is that realy a fair count or is it too low?ohh and will donald rumsfled be charged with the deaths like saddam was, since he and bush sent in the u.s military,should the trial be held in the international courts for war crimes.?
2006-11-09 21:47:25 · 13 answers · asked by the _reporter 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
no, its a false figure, its 700,000 dead to date
2006-11-10 02:33:17 · answer #1 · answered by mr_truth 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The offical death count is roughly 45,000. This 150,000 seems a bit excessive, and the 690,000 that was quoted a few months ago was totally unrealistic.
George Bush and Company SHOULD be charged with crimes against humaintiy for starting a war without just cause- this is true. However, nothing will happen- namely, because of the concept of "Sovergin Immunity" which comes from the Olde English law essentially saying "The King Can Do No Wrong, And Is Not held Accountable for his actions"
2006-11-10 05:59:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The death count of 150,000 is supposed to be the total number of Iraqis that died during the time the coalition forces were there. This number includes all deaths in Iraq. To include but not limited to: #1 is death by Natural causes #2 in insurgents opposing coalition forces, # 3 civilians. #3 civilians were divided up into 3 categories. #1 Killed by militant groups, #2 Killed by insurgents, #3 Killed by coalition forces as collateral damage. The count is probably fairly accurate. Death by coalition forces are actually a small portion. Not to minimize this number. All deaths of noncombatants is horrible.
2006-11-10 06:26:28 · answer #3 · answered by Becky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too low? What in the world. It's too HIGH. If you look at the facts of those deaths, how many were actual terrorists? Or how many were soldiers and civilians? Rumsfeld won't be charged with anything, even though he should be.
2006-11-10 05:50:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think the Muslims need to wake up and stop hating each other and blaming America for everything...well why don't you include congress who voted to send the war in or why not the people of America for voting for bush and why not Europe for sending white people over to America to start a new country why not...no they should never be convicted "war crimes" because they did nothing wrong...
2006-11-10 06:39:39 · answer #5 · answered by turntable 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The count is more like 655,000& no Bush &Rumsfeld will never hang next to Saddam who was convicted of killing 148.
2006-11-10 06:16:40 · answer #6 · answered by bradship4u 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personaly me, I'was alwyas against this war...but unfortunatly there's one opinion and it was said by Stalin if I'm not mistaken: "The death of one person is a tragedy and the death of millions is just a history".
2006-11-10 06:07:07 · answer #7 · answered by Ugi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would Rumsfeld be charged? Around 149,900-something of those deaths have been at the hands of "insurgents" in Iraq -- not American soldiers.
Of course, the media didn't tell you that.
.
2006-11-10 05:52:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
that's horrible... whether or not people died at the hands of American soldiers or insurgents, so many people have died and it's because we're over there... They wouldn't have all those insurgents and people fighting back...
2006-11-10 05:56:31 · answer #9 · answered by Netta 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
one person is too much, esspecially when you dont even know what your fighting for anymore...and lets hope so they shoudl be held responsible for something!
2006-11-10 05:51:37 · answer #10 · answered by thereis 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