Civilian death toll in Iraq since invasion exceeds 100,000

[mardigras]

Report will be published tomorrow.

Poor planning, air strikes by coalition forces and a "climate of violence" have led to more than 100,000 extra deaths in Iraq, scientists say. ...

Iraq death toll 'soared post-war'

Medical Journal Estimates 100,000 Civilian Deaths in Iraq War

Civilian death toll in Iraq exceeds 100,000

Household Survey Sees 100,000 Iraqi Deaths

[CamChicks]

But we are much safer now. None of those families will want revenge. The more we kill, the more they love us.

[TheMob]

heh, oh isn't it grand..

[detoxed]

Should have been a million. How many of those were suicide bombs?

[Gynecologist]

That is bad but is dwarfed by the nubmers of Iraqi children who died in the last decade due to lack of medical supplies since the start of sanctions.

[jmk]

Originally posted by CamChicks
But we are much safer now. None of those families will want revenge. The more we kill, the more they love us.

[Eyes_Without_A_Face]

How many years would the infame dictator Saddam need to reach such a bodycount?

[xclusive]

We should have stuck with our program get saddam out then get out...

[crockett]

I think it's closer to 150k dead http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

[hagbard]

Anyone ever think that if we had the internet in 1941 we woudlnt have been able to win the war?
There would be a bunch of people pissed that we took apart the japs at Midway. Any reports on most of the pacific fighting where we could lose 10k people in one battle would instantly spark a call to retreat. I guess though, letting arab leaders take their people and countries to pieces through torture, bribes, threats and violence is just so DIFFERENT than when a white guy does it.

[xxxdesign-net]

George Bush and his administration should be arrested... 100,000 deaths to prevent what exactly? That Hussain MIGHT in 15 years sponsor a terrorist attack that will kill 500 americans.. ? To all Republicans.. the World despises you

[CamChicks]

Originally posted by hagbard
Anyone ever think that if we had the internet in 1941 we woudlnt have been able to win the war?
There would be a bunch of people pissed that we took apart the japs at Midway. Any reports on most of the pacific fighting where we could lose 10k people in one battle would instantly spark a call to retreat.

One important difference: Iraq didn't attack us. If they had, there would be very little domestic opposition to this war.

In war, whoever leaves their own country and crosses the border into another country to kill those people who live there in their homes are the hostile aggressors. In this conflict, we are the bad guys. Don't let rooting for your hometeam bias you. Just replace 'America' and 'Iraq' with fictitious country names and then re-read the story.

The bottom line is: America now has hundreds of thousands of enemys it didn't have 4 years ago.

It only took a couple dozen people to pull off 9/11. Now we've multipled the number of people who believe America is an imperialistic enemy by 1000%; turned a small gang of thugs into a global army. All they see everyday is us bombing their homes and blowing up their children, patrolling / gunning down people in the street, and they're not going to embrace our presidents excuses or justifications they way americans (sitting safely in comfort watching it on TV) give him a free pass because they've already picked a side.

Whoever wins on Nov 2nd, I'm afraid the invasion of Iraq has created enough hatred among so many that we're in for a generation of retribution/terrorism from those Iraqi's who lost loved ones. But an endorsement of the war from the american people (by re-electing Bush) will certainly make it worse. The whole world is waiting to find out if this is just a rogue administration, or if the american people themselves are responsible.

[TheJimmy]

Originally posted by CamChicks
But we are much safer now. None of those families will want revenge. The more we kill, the more they love us.

Whatever threat Bush THINKS he got rid of he just increased by (scientifically speaking) a shitload.

He's made the world a MUCH more dangerous place for us and our offspring.


Trust me I'm TOTALLY not opposed to military action in general. I was in the miliary for over 12 years...but G_D DAMM, even an eye for an eye is put to shame by the low numbers from this mishandled conflict.





What really worries me, as I spent quite a bit of time around these 'fanatics' while I was in the desert, is that they don't let go of grudges very easy to put it lightely. The coallition of the coerced has clearly backed up their fears and fueled their hate.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally posted by CamChicks
But we are much safer now. None of those families will want revenge. The more we kill, the more they love us.

[TheJimmy]

Originally posted by CamChicks
...

