MINIMUM Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq=45354?

Question

so if Saddam is going to hang for killing less than 200 hundred people what can we expect to happen to BUSH?

The former Iraqi dictator and six subordinates were convicted and sentenced for the 1982 killings of 148 people in a single Shiite town after an attempt on his life there.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061106/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_verdict

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

I am in NO WAY justifying the horrors that occured under Saddam's rule--but wondering when AMERICANS will wake up and see BUSH as the liar, warmonger and greedy SOB (sorry mrs. bush I like you but not your son) he is and act accordingly.

War crimes are violations by a country, its civilians, or its military personnel of the international laws of war. The laws of war are laws that must be obeyed by the United States, its officials and its military, and by the UN. The laws are contained in treaties that the U.S. has signed, for example the Geneva Convention of 1949 on Prisoners of War. They are reflected in what is called customary international law. This law has arisen over hundreds if not thousands of years. All countries must obey it.
War crimes are divided into two broad categories. The first are called crimes against peace. Crimes against peace include the planning, preparation, or initiation of a war of aggression. In other words one country cannot make aggressive war against another country. Nor can a country settle a dispute by war; it must always, and in good faith, negotiate a settlement.

The second category are what we can call crimes against humanity; I am including here crimes against civilians and soldiers. These are violations of the rules as to the means and manner by which war is to be conducted once begun. These include the following prohibitions: killing of civilians, indiscriminate bombing, the use of certain types of weapons, killing of defenseless soldiers, ill treatment of POWs and attacks on non-military targets.

Any violation of these two sets of laws is a war crime; if the violations are done on purpose, recklessly or knowingly, they are considered very serious and called grave breaches; Nazis and Japanese following World War II were hanged for such grave breaches.

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-ilaw.htm

Answer 1

45354

THATS ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WANT MY TAX MONEY BACK. THE ROMANS WOULD HAVE KILLED EVERYBODY or sold them into slavery.

Answer 2

The reason they are civilian casualties is because they are not part of a national army. Any terrorist can be killed and be called a civilian. If we soldiers were to go out to fight in t-shirts and jeans, will the terrorists still be killing our military, or will they be killing Americans? You wouldn't be able to tell, just like the average person can't tell a terrorist from a civilian who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Plus you need to remember that terrorists are coming into Iraq from other countries to kill us. Are they considered civilian casualties also?

Answer 3

The true number of civilian deaths will never be known for certain and even a good estimate will not be available for years.

However there is a distinction between unintentional civilian deaths as an unwanted consequence of a larger conflict (increased in no small part by the enemy's intentional use of civilians as human shields); and the deliberate massacre of specific persons as an instrument of oppression, preceded in many cases by individual arrest and prolonged torture. When one fails to make or respect that distinction, it is reasonable to question their motives.

Answer 4

jesus, whats with all the bush apologists! hes selling our country down the river, and u goobers are cheering the whole way. WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! omfg wake up. READ!! learn, he stole BOTH elections, they start this bogus war, on completely bogus intel. WE funded sadam hussein, WE gave him chemical weapons, WE didnt care when he "apparently" used them. WE use depleted uranium, which our very small use of it in the first gulf war has been attributed to over 500,000 cases of cancer deaths alone. Those number of civilain deaths are WAY off mulitply that x 10 and you get closer to the real number. Yeah we may not have directly caused those deaths, but whats the difference, we have for no reason destabliszed the region, and are using horrible weapons on these people, meanwhile our troops are going to be suffering 10s of thousands are going to be all messed up from the uranium. by the way your vote isnt going to count

Answer 5

Wow you Bush-bashers are confusing. You think that when the military accidentally kills a civilian then it is murder but most of you have no problems with abortion. What exactly goes through that head of yours? Civilians are going to die in a war no matter what. There is absolutely no way around it.

Answer 6

Your numbers come from insurgency attacks on civilians and not US caused civilian casualties. Your numbers are also incorrect about Saddam, as he, in one incident alone, killed over 25,000 Kurds with gas, and thousands more over the years he was in power. Also, the insurgents are ununiformed combatants, which make them civilian combatants, so any death we impose on the insurgency is "a civilian death". How you can defend this, however, I do not know, as even the Geneva Convention classifies ununiformed enemy combatants as war criminals. See Ex parte Quirin and Ex parte Milligan for more on that.

Answer 7

The real culprit for the death of hundreds of Iraqis should be meted the appropriate penalty if proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Answer 8

Let me put it this way.......when A "civilian" Enacts an act of aggression...they are no longer a civillian. And I wouldn't believe everything you read......numbers included. You wouldn't know, because you weren't there.

Answer 9

Nothing. Where do you get the numbers from? If it were true, since terrorists dress as civilians, how many were actually killed?

Answer 10

Wait, are you seriously asking this question?