1
   

Civilans killed in Iraq

 
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Oct, 2007 02:49 pm
@92b16vx,


:thumbup:
0 Replies
 
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 06:45 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;41514 wrote:
meanwhile in reality land fewer Iraqi's die now then they did under Saddam or if we left tomorrow

87% Fewer Violent Deaths Annually in Iraq Now than under Saddam Hussein by by Mary Mostert

how about the 180K he killed in Northen Iraq?

WCBS NEWSRADIO 880 - Saddam Hussein Genocide Trial Resumes

your statement is so un-educated it's obtuse, and your defense is "who care about their lives, it's going to cost us money!"

that's sick, for better or worse we invaded Iraq, going forward does not include finger pointing and allowing our now obligation to fall away into civil war and genocide. It includes banding together as a country, and finishing the job. We leave tomorrow and we'll be back in 5 years away, I say we do it once.


You use a January 2005 posting by Mary Mostert to justify that claim of 87% more deaths under saddam than after the American occupation. A dated article by a vested interest. Very good. The fact is,
- we invaded a country with no justification.
- the people want us out.

We have already given that country on a silver platter to Iran. Its gone dude. You have a Shia majority on both sides. If you don't know what that means, read your history. And the best part is, we put the Iraqi Shias in power. The whole Middle East looked at it happening and couldn't believe what they were seeing. Saddam was an asshole & a thug. But he kept the Sunni-Shia power equation intact. We blunder in there and screw it. Nothing we do now, nothing, can prevent Iraq coming into Iran's sphere of influence. We just do not have the wherewithal to prevent it from happening. That is a fact. Now we may continue to remain in denial and feed more of our children at the altar of our Rambo fantazises. Or we may do the right thing cut our losses and leave the crazies to sort themselves our in that region and then negotiate with who ever surfaces on top. Cynical you say? But thats precisely what's going to happen anyway the only difference being how may of our gorgeous children die before it does.
0 Replies
 
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:11 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;41726 wrote:
the exact number is irrelevant, my point was to prove that Iraq's civilians were no safer under Saddam, possibly less safe. I think that was easily proven given the data I provided. I'm not saying civilians aren't dying, I'm not saying that isn't a horrible thing.

What I am saying is that blaming the US for Muslim on Muslim crime is like blaming white people for black on black crime. It neglects personal responsibility and any conclusion which doesn not encompass personal responsibility is dangerously ignorant. Even if we entered Iraq on bad intel, that guy decided he was going to kill innocent people, and you can't blame that on Bush anymore then you can claim the VT shooting was Bush's fault

I agree with you and as I posted about the events of Butto's return last night not one person (I haven't looked sense early today) sees this. Nor the fact while that idiot and his 2 little boys were alive we had two no fly zones in place and protected many lives by doing so. Some talk to be heard not to make a point. As usual Silverchild79 you have stated and backed up yourself quite well. :peace:
0 Replies
 
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:23 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;41514 wrote:
meanwhile in reality land fewer Iraqi's die now then they did under Saddam or if we left tomorrow

87% Fewer Violent Deaths Annually in Iraq Now than under Saddam Hussein by by Mary Mostert

how about the 180K he killed in Northen Iraq?

WCBS NEWSRADIO 880 - Saddam Hussein Genocide Trial Resumes

your statement is so un-educated it's obtuse, and your defense is "who care about their lives, it's going to cost us money!"

that's sick, for better or worse we invaded Iraq, going forward does not include finger pointing and allowing our now obligation to fall away into civil war and genocide. It includes banding together as a country, and finishing the job. We leave tomorrow and we'll be back in 5 years away, I say we do it once.


Lancet versus Mary Mostert:

BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Iraq death toll 'soared post-war'

Any Iraqi or Amercian who has had a child die needlessly would not find this debate funny. Nevertheless, I post these statistics from Lancet. The Medical Journal is - you'll agree - a far more reliable source than a Neocon website.
0 Replies
 
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:32 pm
@Silverchild79,
Fed Up American: The REAL Iraq As Told By REAL Soldiers
0 Replies
 
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:34 pm
@Silverchild79,
Just Foreign Policy - Iraqi Death Estimate
0 Replies
 
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:38 pm
@Silverchild79,
In addition to the Iraqi deaths post-occupation is another problem we in America willfully ignore. That of the 2million Iraqi refugees escaping the violence. Somehow these guys refuse to buy our story of post-surge improvements.

War in Iraq Propelling A Massive Migration - washingtonpost.com
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 07:49 pm
@Adam Bing,
So lets just pull out and see what happens? Whom will get Bush to wake up?
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 10:26 pm
@mlurp,
mlurp;42435 wrote:
So lets just pull out and see what happens? Whom will get Bush to wake up?


Bring in the draft and see how quickly the war winds down.
0 Replies
 
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 06:57 pm
@92b16vx,
I know the right thing. Get our troops out now! And then we can set back and watch thefireworks and death tolls climb without our name mentioned except the fact we ran away and so again we will be blamed. It is a no win situation because we aren't fighting any army but small groups with hardlind ideals. Just INHO.

