Why Do Liberals Want More Dead Iraqis?

Question

After the U.S. and Australia left Vietnam, millions of people in the area were killed. And more than 5 million people were became fugees.

Also, because of decline in troop strength in Vietnam, Americans were under heavy attack before the fall of Saigon.

If America leaves Iraq, then at least over 1 million people will die and Iraq will become an terrorist run Islamic state. Al-Qaeda's goal is to be in charge of Iraq.

Getting rid of Saddam saved lives. It stopped hundreds of thousands of people from dying due to U.N. Santions.

Even by the year 2000, a half of million children died. The real numbers of Saddam related deaths are even higher since Iraq was on the run until three years later.

The link is to a Liberal English newspaper.
2000:
"Half a million children have died in Iraq since UN sanctions were imposed - most enthusiastically by Britain and the US. Three UN officials have resigned in despair. Meanwhile, bombing of Iraq continues almost daily. John Pilger investigates "
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html

To bbbbbbbriggs04: Japan and German said they would win WW 2. It didn't happen. Also, Mike Tyson said he would win his last fight. It didn't happen.

To heLLo, PoE: One million Iraqis have not died. Don't make stuff up.

To Bruce J: Recruits are better educated than the average American and they come from families that have average incomes.

Education level of recruits:
"We find that, on average, recruits tend to be much more highly educated than the general pub­lic and that this education disparity increased after the war on terrorism began. Comparable detailed education data from the Census classify the educa­tion level of individuals into one of seven categories (from less than high school up to graduate/profes­sional degree). We generated a binary variable that assigns a 1 for individuals with a high school diploma or higher and a 0 for less than a high school diploma.

If one single statistic could settle this issue, it is this: 98 percent of all enlisted recruits who enter the military have an education level of high school graduate or higher, compared to the national aver­age of 75 percent"

Family income of recruits:
"The household income of recruits generally matches the income distribution of the American population. There are slightly higher proportions of recruits from the middle class and slightly lower proportions from low-income brackets. However, the proportion of high-income recruits rose to a disproportionately high level after the war on ter­rorism began, as did the proportion of highly edu­cated enlistees. All of the demographic evidence that we analyzed contradicts the pro-draft case" http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda05-08.cfm

Answer 1

Most Liberals have no consciences of right or wrong.

If they cared so much about the Soldiers you would think that they would support their efforts, instead of accusing them of things that they have not done.

Answer 2

IT'S NOT OUR PROBLEM. It never was our problem. We went to war with Iraq under the (false!) pretext of destroying WMD's. Somehow, the situation got twisted around. Suddenly, we had a moral obligation to the people of Iraq.

HELLO? Isn't this why the U.S. set up the United Nations? Why should I foot the bill for a war that has NO bearing on my life.

"Terrorists," you say. Well, conquering Iraq doesn't stop terrorism. We could have spent that money in MUCH better ways.

To me, it all comes down to the dollars. Republicans are SUPPOSED to be the financially responsible political party. They have spent hundreds of BILLIONS of American dollars on this war, and a lot of the money is lining the pockets of thier buddies. It's a travesty.

As for the American lives lost...so what? These hillbillies were lining up after 9-11, just waiting to join the Army so that they could go to war. They wanted to fight. They took a chance that they might die when they signed on. That's what happens when you join the military. They aren't heros, they are just plain stupid to think that we could waltz into a country and take it over without any bloodshed. Wouldn't you fight if the U.S. were invaded?

Let Al-Qaeda have Iraq. Let's see if they can establish order in that mess. At least we won't have to pay for it.

Answer 3

-"If America leaves Iraq, then at least over 1 million people will die". Oh wait, but over 1 million people have died already. Maybe if america hadn't used a lame excuse to bully Iraq, these people would still live AND have more than an hour of electricity a day.

-"Iraq will become an terrorist run Islamic state". So lets terrorize terrorists, and Iraq will be "the land of the free".

-"more than 5 million people were became fugees." Well there's 2.5 million refugees starving because of the conflict in Darfur. Maybe America should just switch AK-47s for water, food and shelter for this people and then claim to really care about people's lives.

Answer 4

Whether Vietnam has become a terrorist run Buddhist or communist state? The answer is no, then why bother for Iraq and Afghanistan. One day may come people may be compelled to think that the Americans have become insane and attacks any country they want so place them under UN supervision to cool down their brain will you then support that theory? Who the hell you people are to think about Vietnam. Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and now Iran not to talk about Syria and Lebanon. Have you (USA) got as license to kill like Bond 007?

Answer 5

Excuse me that's Bush's job, as long as no Bush family member is harmed in the carrying out of his war started by lies:

1. No weapons of mass destruction found.
2. No link to Al Qeda proven, Saddam Hussein may not an inocent individual, but it gives Bush no right to fabricate facts, now it is about Al Qeda.
3. Always painting a much rosier picture, then it really is.

For the record I support the troops, but this "Commander in Chief" and his administration will always leave something to be desired as long as he is in office.

Answer 6

It's the price of fewer dead American soldiers. Some are willing to pay it, some aren't, some deny the responsibility (if not the connection "yes, if we leave, more Iraqis will die, but that's the responsibility of those killing them") - some don't care.

Answer 7

The question is every bit as inappropriate, stupid, obnoxious, and irrelevant if you substitute a different word:
Why Do Conservatives Want More Dead Iraqis?
Why Do Moderates Want More Dead Iraqis?
Why Do people uninterested in politics Want More Dead Iraqis?
Why Do Americans Want More Dead Iraqis?
Why Do people outside of the USA Want More Dead Iraqis?

I could go on but it would be a waste as you'd undoubtedly fail to see the stupidity of your own position anyway. I can only hope that you're not the typical end product of the schools you attended.

Answer 8

The left-wing wants defeat, they own it, they defend it. They are the dogs that return to their own vomit. Freedom, limited government, free enterprise, morality, Church, these are the things liberal left-wing people hate and that is why they are the real enemy. They attack police, Christianity, morality, patriotism, love of country, our military and anything decent. The enemy is within and there are two fronts in the fight.

Answer 9

The middle east is a stink pot. The only way to get rid of all the towel head extremist is to nuke the place. The last time we nuked and enemy, they surrendered. IT worked before, why not now? Oh yeah, it would save AMERICAN lives.

Answer 10

That's a good question! I still can't understand why liberals went along with Bush's plans to conquer and occupy Iraq. I don't think they understood how many Iraqis would be killed, and how many Americans...