How long will it take for just as many Iraqis to die under US occupation as under Saddam?

Question

Is there a point when, despite our best intentions, the solution is worse than the initial problem?

Answer 1

I think we're getting close. Saddam killed a few hundred thousand, and, while estimates vary pretty widely, I believe that we are in the six figure range as far as Iraqi deaths.

Sorry, thanks for your service to our country, but A- Saddam did not kill "millions", B- the United States supported, armed and funded Saddam during the majority of his atrocities, even helping to cover up the gassing of the Kurds.

Answer 2

Well lets see, Saddam killed so many of his people that on the average day of his rule more people died violently than from the worst day of sectarian violence since we entered Iraq. But to be fare to old Saddam, people do still die from things like old age, disease and accidents. With the population of Iraq being slightly higher than it was in 1979 when he took power, the natural death rate will probably keep pace with the death rate under his regime. So I'd say that in the year 2027 if we are still occupying Iraq the death toll during US occupation should equal that of Saddam's reign.

Answer 3

Erm first i wanted to say that this is a totally valid question and does not imply that GIs are shooting iraqis or stuff that some people read from it to warrant their own ranting. According to the part of the geneva convention the US did sign the invading army of a country is responsible for the peacekeeping afterwards and thus one might conclude that the US is responsible for the deaths of the civilians.

As to the deathtoll, if you include the iran-iraq war you'll most likely won't reach a number in that dimension, if you exclude it you'll already have passed it by a big margin.

Answer 4

The question was not about how many Iraqis are killed by Americans so much as how many people have died due to the instability in the country caused by the US occupation.

Witness the people celebrating their liberation in Baghdad by looting every building in sight for the first week.
Saddam may have killed a fair large amount of people, but a lot more of them lived in much better conditions and did not participate in radical groups and terrorist attacks.
Since the occupation chaos seems to reign. Infrastructure gone, rationing, competition for available resources.
The United States government bears the responsibility for the deaths even if they didn't personally shoot them.

Answer 5

The biggest misconception is that civilian deaths are due the US occupations and not properly blamed on the extremist groups that conduct sucide bombings in crowded market areas. Many of these extremist groups have media coraspondents in their speed dial. So after a vehicle filled with explosives blows up on a crowded street, the extremist calls their media palls and says a US War plane just bombed the market. Sure enough, the extremists get 20 or so of his buddies to relay the same story to the news reporter in it suddenly becomes "fact". I've seen this scenerio play out time and time again.

Should the US be blamed for this? You can't really say its their fault. The Iraq Police and National Police are still in its infancey and are still learning the core skills to do their job. With time, they will become proffesiant and be able to provide security in Iraq so US Forces wont have to.

It is a difficult concept for someone having not been to Iraq to understand how things work here. We do not target innocent people and we dont drop bombs destroying the infulstructure (because we are dumping millions of dollars to restore).

Even if the body count does get higher under US authority as opposed to Saddam, remember, its extremists doing it to civilians and not the US Government doing it to people based on their relgious beliefs.

Answer 6

The key point that you are missing in your idealogically driven question is this : Inocent Iraqis die at the hand of radical groups who hate all those who don't believe the same way they do. Even though civilian deaths are high they still don't come close to the carnage that Sadam inflicted on his own people. I would love to hear where you got your information perhaps movon.org or from Al jazera. Where did you draw your conclusions from or did you just hear that from one of your friends and regurgitate it on yahoo answers ? You know what I hate about this question ? Besides the fact that it has no basis in fact. Its not that you just thought you would get your point across by asking a tilted question. But that you are emboldening the enemy and by streaming your distaste for the war you are planting seeds of doubt in the hearts of people who still believe in our cause. Even though you have the right to free speech there are some things that shoul be kept to yourself.

Answer 7

That number was passed during the initial bombardment during the first days. You give far too much credence to your government's propaganda. Saddam's government killed a similar percentage of it's population as many governments have and continue to do. The war to initiate the permanent occupation of the Middle East is probably more likely to cause WW3 than any other lie that you are currently being force fed by your government and the good intentions you refer to are wishful thinking x ignorance.

Answer 8

About a million years unless the liberal get over there and let the insurgents have their way with the innocent Iraqis.

Answer 9

I strongly have faith that each and anyone international leaders could be atheists, or a minimum of shop their non secular ideals to themselves and out of government subjects. between that, i think that absolute means DOES corrupt extremely. it is somewhat difficult for me to understand what those human beings are questioning whilst they homicide, and possibility anyone elses lives yet their very own. what's it that makes their suggestions so diverse than type, rational questioning human beings? the place is the humanity in them? you're good in suggesting that means hungry parasites have an identical makeup as a serial killer. the concern that maximum of those human beings had in basic grew to become into that their dying might earnings the few. Take 9/11 as an occasion. It makes me vomit with i think of roughly each and all the money, and means Bush and acquaintances made off this deal. look how paranoid they're attempting to make us with years of "terrorism risk point orange" and crap. I knew it grew to become into all bull. It grew to become into an interior interest, like the 1st bombing years earlier that grew to become into. American are extremely fooled through the mainstream media..."they would not in any respect try this to us...it may well be on the information" that's what I hear as quickly as I talk out. they want us to renounce our freedom for fake protection. What we want is protection from them. All of those politicians might desire to be wiped out, and we as human beings might desire to return mutually to plot a sparkling gadget.

Answer 10

It will take as long as it takes for Iraqis to stop killing each other. You can't fault the Americans for that. It isn't they who are murdering civilians.