it is amazing that rather then admitting any concern or responsibility we choose to argue over numbers. both sides could be off by 100,000 and the numbers are still disgusting.
we sit here and argue numbers while our troops and innocent (and not so innocent) Iraq's die. we have a flawed policy with no plan from either side of the political spectrum on how to solve it.
2007-11-15 13:20:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by michr 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
I don't find it interesting, I find it disgusting. I have known all along that the reason for the invasion of Iraq wasn't to free the Iraqi people, but rather it was an aggessive move by the globalists that have hijacked the Pentagon and the White House.
It is all about stealing the oil and water resources in the Middle East. Israel is heavily involved behind the scenes in maintaining a U.S. occupation of the Middle East. It is almost as if the U.S. troops are being used to do Israel's dirty work.
2007-11-15 13:07:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Compare the deaths from 1939-1945 by Nazi Germany, with deaths from 1939 - 2012 by America, that sounds a fair comparison. Even if you did, Nazi Germany would probably come out on top. Perhaps a deaths per year figure would be more useful. Nazi germany would be 3.3 million per year, has America killed greater than 0.24 billion people since 1939, i think not. Edit: Enlighten us with your headcount! p.s. the deaths per year was sarcasm... comparing the two within the context of your vague question is pointless.
2016-05-23 08:25:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Interesting?
No, I'm not a ghoul.
That six-hundred thousand figure it old; from months ago. I bet it's approaching 1 million, if not more.
Then there's the homeless, the exiled, the destructionof infrastructure, the tortured and raped, the maimed.
Not to mention the fact that women USED to be able to dress as they liked, and leave the house without having to be accompanied by a male relative.
Or the fact that many parents don't dare let their children go to school, but keep them home for fear of never seeing them again.
Interesting?
Hardly the word for it.
2007-11-15 14:03:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by tehabwa 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I 100% agree. And more US soliders have died in this war than people did on 9/11 (and the war has nothing to do with Osama!!)...
Also the fact that the war has been deemed illegal by the U.N and many within the international community (except for the coalition of the willing)...
sad stuff... as stated before, the poor middle east is a basket case and the coalition of the willing aren't helping...
There has been a change of Gov in the UK, us Aussies are about to vote out our Prime Minister out (i'm too sure of it), so sadly Bush is going to look like the only loser who still thinks this entire war is justified...
would love to be alive to read the history books in 100 years... how are they going to see this war? sadly, another nam.
2007-11-15 13:04:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Kurds massacre Christians: 1,000 (Eckhardt) 1933
Iraq (1960s)
Govt. vs. Kurds
Eckhardt: 100,000 civ. + 5,000 mil. = 105,000 (1961-70)
B&J
1961-66: 10,000
1968-70: 2,000
TOTAL: 12,000
In Iraq:
1987 War Annual: 300,000 (1983-87)
Washington Post, 6 June 93: 70-120,000 (1987-89)
David McDowall, A Modern History of the Kurds (1996): 150-200,000 (Anfal operations, 1988)
23 May 1999 Denver Rocky Mtn News: 280,000 (1961-1999), incl. 180,000 between 1976 and 1988, and 10,000 in 1991.
HRW: Chemical attack on Halabja, 1988: 4,000 to 7000 civ. killed. 3,200 names collected. [http://hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/ANFAL3.htm]
Ploughshares 2000
Total 1961-2000: >100,000
Fighting among rival Kurds since 1994: 5,000 k
Anfal operations
US State Dept.: 70-150,000
Human Rights Watch: 50-100,000
B&J:
1974-75: 3,000
1976-95: 60,000
TOTAL: 63,000
857 cartons of detailed files kept by the Iraqi secret police describing genocide against the Kurds emerged in 1991-92.
Time 1 June 1992: 200,000 to 300,000 killed (late 80s)
AP 7 Dec. 1991: 200,000 k (1986-1991)
Chicago Tribune 26 May 1992: 200,000 to 300,000 (1988-91)
In Iran:
Under Islamic Republic, 1979 to Feb. 1981: 10,000 (David McDowall, A Modern History of the Kurds (1996))
1979-89: 17,000 (SIPRI 1990)
23 May 1999 Denver Rocky Mtn News: 17,000, incl. 10,000 military (1979-99)
1980-90: 50,000 (1990 War Annual 4)
In Turkey:
4 April 95 Washington Post: 15,000 (1985-95)
B&J: 18,000 (1984-95)
Ploughshares 2000: 30-40,000
29 April 1999 AP: 37,000 (1984-99)
23 May 1999 Denver Rocky Mtn News: 40,000 (1984-99)
TOTAL:
Adding the numbers above puts the total in the 200 to 400 thousand range. OTOH, the CDI estimates a total of 120,000 deaths between 1961 and 1997 in Iran, Turkey and Iraq. (see also Iraq, 1961-70)
Coups:
Govt. vs. Shammar Tribe, et al., 1959:
WHPSI: 2,300
Eckhardt: 1,000 civ. + 1,000 mil. = 2,000
Small & Singer: 2,000
1963: 1,400 (WHPSI)
1966: 2,000 (WHPSI)
Purges by new Ba'ath Government
PBS: 2,000 [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/mind.html]
Saddam Hussein (1979-2003): 300 000
Human Rights Watch: "twenty-five years of Ba`th Party rule ... murdered or 'disappeared' some quarter of a million Iraqis" [http://www.hrw.org/wr2k4/3.htm]
8/9 Dec. 2003 AP: Total murders
New survey estimates 61,000 residents of Baghdad executed by Saddam.
US Government estimates a total of 300,000 murders
180,000 Kurds k. in Anfal
60,000 Shiites in 1991
50,000 misc. others executed
"Human rights officials" est.: 500,000
Iraqi politicians: over a million
[These don't include the million or so dead in the Iran-Iraq War.]
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatx.htm#h i could go on but you can look for yourself
2007-11-15 13:17:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by djominous20 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Wow. I didn't realize anyone was still using that outdated figure, which has been long since discredited. Just look at the date of your information; over a year ago. Since then, liberals have invented many different figures. Good luck in your quest for accurate figures, even though you evidently don't care about accuracy.
Oh, and Saddam Hussein executed 184,000 Kurds in a single day. Their crime? Being Kurdish. I don't know what math they're teaching these days, but 184,000 is more than 150,000, and that covers just one day of his 25 years in power.
2007-11-15 12:58:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by DOOM 7
·
3⤊
4⤋
Whats the number of people Saddam would have killed in the last few years if he was still in office? He was getting older, dementia could have set in at any time.
2007-11-15 13:17:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Your number under Saddam is missing 2 zeros...the Kurds deaths from the CHEMICAL WMD were over 250,000....fact is over 100,000 in one short campaign....here is the link...
Second...you are counting...as all pro terrorist libs do the people killed by the terrorists..NOT in an act of war...just an act to terrify the population into their way of thinking...
Nice try...but go and try FACTS..Reality kills lib lies
Your OPINION IS NOT A FACT
2007-11-15 13:06:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by consrgreat 7
·
1⤊
4⤋
Actually, I'd like to see a source for the first number.
The second, I'm familiar with, a high-end estimate based on some questionable polls, augmented with statistical hand-waving. But, even the low end estimate is over 150k.
2007-11-15 12:56:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
3⤊
3⤋