|
|
|
|
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| |||||||||||||||
Date: 10/21/2008 12:41:00 AM
From Authorid: 52155
How many were dying at the hands of Saddam and his family before we got there?  |
Date: 10/21/2008 1:24:00 AM
From Authorid: 10657
How many of those numbers died by the result of their own hands?? Just questioning it Ranger  |
Date: 10/21/2008 2:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 53961
I was thinking both of those queations...  |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 3:44:00 AM ( Admin )
Read Obamas plan, it's on his web site. A Responsible, Phased Withdrawal Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began. Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. As a matter of fact the current plan that Bush is proposing is very close to this time frame as it is. Pushing an agenda is like the pork in congress. Create something good and then add garbage to the end to make it a package that you think people are going to swallow. This report is like that. |
| Date: 10/21/2008 3:48:00 AM ( Admin ) What's odd to me is how can McCain wants to take away a woman's right to have abortion reversing (row vs wade) calling it pro-life when the war is killing so many people including babies but he is happy about the results and wants to win the war. It seem counter intuitive at the minimum. |
Date: 10/21/2008 4:38:00 AM
From Authorid: 62579
"The 1.2 million figure is higher than the Rwandan genocide toll and closing in on the 1.7 million who perished in Cambodia’s Killing Fields." Wow, that is a lot of people. What I can't stand is the innocent who have died including many children and babies. Also some of the US soldiers have been known to rape the women there. I have respect for the US soldiers but some things that happen are horrible. Another thing that makes me sick are the ones killing eachother there. A real Muslim would not kill eachother. It's nice to see you on USM again Ranger.  |
Date: 10/21/2008 4:52:00 AM
From Authorid: 21266
What I find extremely ironic is that the American troops were supposedly sent there to prevent the killing of the innocent. How naiive of me to think so. You can all hate me for this but I absolutely HATE this war and I hate the people behind it and I hate every single person held accountable for every inhumane act in this war.  |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 4:54:00 AM
From Authorid: 21266
What do you mean "winning" the war? What are the American troops there to "WIN"? |
Date: 10/21/2008 6:41:00 AM
From Authorid: 21903
Of course we only hear what the controlled media wants us to hear. If we heard the truth, most of the time it would cause us all to be very angry and we can't have that, now can we? Its like they want us all to believe we are some perfect and flawless nation that ONLY does right and never wrongs anyone. We all know that isn't true but usually just can't prove it.  |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 6:44:00 AM
From Authorid: 21903
OMG George...well stated! Granted, I am not a person that would go the route of abortion personally (with exception to some extraordinarily extreme extenuating circumstances that I can't even imagine up right now)....but I believe that no man (such as McCain; or anyone else for that matter) should be able to have a say in what a woman can and can't do to her own body...especially when that man is all for war. George, you are so articulate! |
Date: 10/21/2008 7:54:00 AM
From Authorid: 11240
Being able to speak clearly (articulate) is a far cry from being prompted to tell the TRUTH. Do any of you people have any amount of critical analysis capability in your brain whatsoever? This article is citing figures of well under even a quarter of a million people who died during the last five or so years, or have you all just glossed over that? There is no determination of how they died, just that they died (i.e., were in the morgue)! Were some of the deaths the result of car accidents? Honor killings? Natural causes???!!! Oh, dear, we can't have that! The 1.2 million figure was the result of such a flawed system, it is almost impossible for me to sit here and try to explain it to you because I am laughing so much: one fifth of the 2,414 people in the survey knew someone who had died and that figure was extrapolated to get to this figure of 1.2 million. Well, maybe out of those less than 500 who knew someone who had died by war violence, more than one were TALKING ABOUT KNOWING THE SAME PERSON as having died. How did that survey account for that phenomenon? Still used the one on one ratio for their extrapolation? And, the British study did the exact same thing (i.e., a flawed survey) and came up with a smaller guess. Anyone thinking Obama is going to help out any better as far as "war deaths" go should listen to what his running mate is claiming during private fund raising efforts. And anyone who find McCain's stance on abortion vs. war counter-intuitive ought to look at how counter-intuitive it is to endorse a legal way to kill babies but oppose government war practices. God Bless.  |
