English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What did the real number turn out to be?

(...not counting the mass graves filled after the US invasion.)

2007-09-15 02:10:14 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Actually, john mcd, Human Rights Watch has been towing the neocon party line for some time now.

The correct answer is: only 5,000 bodies were found, and Tony Blair admitted the 400,000 figure was a lie.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1263901,00.html

We are still awaiting an apology from the American imperialists who used the same number.

2007-09-15 02:24:32 · update #1

15 answers

Well no, I don't remember anyone mentioning mass graves before the war.

And the article you posted doesn't mention anyone saying anything about mass graves before the war either.

Every comment, even the Human Rights Watch comments, were made after the war had started.

And yoiur article doesn't mention what the number turned out to be either.

Since it was written in july 2004, more than 3 years ago.

And they are still finding mass graves in iraq dating from Saddam.

2007-09-15 03:03:46 · answer #1 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1 0

Lets just say its 400,000
Lets just say its 5,000

It is 1 too many

Now with that in mind --- my assessment today is that what we have done is worse, because there is no end in sight.

Much more then 400,000 will die when this is all over.

Ya know what really pizzes me off, is that Saddam, who said he no longer had WMD's and Bush claiming he did when Bush knew that there was a high probably that was not true, makes Bush a liar and Saddam telling the truth.

And people still trust him? How in the world can people be so dumb?

Peace

Jim

.

2007-09-15 09:54:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

I think it's unknown how many were massacred, but even the US State Department says that that the atrocities were committed in

1983, 1986, 1988 and 1991 against Kurds, and in 1991 against the Shiites who rose up at the end of the Gulf War

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm

This hardly justifies the imminent need for an invasion 12 years after the last massacre.

2007-09-15 09:32:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

You can read about it at Human Rights Watch, unless you think thats just a neocon think tank or something.


The Dujail Massacre of 1982
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/06/22/iraq16230.htm - HRW questions the legal standards used to convict Saddam, but they seem to argue Saddam should have been tried for something they had better evidence for.

The Barzani Clan Abductions of 1983
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1992/iraq/

The al-Anfal Campaign
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/

The Campaign Against the Marsh Arabs
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/marsharabs1.htm

The Post-Uprising Massacres of 1991

"Although most of Hussein's large-scale atrocities took place during the 1980s and early 1990s, his tenure was also characterized by day-to-day atrocities that attracted less notice. "

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/p/saddam_hussein.htm

2007-09-15 09:22:00 · answer #4 · answered by freedom first 5 · 2 1

The number is in excess of a quarter million, and still rising -- mass graves from Saddam's regime turn up all the time.

Oh, and the US hasn't filled any mass graves. The casualties as a result of our invasion have been buried individually because there are so few when compared to Saddam's butchery.

Mass casualties these days are the results of the terror bombings by those peace-loving Shia and Sunnis Muslims who just want to get along with their Islamic brethren.

2007-09-15 09:18:34 · answer #5 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 4 3

On the show w/Katie Current she asked this guy where he got the answer 4 his info & he said he got the info from him saying it was, so it is. Later the company called 2 say tht is wasnt true wht he said. (Right)

2007-09-15 13:12:25 · answer #6 · answered by elle 4 · 0 0

I'm still waiting on the "mas grave" count from kosovo.

2007-09-15 09:18:59 · answer #7 · answered by ken s 5 · 1 1

Remember how Clinton told us of the mass graves in Bosnia? You know, when Dictator Clinton went to war without the authorization of Congress?

"For nearly four years a terrible war has torn Bosnia apart. Horrors we prayed had been banished from Europe forever have been seared into our minds again. Skeletal prisoners caged behind barbed-wire fences, women and girls raped as a tool of war, defenseless men and boys shot down into mass graves, evoking visions of World War II concentration camps and endless lines of refugees marching toward a future of despair."

Where are the Bosnian mass graves, and when are our troops coming home from Bosnia?

2007-09-15 09:29:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

It came pretty close, and despite you parroting the radical manifesto from moveon, the only mass graves created in Iraq since the invasion were the responsibility of Dennis Kucinich's new bestest buddies.

2007-09-15 09:16:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 5

alll you have to do is add another " 0 " and it will be a Holohoax = Noble Lies = The teaching of the father of the Neocons = Leo Strauss.

There are more graves in the US...............it would be a good reaon to get rid of a leader in the US

2007-09-15 09:15:11 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers