Of course we accomplished in three years what it took him 20 years to do. Are we just as bad as he was?
2006-10-11 10:14:52 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
You failed to mention that it's ragheads killing other ragheads that brought this tally to where it is. Naturally, knowbody is happy to see these numbers, however if the jihadist wake up and realize they're killing their own just to make the US look bad, it's a helluva cost to pay, just to make a point.
I guess your point is, that Saddam wasn't so bad after all. I would have to say that you have totally lost your perspective to make your point.
Are we as bad as he is, you ask? Once again, the ragheads are killing each other, we just kill those who are hostile towards our troops.
2006-10-11 10:28:45 · answer #1 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We went to see if Saddam had weapons, he didn't, we should have left. That was it. Now we're talking about 'staying the course', not cutting and running, seeing it through. Seeing what through? We haven't built an infrastructure or managed to protect anyone. It can't be about electricity because the people have less than they had before, it can't be about oil because they're producing less than before. What are we spending $1.3 billion a week on? Halliburton fraud! We could have given every man woman and child in New Orleans a new house with that. Why are we still there? The 'war on terror'? Our soldiers are the ones committing atrocities, we ARE the terror - and we've spawned even more enemies in the process.
2006-10-11 12:03:05 · answer #2 · answered by revnice 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Oh... Iranians killing Iraqis, Iraqis killing Iraqis... America has killed those people ? Interesting theory...
Perhaps then we can blame the 600,000 + deaths of the Civil War on African Americans ??
Or blame the death of the millions of North Koreans who starved on the Clinton Administration for not feeding them?
Or we can blame the death of.... oh heck I don't have the energy to reply to all the foolish conspiracy theories and revisionist historical statements.
2006-10-11 12:05:06 · answer #3 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No because our attacks are not targeted at just anybody. There are civilian deaths in war. Thats just a given but most of the casualties over there are the enemies. The more they try to grow the more targets we have in which means more deaths.
2006-10-11 10:19:58 · answer #4 · answered by JB 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How many times did you read the whole news article? Zero, nada, zilch. You would have read that the figures are greatly exaggerated by anyone's opinion, and Americans are not killing them. They are killing each other. The news media is so slanted, it doesn't even report how many enemy are killed, only civilians and Americans.
2006-10-11 10:23:25 · answer #5 · answered by eferrell01 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately these deaths are seen in a different light. They become casualties or war, whether you think the war just or not.
2006-10-11 10:19:43 · answer #6 · answered by vividtoy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Guess we're getting the job done arent we??You failed to mention that many of those were due to terrorists attacks not american killings but nice try with the propaganda.Get a life please
2006-10-11 10:21:55 · answer #7 · answered by halfbright 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Actually READ the report and use your head while reading it. Journalists wouldn't lie would they.
2006-10-11 14:31:03 · answer #8 · answered by Jeff F 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam killed innocent people
We kill terrorists.
If more terrorists die than innocent people then....YIPEEE
2006-10-11 12:23:31 · answer #9 · answered by TRUE PATRIOT 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
George W. Bush is the true Butcher of Baghdad. Too bad he won't be held accountable for his crimes, at least not in this life. We can only hope there really is a God who will hold him accountable for his war crimes in some kind of afterlife
2006-10-11 10:25:44 · answer #10 · answered by Colin R 1 · 3⤊ 4⤋