off by a scimmitar, 2 guys about to be beheaded and then they said it didn't totally work so they finnished it with a Knife, guy thrown off a 3 story building then beaten, and man getting whipped and caned all of this was in public. They did some editing of course but you got the drift.

So what is your point you'd rather have this happen every day in Iraq? You Brand me a Neo-Con but no matter how you paint this that crap is barbaric and we stopped it so go ahead and delude yourself and think we are doing the wrong thing. Freedom ain't free bub.

You sir are an even bigger dumbass cause you would rather have Americans and Iraqis alike die for reasons that are at best debatable and you keep a liar with the IQ of a doughnut in office

I am the Dumb one ok nice statement there... Ok man you just lost the last shred of credibility there you might not like him and he might not be the best speaker in the world but could you do 1 or 2 20-40min speeches a day without a mistake? Have you ever LIED? I can answer both for you. No and Yes. Get off your high horse get your head out of your butt and don't so easily believe all the liberal press that only reports the bad that is being done in Iraq.

What's wrong with me saying: "Combattants or civilians, a life is a life, and those lives would not have been lost had we not started a pointless war."?

nothing as long as you understand that although distasteful to you this war has saved many many more lives of Iraqis than it caused directly i.e. Saddams thugs would have more than that taken away easily except instead of being killed the would have been humiliated and tortured before being put to death. Also "pointless" that is your opinion and nothing more right now nobody can say wether or not this will be pointless or not. :clock: will tell.

 

[Gaard]

<<You Brand me a Neo-Con but no matter how you paint this that crap is barbaric and we stopped it so go ahead and delude yourself and think we are doing the wrong thing. >>

Yes, this crap is barbaric and the fact that it has been stopped is a good thing. You are saying that to have not stopped it is the wrong thing, correct?

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Doboji

What do you think those terrorists are fighting for? They have a whole list of grievances that have nothing to do with "freedom" - although you and dubya seem to have the same lead curtain around your heads. Right, so let's ignore any actual reasons the terrorists have cited as impetus for waging war vs the U.S. and let's continue framing it as a war against freedom.

Ok ok... lets play this game... what reasons do the terrorists have that justify the delibrate targeting and murder of innocents?

-Max

Sure thing. Let me start off by making it perfectly clear that I do not support or condone terrorism. I without equivication, think it's a "Bad Thing" (tm).

So with that said, if you would at least try to understand the terrorists, you'd realize that they don't consider anyone to be "innocent" - including the victims of the WTC 9/11 attack, nor those Israelis that are killed in suicide bomb attacks. Everyone is fair game. Now, again, I don't agree with this, however it's simple fact. That's how the terrorists think, so at the very least, we should try to understand that.

Why don't you start by reading OBL's fatwah declaring war on the U.S., in which he lays out his 3 primary grievances against the U.S.? Now maybe to you they aren't good reasons to wage war, as say Iraq having alleged WMDs or "rape rooms" were, but to the terrorists they're quite big issues. Ones apparantly worth dying for...

First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have formerly debated the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it.

The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, still they are helpless. Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, in excess of 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.

So now they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there.

The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.

All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al- Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said "As for the militant struggle, it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life."

To believe that the terrorists "hate freedom" (as Bush often states) is really doing everyone a disservice. They aren't waging this war because they hate freedom, they actually have a set of reasons. It would be smart of us to know where they're coming from and not just simply cast this battle as "good vs evil."

 

[EXman]

Yes, this crap is barbaric and the fact that it has been stopped is a good thing. You are saying that to have not stopped it is the wrong thing, correct?

Yes it was wrong for us to wait so long to stop entnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia and do almost zero in central Africa as well but since they don't attack us directly I guess we just didn't care as much.

Actually to be honest I am very disturbed but not shocked that Saddam's Islam neighbors didn't seem to lift a finger to help the Iraqi people themselves. Where was the outrage from that part of the world directed? Unfortunately it seems they were blinded by their mutual hate of Isreal even though Saddam was killing far more than Isreal ever has. Ironic.

for Deal monkey

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How many Iraqis would have died, if we hadn't gone in?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

None by our hands.

How many would have died in Europe if people Didn't take up arms against Hitler? Many psychological profilers have grouped Saddam with Hitler and Stalin too for that matter. Sitting on you hands can be the most harmful course of action. Go back and answer his question don't rationalize your opinion.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: EXman

Yes, this crap is barbaric and the fact that it has been stopped is a good thing. You are saying that to have not stopped it is the wrong thing, correct?

Yes it was wrong for us to wait so long to stop entnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia and do almost zero in central Africa as well but since they don't attack us directly I guess we just didn't care as much.

Actually to be honest I am very disturbed but not shocked that Saddam's Islam neighbors didn't seem to lift a finger to help the Iraqi people themselves. Where was the outrage from that part of the world directed? Unfortunately it seems they were blinded by their mutual hate of Isreal even though Saddam was killing far more than Isreal ever has. Ironic.

I'm not sure I understand you correctly. You're saying that the reason we helped the Iraqis and not the others is because Iraq attacked us directly?

 

[Doboji]

DealMonkey,

So with that said, if you would at least try to understand the terrorists, you'd realize that they don't consider anyone to be "innocent" - including the victims of the WTC 9/11 attack, nor those Israelis that are killed in suicide bomb attacks. Everyone is fair game. Now, again, I don't agree with this, however it's simple fact. That's how the terrorists think, so at the very least, we should try to understand that.

