http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html
[asking this question because on the last question posted, many seemed to be under the delusion most or all civilian deaths were caused by islamic extremist bombings.]
2007-09-29
11:15:55
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
summer b, the question is in the title
2007-09-29
11:23:08 ·
update #1
wolf, why do you keep calling me a terrorist? do you know what a terrorist is?
i guess i might be able to see where you're coming from if i said i supported the iraq war. obviously i don't.
2007-09-29
11:27:01 ·
update #2
The 655,000 civilians killed is old estimate that has mostly been discredited. Some of the people counted as dead actually fled to other countries or to segregrated sectarian enclaves.
Most of the deaths are due to civil war which is a direct result of the US take down of the government and the occupation. Between 2-5% of the fighters are foreign Al Qaeda, and they are estimated to be responsible for about 15% of the deaths.
2007-09-29 11:24:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
I never said there wasn't such a thing as collateral damage or trigger-happy Soldiers that fire on an indistinct lump in the distance that looks like its pointing something at them - only to realize its a child with a water pistol.
But to say that the US presence is responsible for the majority or even a plurality of civilian deaths in Iraq is just uneducated and often directed out of hate.
If you really want a source of civilian death, first look at the people who threaten to kill Iraqi voters, direct rocket attacks on apartment buildings, and blow themselves up in crowded markets. I'd say that's responsible for about 80-85% of it.
2007-09-29 11:42:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question? Now if AQ is responsible for killing App. 700,000 of Iraqis, well damn, they are truly a mighty power, ain't they?
Folks if you can spare couple of minutes please go to my questions and read about one our true heroes.
A hero that thought me the slogan:
The needs of the many outweigh..the needs of the few.
Or the one. does not become reality only in the movies?
Thanks,
2007-09-29 11:26:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes.
When is Jack Murtha going to apologize for wrongly accusing our troops of this?
2007-09-29 12:06:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, well over 90% were killed by you terrorists and insurgents.
Your hatred of the USA is clouding your thinking.
Just get a job and don't spend so much time hating our troops.
You Democrats need to get jobs.
(I called you a Terrorist because you sound like one. Honey, I was around Terrorists in French Morocco before you were born.)
2007-09-29 11:25:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by wolf 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
.No the US presence kills too.That's the truth,period.
The saddest part is some of those deaths by American forces(army or private contractors) are no accidents but deliberate acts out of frustration or contempt for Iraqi lives.
Collateral damage,unintended deaths of civilians, is worse enough as it is but this goes way beyond that
2007-09-29 11:27:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by justgoodfolk 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
dude,ever hear of collateral damage? people die in every war.Hello! you cannot make an omlet without breaking the eggs.SAME IN LIFE!grow up!
2007-09-29 12:06:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
No one said there is no such thing as friendly fire.
2007-09-29 11:20:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Is this a question or a statement?
2007-09-29 11:22:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