US-Brit war killed 55,000 Iraqi civilians

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,407
8,595
126
I guess they'd rather be alive than free. Poor dumb bastards.
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
why is aljazeera low-balling the figure? why not pump it up to a few million civilians :Q
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
But wait, I thought we were saving Iraqis by killing Iraqis? Wait .... How does the story go again? Yes, the correct question is: How many Iraqis did we save? Indeed, we saved 24.95 million Iraqis. There you go. ;)
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Between 55,000 KIA (if the report is credible) in this war, 100,000 (maybe?) during Desert Storm, 300,000 in mass graves, I wonder how many Iraqis have actually died in that country as a result of war and dictatorial consequences over the previous twenty years?
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
quite a lot i am sure, but it still doesn't make me feel any better about my tax dollars being used to kill them.
 

AEB

Senior member
Jun 12, 2003
681
0
0
do you feel better about your tax dollars going to pay the welfare or medicare of some bum who doesnt want to work. Or paying the way for a "underepresented" youth to goto school? . id rather my money go to iraqis who didnt have as many choices, as do the people in our country getting money from special intrest programs
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
22,000 and 55,000 Iraqi civilians died during the bombing of the country.

thats some range. i wonder how many iraqi troop casualties were pumped into that figure to boot.
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
Originally posted by: AEB
do you feel better about your tax dollars going to pay the welfare or medicare of some bum who doesnt want to work. Or paying the way for a "underepresented" youth to goto school? . id rather my money go to iraqis who didnt have as many choices, as do the people in our country getting money from special intrest programs

blah blah blah... you're the typical self-righteous bastard who "concerns" themselves w/ other people's oil...i mean other people's problems.
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
I guess they'd rather be alive than free. Poor dumb bastards.

hah... since when do texans have the right to call any other group of people dumb?

:confused:
 

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
Originally posted by: AEB
do you feel better about your tax dollars going to pay the welfare or medicare of some bum who doesnt want to work. Or paying the way for a "underepresented" youth to goto school? . id rather my money go to iraqis who didnt have as many choices, as do the people in our country getting money from special intrest programs

Hmmm..tax money used to kill innocent civilians or used to help people...tough choice.
rolleye.gif


Ohh...hold up there chief...looks like your original statement wasn't right...let me fix it for you.

id rather my money go to -killing- iraqis who didnt have as many choices, as do the people in our country getting money from special intrest programs

Just curious, judging by your grammar, are you one of those "underrepresented" youth who didn't get much out of your schooling? ;)
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
I find it interesting that you guys repeatedly question the credibility of Al Jazeera, even though it's partly owned by Qatar's government. And we all know Qatar's government is one of many other US endorsed puppet regimes in the region.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
the us is pretty cozy with saudi arabias government too, yet they fund religious extremism.. so whats your point.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Well they killed 3000 in the WTC attacks...wait that was the Saudis not Iraqis..Hmmm
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
Originally posted by: AEB
do you feel better about your tax dollars going to pay the welfare or medicare of some bum who doesnt want to work. Or paying the way for a "underepresented" youth to goto school?

Do you also demonize the corporate welfare queens or are you just another hypocritical Republican? Corporations get more of our money than "bums who don't want to work."
 

Bulk Beef

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2001
5,466
0
76
The morons at Al Jazeera didn't even read the report.
Coalition combatant total: 394; Iraqi civilians total: 7,757-9,565; Iraqi combatants estimates range from 13,500-45,000. This brings the death toll between March 20-October 20, 2003 to between 21,700 and 55,000.
Medact Report
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
Their findings are suspect, and the report doesn't state how the figures were tallied. It also doesn't state whether they had any access to military records to determine if theses "civilians" were in fact "civilians" at all. I seriously doubt that a U.K. based charity had the manpower, or access to do a census after the conflict, and check the records to sort military from civilian. Their main purpose of these numbers is to get more money for their work. Of course they want to report as high as possible, the numbers killed. I would do the same in their shoes. They are not a journalistic organization, nor a governmental agency, so they are not in any way constrained by journalistic integrity, or government regulations about their reports. The fact that a news organization printed their figures doesn't add any more credibility than a release from The Weekly World News. I once read a story titled "Boy, Age 9, Raped by Gay Bigfoot", and another, "I Ran Over My Husband Because he Was Possessed by Mickey Mouse". Both top notch journalism, and totally accurate they say.

Look at the source, then weigh it's value, before spouting off.
 

Bulk Beef

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2001
5,466
0
76
They are not a journalistic organization, nor a governmental agency, so they are not in any way constrained by journalistic integrity, or government regulations about their reports. The fact that a news organization printed their figures doesn't add any more credibility than a release from The Weekly World News.
Read my post above. Al Jazeera did not print Medact's figures. Regardless of Medact's motives or methods, Al Jazeera's credibility is not just suspect, but non-existent.
 

Doboji

Diamond Member
May 18, 2001
7,912
0
76
Word..... bump this point... because it debunks the whole implication of the article and this thread...

The morons at Al Jazeera didn't even read the report.

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coalition combatant total: 394; Iraqi civilians total: 7,757-9,565; Iraqi combatants estimates range from 13,500-45,000. This brings the death toll between March 20-October 20, 2003 to between 21,700 and 55,000.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
3
0
Originally posted by: Pers
I find it interesting that you guys repeatedly question the credibility of Al Jazeera, even though it's partly owned by Qatar's government. And we all know Qatar's government is one of many other US endorsed puppet regimes in the region.



It's very independent from qatar. That's the way Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani (who owns it) wants it.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
31,740
48,563
136
TextAnd we all know Qatar's government is one of many other US endorsed puppet regimes in the region.

Having lived there for 5 years I can say with some certainty that you are talking out your ass. Good one about Texas though....heh.