92b16vx;41615 wrote:
LOL, yea, ok.



Human Rights Watch/Middle East puts the number between 50,000-100,000. Kurdish sources put the number higher, near you 180,000 figure. Of course all this comes back to your claim that my numbers can't be verified, but guess what that means for YOUR numbers...



I personally, care more about America than Iraq, or Iraqis, do you?

Fact is we have turned Iraq into a ***ing mess, and many, many people have died because of our actions, and many, many more will die because of our actions. People blather on about "Doing it right" but offer no plan, or realistic definition of what "right" is.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 08:34 pm
@mlurp,
mlurp;42522 wrote:
I know the right thing. Get our troops out now! And then we can set back and watch thefireworks and death tolls climb without our name mentioned except the fact we ran away and so again we will be blamed. It is a no win situation because we aren't fighting any army but small groups with hardlind ideals. Just INHO.


You can NOT fight ideas, or tactics. Bush has spun our war machine into hyperdrive, trying to fight these very things because they lead to perpetual war because you can never win.
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 08:52 pm
@Silverchild79,
It does no good to keep crying about how and why we got into Iraq. That part of it is OVER. Get over it.
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 11:21 pm
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;42534 wrote:
It does no good to keep crying about how and why we got into Iraq. That part of it is OVER. Get over it.


I suggest that the mothers of the American and Iraqi dead would disagree with you.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 12:51 am
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;42534 wrote:
It does no good to keep crying about how and why we got into Iraq. That part of it is OVER. Get over it.


You get over it, we need to get the **** out, screw the Iraqis. I don't give a **** about them, no more dead Americans for BushCo™'s friends to get fat on. Or, they can pay Blackwater to defend their excursions, and send our guys home. If they want to play in the sandbox, they can pay BW to hold off the natives, no more American tax dollars wasted on corporate profits.
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 01:12 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;42558 wrote:


Oouch. Harsh on the Iraqis my friend. After all they never asked us to come and "save" them. But I am one with the rest of your outrage. Yes, bring our children back and send Jena Bush & other Republican kids over if Bush is really committed to continue the war.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 04:09 am
@Adam Bing,
Adam Bing;42561 wrote:
Oouch. Harsh on the Iraqis my friend. After all they never asked us to come and "save" them. But I am one with the rest of your outrage. Yes, bring our children back and send Jena Bush & other Republican kids over if Bush is really committed to continue the war.


Don't get me wrong, I don't wish them harm persay, I just would rather have our guys alive, and if that means some of them die when we leave, will, they should have picked up the torch we are trying to pass to them sooner. I get really sick of all the people that make up excuses like "Oh, but there will be wholesale slaughter if we leave now", or "But the country will descend into chaos, and civil war", too bad, should have thought about that when they were waving their flags screaming for blood five years ago. It's disgusting that they pretend they care now, but sure as **** didn't give a damn before we started a war in their country.
Adam Bing
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 04:46 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;42566 wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I don't wish them harm persay, I just would rather have our guys alive, and if that means some of them die when we leave, will, they should have picked up the torch we are trying to pass to them sooner. I get really sick of all the people that make up excuses like "Oh, but there will be wholesale slaughter if we leave now", or "But the country will descend into chaos, and civil war", too bad, should have thought about that when they were waving their flags screaming for blood five years ago. It's disgusting that they pretend they care now, but sure as **** didn't give a damn before we started a war in their country.


You brought back memories of 5 years ago. The "with us or against us" atmosphere.....a cowed press, gung ho government, people braying for blood...we were all responsible my friend, each of us. Guys like you and me should have been more vocal in defending the lives of our children being sent out.

When they say "Support the Troops" 99% of those guys toting stickers on their cars mean "Support the war".

If they really meant support for the troops, they'd fight to bring our kids back home.

In Moscow, I saw the consequences of the walking wounded from the Afghan war. Those brutalized kids who came back are now the backbone of the Russian mafia.

I wonder what consequences we will see 5 years from now, from having our mentally brutalized children back home from Iraq.
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 06:54 pm
@Adam Bing,
Adam Bing;42550 wrote:
I suggest that the mothers of the American and Iraqi dead would disagree with you.


It remains true, nonetheless. It does no good to keep brooding over the how and why. We are there, period. The tasks now are to win and get out on our own terms. :patriot:
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 08:39 pm
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;42652 wrote:
It remains true, nonetheless. It does no good to keep brooding over the how and why. We are there, period. The tasks now are to win and get out on our own terms. :patriot:


Just in case you hadn't noticed, we don't have terms, that's the problem.
0 Replies
 
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 09:13 pm
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;42527 wrote:
You can NOT fight ideas, or tactics. Bush has spun our war machine into hyperdrive, trying to fight these very things because they lead to perpetual war because you can never win.

No fight of ideas and values. But tactics are the way of any Army. Ever hear of the first book on war The Art Of War? Art of War by SunTzu [SunZi] -English Hypertext
You can count these too..... I am just posting it I didn't order it or lead any men into this combat situation, please keep that in mind. Nor do I take any side on this post. THANKS.