Date: 10/21/2008 8:12:00 AM
From Authorid: 2030
How many Iraqi's were put in harms way by their own people, Saddams military or insurgents from other countries...... Almost all of them.  |
Date: 10/21/2008 8:40:00 AM
From Authorid: 53284
Always, the implication is that the US killed all those who have died. Many of the civilians who died, met there fate due to the sectarian violence. That doesn't make it OK. The upper estimates have been found to be bogus. The newer studies are most likely coming closer to the real number but it's still a whole lot of people to have died. War is always sad.  |
| Date: 10/21/2008 11:10:00 AM ( Admin ) Absz.. I'm 100% with you on that. I hate the war, I hated it before it started. So many people can love their own and hate others they don't know. Pushed around mentally by a Government that lies to them and then they stand in defence of their own terrible actions. |
| Date: 10/21/2008 11:17:00 AM ( Admin ) The war is like bombing the wrong building with hundreds of innocent men, women and children in it because some bank robbers are hiding a bank somewhere else. Only multiply that times 1000. Then saying it was an accident and justifying it like those people don't matter. You can't justify killing innocent men, women and children. I can't even imagine how a person can talk about it without weeping or showing any remorse and still go to church on Sunday's with a clear concience. |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 2:12:00 PM
From Authorid: 11240
Far be it for me to go to church on Sunday and not Give Everything Up to God, As Being All. God Bless. |
Date: 10/21/2008 5:54:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
Oh Deb, physician heal thyself! You don’t need much in the way of “critical analysis capability”, to understand the article, you just need to read it a little closer. “There is no determination of how they died, just that they died (i.e., were in the morgue)!” The third sentence of the article clearly states “…found that more than 20 percent had experienced at least one WAR-RELATED death since March 2003” (my emphasis). It’s right there, plain as day. These are deaths which occurred as a result of war. The very next sentence answers your second criticism, stating that “common sociological study methods” were used to determine the final estimate. Is this rather vague? Of course, but that’s to be expected in the context of an article which we can hardly expect to go into such specifics. But it does clearly state that certain specific methods were used to calculate the estimate. If you think the fact that more than one person might be talking about the same victim was not taken into account, you give trained sociologists very little credit indeed. Sorry if that sounded harsh, but there can hardly be a more serious matter than the loss of human life on such a scale.  |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 5:55:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
As for those who want to know how many died under Saddam, I must ask where exactly they draw the line in their moral mathematics? If Saddam killed 1,000,000 people, would the war be justified as long as only 999,999 people died? |
Date: 10/21/2008 6:03:00 PM
From Authorid: 33286
I guess on this "news" debate my question would be... how many died in Somalia with no U.S. intervention at all? why is Iraq so important? my only two conclusions can be "oil" and that baby Bush wanted to finish what Daddy Bush started.  |
Date: 10/21/2008 6:13:00 PM
From Authorid: 7830
Ive never understood, nor agreed with anything about this war. The whole thing is wrong and I really feel for the people who have been lied to and fooled into believing it's something noble instead of absurd.  |
Date: 10/21/2008 7:04:00 PM
From Authorid: 11240
"More recently, in January 2008, the World Health Organization and the Iraqi government did door-to-door surveys of nearly 10,000 households and put the number of dead at 151,000." This is a larger survey group and surely quite as credible a "polling" organization, moreso I would expect than a BUSINESS (OPINION RESEARCH BUSINESS paid to get the paid for result, don't you think, DP? |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 7:07:00 PM
From Authorid: 11240
I chose not to add "God Bless" to that comment since it seems to offend people that God Has people die, and to talk about deaths and end with "God Bless" in one comment is apparently a bit more than some can "stomach". God Bless. |