I think everyone understands this. I certainly understand that... but thats the problem, suppose in the United States a group of people felt that all property belonged to them, and set out to take whatever they pleased. Now I think that simply understanding the reasoning for their crimes doesn't excuse their actions. Especially after explaining that we DO NOT find those actions appropriate.

The same is true of terrorism, because terrorists have a twisted, warped view of the world, does not mean we allow them to kill our children. These people are not stupid, and if they wish to live in a world with other people, they have to let go of their ethnocentric misunderstandings, otherwise they must be removed.

As for the reasons you gave that the terrorist groups declare Jihad. While it may indeed be that extremist muslims subscribe to the beliefs posted, the vast majority of Muslims really dont. Furthermore, the actions these extremists take, and their impact on civillization itself, would be drastically reduced, were it not for the support of Arab/Muslim nations, who more often than not, are not fanatic. Saddam Hussein for example was quite secular, and yet he supported organizations like HAMAS.

So it does not make sense for the United States and the Western World, to turn on it's heels, and abandon the Middle East at the bequest of small Muslim minority.

Furthermore one of the complaints cited above is about Israel, and when it really comes down to it, the objection has been historically and arguably is still today, more about the state being "Jewish" than being about the rights of Palestinians. In particular the terrorist groups of the middle east are not demanding equal rights for Palestinians, they are asking for the expulsion of Jews, who, have every right to live there.

In short the terrorist demands and grievances are ill conceived and ill placed, and certainly do not excuse the actions they take. Sure we can understand them... I understand them completely... and so what?... should I obey them, even if they are wrong, and immoral?

If we are forced to accept the terrorist way of thinking.... then we should also embrace it... and god be with the terrorist supporting nations, and the world, were we to LOWER(yes thats right lower) ourselves to that level of stupidity. Because they would be absolutely decimated on a level beyond their imaginations. Or we can reject their way of thinking, and force them to accept our way of thinking. You pick. There is no alternative but to lose, and become subjugated.

That said... I'm with you on the whole good vs evil nonsense... Thats a waste of time... it's this simple... they are the enemy...
-Max

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Nevermind the ~200,000 killed by Saddam in the shiite uprising in 1991.

 

[EXman]

Yes and No.

Not Iraq but those sympethetic to the cause yes. Let's face it Saddam was an empowering image of resistance against the infedels. Many in that region think him a Hero along with Osama. Sad but true. Also Saddam did actively invest in terrorism $25,000US to families of suicide bombers and Iraq has harbored or turned a blind eye to terrorists operating/training out of their country.
Serbs and Central Africans were not taking pot shots at soft targets of close allies of ours or tall buildings in the US or cheering in the streets when it did happen.

 

[roboninja]

...they are asking for the expulsion of Jews, who, have every right to live there.

And why is that again?

 

[Corn]

And why is that again?

For the same reason that you have the right to live where you do.

 

[Corn]

.....or is your opinion that because the land you occupy was merely "stolen" further back in the past than the legal formation of Israel by the UN, well that makes it ok, right?

 

[roboninja]

We won our war for the land, they are still fighting theirs. Not saying our method was right, but it is over and in the past, so there is little ot be done now.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Corn
.....or is your opinion that because the land you occupy was merely "stolen" further back in the past than the legal formation of Israel by the UN, well that makes it ok, right?

At least Native Americans get their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the Palestinians.

 

[roboninja]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Corn
.....or is your opinion that because the land you occupy was merely "stolen" further back in the past than the legal formation of Israel by the UN, well that makes it ok, right?

At least Native Americans get their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the Palestinians.

Go get 'em, Dealmonkey


What a lame-ass post to reach Senior status on

 

[Corn]

At least Native Americans get their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the Palestinians.

A simple and gross misrepresentation of the facts. We did not broker peace with the American Indians, we forcibly relocated them there. Israel had a deal on the table with 98% of what Arafat wanted minus Jerusalem, they chose not to accept their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the American Indians who basically had no choice in the matter.

Maybe Israel should bargain like the US did, eh?

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Corn

At least Native Americans get their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the Palestinians.

A simple and gross misrepresentation of the facts. We did not broker peace with the American Indians, we forcibly relocated them there. Israel had a deal on the table with 98% of what Arafat wanted minus Jerusalem, they chose not to accept their own soverign areas to live in, unlike the American Indians who basically had no choice in the matter.

Maybe Israel should bargain like the US did, eh?

Hey, I'm just pointing out the disparities between two groups of displaced people. I never said how they got to where they are today was exactly the same. I still maintain the Native Americans got a better deal in the long-run: Sovereignty AND the opportunity to make big bucks with their casinos. I do agree with you though, the Palestinians had a pretty good deal on the table. Considering all of the suffering since then, they should have definitely taken it.

 

[Corn]

Sovereignty AND the opportunity to make big bucks with their casinos.

I'm sure the Palestinians would be free to operate casinos as they wish.

Question for you though, how long do you think the "sovereignty" of the Indian reservation would last if they begun launching terror attacks against the general US population? Is the American Indian's soveriegnty any different than what is currently enjoyed by the Palestinians?

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Corn

Sovereignty AND the opportunity to make big bucks with their casinos.

I'm sure the Palestinians would be free to operate casinos as they wish.

Question for you though, how long do you think the "sovereignty" of the Indian reservation would last if they begun launching terror attacks against the general US population? Is the American Indian's soveriegnty any different than what is currently enjoyed by the Palestinians?

Well, in a legal sense, having sovereignty is much better than not having it. Although if terror attacks were launched, all bets would be off. I'm not exactly sure what is currently "enjoyed" by the Palestinians, as there doesn't seem to be anything official in place. It's total anarchy over there.