Some claim that our troops are responsible for these deaths and that it is a shame that they have but then as soon as they are called on not supporting the troops they say that they do support them. Is this suggesting that they support these so called deaths by our troops?
Here is a link to the findings of the death toll (supposedly, our fault)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html
2007-09-07 07:08:41 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Petey V3.3 -
youve said it yourself: "Some claim"
so why are you generalizing?
It is a general question about a specific group. You just looked smart them dumb all in one sentence.
P.S. Nice way to not answer the question.
2007-09-07 07:15:19 · update #1
They don't support anything but themselves, and even then they need government help.
2007-09-07 07:11:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 7⤋
Liberals find that their duty is to engage in outbursts of outrage just for the sake of it.
Facts and fully vetted data is just a nuisance.
Answering the call of 'duty' no matter how misguided is admirable. What they fail to realize is that, the duty comes with a responsibility.
The conservatives have taken a position where they are giving the American people a little too much credit IMHO.
They think that if they just let the left ramble on they will weave enough rope to hang themselves with. Logically that has already happened and is clearly manifest in the current, dismal congressional approval ratings. Nevertheless, the left has the media as willing participants rather than observers.
If the ridiculous, un-founded postulations of the left go un-challenged, they become fact.
Extremely dangerous.
2007-09-08 05:11:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
properly the outrage is how some human beings can think of our troops are loss of life for not something. The troops are loss of life to guard your freedom, yet on account which you're so politically partisan you won't be able to see that the war on terrorism is actual and not basically a bumper sticky label, as your liberal presidential candidate John Edwards could propose.
2016-10-18 05:58:36 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know how accurate the number is, but the number is huge regardless.
Sort of makes it difficult to "win the battle for (Iraqi) hearts and minds" doesn't it? (Bush's phrase, not mine). Clearly, as with all wars, some civilians have been killed by US troops. Obviously, only a fool would deny that. Many other civilians have died due to sectarian violence.
The fact that neocons don't consider is that there are probably a million Iraqis, who, rightly or wrongly, blame us for the death of their mother/father/son/daughter/wife/husband/brother etc.
Some % of this population become "insurgents", determined to take revenge by killing US troops. Bush claims repeatedly that we are somehow going to eradicate all of these insurgents and establish a stable democracy in Iraq.
I say that is nonsense. We can't even find these people, so how the hell can we eradicate them. Further, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the number of insurgents is increasing every day.
So, the con version of "supporting our troops" is leaving them indefinitely in a hostile nation populated by people who want to see them dead, without giving them the intelligence or means to fight or even identify their enemies, with no end in sight. And as indicated in the NY Times editorial by the seven vets recently, members of the Iraqi Security Forces and Iraqi Police are among the killers of our troops.
2007-09-07 07:27:38 · answer #4 · answered by celticexpress 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Simple it is all about bashing Bush.
If the troops happen to be in the wake so be it.
Why else do they call them dumb, Nazis, terrorists, cold blooded murders, those die are wasted lives, etc.
They don't care about the troops or anything else it is far more important to bash Bush than anything else.
That 650K number has been debunk do many times but they love it any ways.
Just like the 9/11 consiparcies.
2007-09-07 07:33:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The Guardian Study does not anywhere say that the 650 000 casualties (as of last year) were victims of US troops.
They are a proof that the invasion of Iraq was a criminal act and that those who masterminded it are not only guilty of crimes against humanity but also responsible for the lives of close to a million innocents.
Which is not to say that the troops are in their best behavior. Just yesterday they murdered 14 civilians in Sadr City from the air. That's murder plain and simple.
The American military is hated for a reason. American's always like to think that foreigners are crazy for not trusting your army. Anyone who knows anything about US involvement in Latin America, knows the US army is like any other imperial army, murderous.
edit: The US has already surpassed the amount of people murdered by Saddam. The Iraqi people hate you, with good reason. Ask any soldier, they are HATED.
By the way, why is the US fighting insurgents? Is the US planning to make Iraq into a colony?
2007-09-07 07:16:31 · answer #6 · answered by Washington Irving 3 · 4⤊ 5⤋
While it is nuts to equate those that intentionally kill women and children to US troops who are now closer to peacekeepers than conquerors, it is quite sad to see results of bombs that missed the target and killed a family. It is not a good feeling at all.
2007-09-07 07:39:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, you're right, it isn't our fault at all. We haven't launched any missiles or fired any weapons of any kind. All those people died of natural causes. It's just mere coincidence that it happened after we invaded the country.
Troops don't make decisions; they carry out orders. I can support the troops and still think the people ordering them around are totally brainless.
And that's what I do think.
2007-09-07 07:29:32 · answer #8 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The initial invasion killed a relatively small number of Iraqis, (according to official sources which are known to lie) though all life is sacred. It is the occupation that has led the American Military to preside over the most vile and largest ethnic cleansing of the modern age. (according to Official Sources)
The U.S. troops are helpless to stop these "locusts" who come out of the earth to murder women and children. Because of Bush, terror has never been happier, or healthier.
2007-09-07 07:15:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
Cause they are REAL supporters. A REAL supporter knows that the insurgents are the ones killing the innocent Iraqis. Sure we do accidentally kill a few civilians but the come into the line of fire and many of them are put in harms way to make it look like we are killing them on purpose.
2007-09-07 07:21:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Are they counting the thousands of bodies that have been found in mass graves, left over from the Sadam Hussein regime? The people trying to pin the deaths on our troops that have occurred by terrorists blowing up civilians do not and have never supported the troops.
2007-09-07 07:16:37 · answer #11 · answered by Rich people employ me 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