Yes
according to the data, there are approximately 2.5 times more annual deaths in Iraq AFTER the US-led invasion.
more importantly, the main cause of death in Iraq prior to invasion was heart attack and other such illnesses, while the main cause after invasion is related violence. This report was published in the Lancet (see link below for PDF).
Saddam was a dictator, but he was not slaughtering his people the way the Bush Crime Family would want you to believe.
"over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"
if you do the math, thats approximately 1.2 Million total, half of which are attributed to War with Iran.
In fact, an article published in Harper's entitled "Cool War" prior to the US illegal invasion, pointed out that much of the pre-US-invasion deaths were direct results of US-backed UN-sanctions. (google Cool War + Harper's). Many more died from US-backed sanctions alone than from Saddam, and thats BEFORE the invasion started killing even more.
The lack of the facts in the US is simply appalling. How can anyone say with a straight face that we have a "liberal" media?
2006-09-08 09:25:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes I agree with u, I also think the condition has only worsened now. People being unsafe to live, to fear wherever they go, no home or not even sure if they will be alive the very next moment. It's so worse that the war has disrupted the lives and families of people, and many (countless) die each day by suicide bombers etc. Though sadam was a bad guy there was much more peace and unity among the people. I don't understand what US gained by this other than capturing Sadam and stealing their oil !!
2006-09-08 09:25:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by scorpio_friendz 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Saddam killed hundreds of thousands over a thirty year period. UN sanctions killed millions from starvation over ten years from 1991 to 2001. The U.S. invasion has killed more people than Saddam and created chaos in which thousands die each week. Things are NOT better there now than they were in 1989. It's like asking if things were better in Cambodia before 1975. we left that place in chaos and millions died because of it. Military action never improves a bad situation.
2006-09-08 09:31:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Perry L 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Not a million per year, but Saddam did have millions tortured, raped, and executed during his tenure. There are many mass graves to attest to that fact.
(When Clinton bombed Serbia, Sudan, Iraq, and Bosnia without UN approval, why weren't there mass protests in the streets condemning his "illegal" wars? OH YEAH, because these protesters don't give a damn about the war, they just have a blind ignorant hate of Dubya.)
2006-09-08 09:17:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by salaamrashaad 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
i'm a 1st technology American and a Veteran. i'm having problem following you with republicans and all? Wilson, FDR, Truman, Johnson...those were all democrats. fresh you a touch: That became WWI. WWII, Korea and Vietnam. It imagine it became Republicans who were given us out of them. although Truman ended WWII. with regards to some thing else of it. I educated and fought with the numerous maximum acceptable adult men I ever knew and ever will recognize. Many did not get to be as previous as i'm now. Our reason became noble. undesirable issues ensue in warfare. that's unlike television in any respect. to keep my family individuals and to keep anybody of those superb adult men that I served with; i ought to confess that i'd do maximum some thing. If water boarding became financial disaster a million; i'd crack the e book at round financial disaster 20. that's how i believe. Our enemies are literally not certain by technique of any code or any scruples in any respect. Our enemies do not use books...they are naturals. they are no longer measuring us by technique of a few more desirable wide-spread that's contained in the mind's eye of maximum table jocks or arm chair politicians. (in present day generations, you'll look distinctly demanding before you'll stumble on a democrat who fairly served contained in the militia) I disagreed with one among my contemporaries...John McCain at the same time as he ran on the platform. became he tortured? sure. Did North Vietnam signal the Geneva convention? also sure... This lofty platitude playing field ought to purely exist contained in the minds of people which have in no way been on a real battlefield.
2016-11-06 22:14:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You've got to understand - the thing is that most of the Shiites are dying at the hands of the people who supported Saddam and kept him in power. You read about bombings at mosques and markets.
Saddam killed a lot of people. They have found many mass graves in Iraq. He even used WMD against the Kurds in Iraq. But as to how many a year? Not sure if that info is out there.
2006-09-08 09:29:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
i watched a special on saddam. they showed a mass grave, it was as wide as a bull dozier blade, contained 300 bodies of Kurdish women and children. there were 5 or 6 other mass graves that weren't excavated. the one they showed had schools (again only women and children) ranging in age from 6 months to old ladies. aren't you glad that you live in a country where people will fight to give you the right to be a pacifist?
2006-09-08 12:56:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, The people in Iraq aren't dying any less. 6,000 have died since 1st of June 06. Of course Bush supporters and warmongers will say things in Iraq are wonderful. They have their heads in the sand. Stay tuned. This will end up like Vietnam. We will not win in Iraq.
2006-09-08 09:38:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
yes
2006-09-08 09:18:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by loko 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes he was brutal, but it's better now
2006-09-08 09:25:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by nbr660 6
·
1⤊
2⤋