Date: 10/21/2008 7:23:00 PM
From Authorid: 15228
Once upon a time there was a baby Bush that every body was hatin on. Political correctness was suspended so baby Bush could be dealt with properly. "Why does everybody hate me?", cried Baby Bush. "It's because you are evil and a republican, which is the same thing and you have not one redeeming quality", explained Mama Bush. "Oh, you're also stupid", Mama Bush added for good measure. "But Al Qaeda killed 3000 of our people in one day, took down some important landmarks, terrorized a whole city if not the country. I learned that problems shouldn't be left to another President to solve as Osama bin Laden was left for me, and I thought it was a good idea to go after countries that might pose a future problem. Iraq had been a serious thorn in our side since Colin Powell advised daddy Bush not to do a victory lap over Saddams face in Baghdad when we supposedly won the first Gulf War. Iraq was never going away, especially since there was a push by our friends, the Europeans (editors note: Europeans were getting their dirty palms greased by Saddam), to have sanctions lifted. Why don't people hate them as much as me?". asked Baby Bush. 'Al Qaeda and Saddam aren't Republicans", Mama Bush said gently. "Oh, and they don't have a monkey shaped head and funny ears", she added just for fun. The End.  |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 7:53:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
I would certainly regard the W.H.O. as a credible source Deb, and as you pointed out the polling group was much larger. I suppose the larger question here is, if it matters that the death toll is nearer to 150,000 than 1.2 million, at what point does it become unacceptable? |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 7:56:00 PM
From Authorid: 19613
You have a talent for writing fiction Kelly. |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 8:22:00 PM
From Authorid: 15228
Was it acceptable in Rwanda? (800,000 and 1,000,000 and heck, that was with machetes) Somalia? (ongoing 200,000--300,000 dead through 2006) Darfur (200,000-400,000) How about the series of massacre's in Algeria in the 1990's? How about the killing fields of Cambodia where an estimated 1.4 to 2.2 million out of a population of around 7 million died. Not to mention the conflicts fueled by climate change<That showed up when I googled recent conflicts around the world. I'm sorry, I just don't see the passion for those conflicts. I guess it's only if America is involved that it matters and it doesn't matter if we aren't doing the actual killing...anyone want to say we are?? Russia can invade a democracy and get away with it. We invade a dictatorship with the bipartisen approval of both houses, and democrats sudennly get amnesia and we never hear the end of it. Check out McCains plan for victory in Iraq and the prevention of any more killing fields. If it hadn't been for the surge, there really would have been the number of deaths that are imagined when we pulled out. |
|
Date: 10/21/2008 8:24:00 PM
From Authorid: 15228
Thank you. I thought it was rather good, Dark Phoenix. Although I prefer to call it a docudrama with a hint of satire. |
|
Date: 10/22/2008 3:14:00 AM
From Authorid: 19613
We hear time and time again how the US is the "greatest nation on earth". Is it not understandable that the world should hold you to a higher standard than de facto dictatorships like Russia? With great power comes great responsibility and all that jazz. This is not to suggest that if someone made a post concerning the foreign policy failures of, say the EU, that we wouldn't have a rather long list to discuss (there's a heck of a lot of blame to go round for Darfur for example). |
Date: 10/22/2008 3:14:00 AM
From Authorid: 19613
....Bugger, that's what I get for typing my message on notepad I guess  |
|
Date: 10/22/2008 7:30:00 AM
From Authorid: 11240
I am not discounting in any way that people have died. I am not discounting that the families of those people are upset. I am not making light of war. What I am doing is pointing out the fallacies contained in this article. THAT IS WHAT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO ME. And that supposedly intelligent people read this article in such a state of emotion that they are unable to use their rational thinking or critical analysis capabilities, is, to say the least disappointing. As far as finding a number to assuage any "moral mathematics", I do need to point out to people that humans die everyday! It is the ultimate "Fact of Life". God Bless. |
Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization
61901 Category:(News) Created:(10/21/2008 12:39:00 AM)