2006-10-13 14:25:41 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
You sheeple don't get out much, do you?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-10-10-iraq-dead_x.htm
2006-10-13 14:34:56 · update #1
Answer the question, sheeple - HOW MANY DO YOU THINK WERE WOMEN OR CHILDREN?
2006-10-13 14:38:09 · update #2
i think the # is more like 130000, one child is to many
2006-10-13 14:29:11 · answer #1 · answered by jjayflash9 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Probably half of the Iraqi civilians killed after Saddam fell were female. Why? Half the people in the world are female. Simple rule of numbers.
600,000?! What a bunch of garbage! Hopkins didn't count bodies, just what people said. Did they call EVERYBODY in Iraq? Not likely. It was a survey, not an inquiry.
2006-10-13 16:23:38 · answer #2 · answered by Mike R 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I assume you are referring to the claimed 655,000 Iraqi civilians reported to have died a violent death since the beginning of the war. I also assume you realize that 69% of those deaths were claimed to have been at the hands of other Muslims preying on their own kind. I also assume you realize that this was a house-to-house opinion poll survey and that NO real bodies were tallied in the claims of deaths...only reported deaths by the respondents AND that their political affiliation (i.e., their feelings about the US in Iraq) were not considered or verified. I further assume that you have considered that the organization doing this poll was the very same one that did a poll a few years ago on the same subject that was completely debunked as being falsely reported.
2006-10-13 14:34:52 · answer #3 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Not as much as people like you like to imagine. The death of Innocent women and children is a bad thing that's we fight the people who behead them an blow them apart and fly planes into building filled with innocent people.
You see there are 3 types of people in this world, you got the people who practice, understand and no when to use warfare, those who hate it so much when an enemy kills there own people they don't believe in fighting and those who live to fight.
Ill bet your one of the Pansy's who don't fight back even when kicked in the nuts. Well sorry i don't agree with that.
Oct. 1983 Marine Barracks Beirut Lebanon 283 DEAD
Dec. 1988 Pan Am Flt 103 Lockerbie Scotland 244 DEAD
Feb. 1993 World Trade Center NYC Ny 6 DEAD
Oct. 1993 Somalia, Africa, American Rangers and Delta Force are killed by rebels. Supplied and trained by Osama. Over a thousand DEAD 19 of them American soldiers
Oct. 1993 over 300,000 African civilians died by radical Muslims.
Jun. 1996 Khobar Towers Dhahran, Sa 19 DEAD
Aug. 1998 US Embassies Kenya/Tanzania 224 DEAD
Oct. 2000 USS Cole Aden Yemen 17 DEAD
Sep 2001 NY 3000 dead
How many more should we let die before we decide before they kill millions more we should fight back.
So now we are in iraq fighting radical muslims, or terrorists.
People saved the world from Nazi occupation, Communism, the British, and the Romans so on and so forth threw warfare. Millions of innocent people were killed. But aren't you free?
Stop taking drungs there killing your brain you stupid hippi
2006-10-13 16:22:33 · answer #4 · answered by jvelenti 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
You'd have to ask the people who killed them. Most reports indicate that most of the bodies uncoverred show signs of being tortured brutally. I don't imagine US soldiers did that, at least not in most cases. The Iraqi Military speculates that most died from sectarian violence.
2006-10-13 14:29:43 · answer #5 · answered by W0LF 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Do the math. If that figure is correct then over 500 people would have to be killed everyday. Find one reputable news source which shows where 500 people have been killed in any single day...
2006-10-13 19:08:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you ACTUALLY read the study, the margin of error is between 400,00 and 800,000. For the kids out there - that means the number is totally unreliable. Estimates before this "study" have been between 40 - 60,000 civilian deaths.
Please don't read everything you read, have some independent thinking...
2006-10-13 14:32:40 · answer #7 · answered by NCAF33 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Somehow I feel the numbers have been exaggerated since in the modern wars, we don't see the same massive bombings on civilian targets which happened during WW2.
2006-10-13 17:41:28 · answer #8 · answered by A victim of Pay And Pay 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who's answer are you going to pick as "Best" this time? Every answer here is against you. Or should I say all the answers here are correct and your question is fallible. My God, didn't you even read the whole USA Today article you posted? Or is that the reason? You "can't" read? Or are you going to use a different i.d. to answer your own question?
2006-10-13 18:12:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Why are Women and Children more important than Men?
2006-10-13 18:28:16 · answer #10 · answered by rasmalai001 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
on condition that individuals discovered from Vietnam to no longer count huge type civilian deaths - basically the deaths of our troops - no you will confirm. some have self assurance that the numbers ought to pass as severe as a million. we've killed greater Iraqi civilians than Saddam did.
2016-10-19 08:51:20 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