US: Raid of Baghdad's Sadr City kills 49 By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 52 minutes ago



BAGHDAD - The U.S. military said its forces killed an estimated 49 militants during a dawn raid to capture an Iranian-linked militia chief in Baghdad's Sadr City enclave, one of the highest tolls for a single operation since President Bush declared an end to active combat in 2003.

ADVERTISEMENT


Iraqi police and hospital officials, who often overstate casualties, reported only 15 deaths including three children. Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said all the dead were civilians.

Al-Dabbagh said on CNN that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, had met with the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, to protest the action.

Associated Press photos showed the bodies of two toddlers, one with a gouged face, swaddled in blankets on a morgue floor. Their shirts were pulled up, exposing their abdomens, and a diaper showed above the waistband of one boy's shorts. Relatives said the children were killed when helicopter gunfire hit their house as they slept.

One local resident said some of the casualties were people sleeping on roofs to seek relief from the heat and lack of electricity. The Iraqi officials said 52 were wounded in the raid on the sprawling district.

The U.S. military said it was not aware of any civilian casualties, and the discrepancy in the death tolls and accounts of what happened could not be reconciled. American commanders reported no U.S. casualties.

The raid on the dangerous Shiite slum was aimed at capturing an alleged rogue militia chief, one of thousands of fighters who have broken with Muqtada al-Sadr's mainstream Mahdi Army. The military did not say if the man was captured. He was also not named.

The Shiite cleric has ordered gunmen loyal to him to put down their arms. But thousands of followers dissatisfied with being taken out of the fight have formed a loose confederation armed and trained by Iran.

The U.S. operation was the latest in a series that have produced significant death tolls, including civilians, as American forces increasingly take the fight to Sunni insurgents, al-Qaida militants and Shiite militiamen.

The intensity and frequency of American attacks and raids have grown since the arrival of the last of 30,000 additional soldiers on June 15.

The reinforcements were ordered into Iraq earlier this year by Bush and have inflicted a heavy toll on militants on both sides of Iraq's sectarian divide. American commanders credit the troop buildup for a sharp drop in the number of attacks and deaths of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians, particularly in the past two months.

As U.S. forces pounded Sadr City, the potential grew for a fresh explosion of fighting on a new front, Iraq's northern border with Turkey.

Early Sunday, Kurdish separatist rebels who take shelter in the rugged mountains on the Iraqi side of the frontier ambushed a military unit inside Turkey and killed at least 12 soldiers. Turkish forces responded by lobbing at least 15 artillery shells toward mainly abandoned Kurdish villages inside Iraq, according to Iraqi border guard Col. Hussein Rashid. He said there were no casualties.

In the Sadr City raid, the U.S. military said forces killed "an estimated 49 criminals" in three linked attacks during an intelligence-driven raid to capture the rogue Shiite kidnapper who was partially funded by Iran.

U.S. troops returned fire under attack from automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades from nearby buildings as they began raiding structures in the district, according to a statement. It said 33 militants were killed in the firefight. Ground forces then called in helicopter airstrikes, which killed six more militants.

As American soldiers left the zone, troops were hit by a roadside bomb and continued heavy fire, killing 10 more combatants.

"All total, coalition forces estimate that 49 criminals were killed in three separate engagements during this operation. Ground forces reported they were unaware of any innocent civilians being killed as a result of this operation," the military said.

A local resident who goes by the name Abu Fatmah said his neighbor's 14-year-old son, Saif Alwan, was killed while sleeping on the roof.

"Saif was killed by an airstrike and what is his guilt? Is he from the Mahdi Army? He is a poor student," Abu Fatmah said.

An uncle of 2-year-old Ali Hamid said the boy was killed and his parents seriously wounded when helicopter gunfire pierced the wall and windows of their house as they slept indoors.

Relatives gathered at Sadr City's Imam Ali hospital where the emergency room was overwhelmed with bloodied casualties. The dead were placed in caskets covered by Iraqi flags.

APTN video showed three bloodied boys sitting on hospital tables and an elderly man being treated for a head wound. Mourners tied wooden coffins onto the tops of minivans with a plume of smoke in the background. Other footage showed a U.S. helicopter flying over the area while black smoke rose.

The sweeps into Sadr City have sent a strong message that U.S. forces plan no letup on suspected Shiite militia cells despite objections from the Shiite-led government of al-Maliki, who is working for closer cooperation with Shiite heavyweight Iran.

An Iraqi military spokesman, Brig. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi, said the government would ask the Americans for an explanation of Sunday's raid and stressed the need to avoid civilian deaths.

The government has issued mixed reactions to the raids and airstrikes, particularly those that have targeted Sunni extremists.

U.S. troops backed by attack aircraft killed 19 suspected insurgents and 15 civilians, including nine children, in an operation Oct. 11 targeting al-Qaida in Iraq leaders northwest of Baghdad.

Al-Maliki's government said those killings were a "sorrowful matter," but emphasized that civilian deaths are unavoidable in the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq.
US: Raid of Baghdad's Sadr City kills 49 - Yahoo! News
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/29/2025 at 03:24:07