But an endorsement of the war from the american people (by re-electing Bush) will certainly make it worse. The whole world is waiting to find out if this is just a rogue administration, or if the american people themselves are responsible.

that should be a bumpersticker dammit...


it's brutally true and it's brutally sad that almost 50% of our population can't comprend that...

[hagbard]

I'm just surprised at what i'm seeing here. Death to all republicans is all fine to say but it was only poor engineering that didnt bring down the WTC during the Clinton administration. These people hated us that much then. There have been terrorist actions long before "the last 4 years" but those are all forgotten in the face of blind hatred of Bush.

A very very significant number of the deaths in iraq, including a group of children who were trying to just get some CANDY are due to very random attacks by the insurgents that often times dont hurt a single american while killing dozens of innocents.

Everyone walks around today talking about how many jews (and others) would have been saved by attacking Germany in 1937. Its very easy to talk about things like this in hindsight. When someone has the BALLS to do it BEFORE millions die, however, hes attacked in the same way you are doing now.

[BlueDesignStudios]

I thought Bush was pro-life?

[BRISK]

[volante]

Originally posted by mardigras
Iraq death toll 'soared post-war'

"They found the relative risk of death was one-and-a-half times higher for Iraqi civilians after the 2003 invasion than in the preceding 15 months.

That figure jumps to two-and-a-half times higher if data from Falluja - the scene of repeated heavy fighting - is included."

[mardigras]

Originally posted by Eyes_Without_A_Face
How many years would the infame dictator Saddam need to reach such a bodycount?

Given that Saddam was boxed in and monitored, probably several hundred...

[eroswebmaster]

Jesus..that would be like taking out everyone at a nascar event in one fell swoop.

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by Gynecologist
That is bad but is dwarfed by the nubmers of Iraqi children who died in the last decade due to lack of medical supplies since the start of sanctions.

only idiots keep talking about sanctions, and child deaths in Iraq, have a look at this statistic:

A 1999 State Department report estimated that Saddam had built 48 palaces since 1991, at a cost of approximately $2.2 billion. This was in addition to the 20 or so palaces he possessed prior to the Gulf War

You can buy a lot of medicine for your 'sick children' with 2.2 billion dollars, however Saddam preferred to build a palace, whom is to blame for Iraq's dying children again? sanctions? or the spending of a tyrant?

[SuckOnThis]

Originally posted by CamChicks
One important difference: Iraq didn't attack us. If they had, there would be very little domestic opposition to this war.

In war, whoever leaves their own country and crosses the border into another country to kill those people who live there in their homes are the hostile aggressors. In this conflict, we are the bad guys. Don't let rooting for your hometeam bias you. Just replace 'America' and 'Iraq' with fictitious country names and then re-read the story.

The bottom line is: America now has hundreds of thousands of enemys it didn't have 4 years ago.

It only took a couple dozen people to pull off 9/11. Now we've multipled the number of people who believe America is an imperialistic enemy by 1000%; turned a small gang of thugs into a global army. All they see everyday is us bombing their homes and blowing up their children, patrolling / gunning down people in the street, and they're not going to embrace our presidents excuses or justifications they way americans (sitting safely in comfort watching it on TV) give him a free pass because they've already picked a side.

Whoever wins on Nov 2nd, I'm afraid the invasion of Iraq has created enough hatred among so many that we're in for a generation of retribution/terrorism from those Iraqi's who lost loved ones. But an endorsement of the war from the american people (by re-electing Bush) will certainly make it worse. The whole world is waiting to find out if this is just a rogue administration, or if the american people themselves are responsible.

Couldnt have said it better. Add that to the fact that when the next attack happens here if Bush is in charge we can expect not only martial law but more countries being invaded. It is not out of the realm of possibilities for other nations to form a coalition to put a stop to Bush's hair trigger cowboy attitude.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by xenophobic
only idiots keep talking about sanctions, and child deaths in Iraq, have a look at this statistic:

A 1999 State Department report estimated that Saddam had built 48 palaces since 1991, at a cost of approximately $2.2 billion. This was in addition to the 20 or so palaces he possessed prior to the Gulf War

You can buy a lot of medicine for your 'sick children' with 2.2 billion dollars, however Saddam preferred to build a palace, whom is to blame for Iraq's dying children again? sanctions? or the spending of a tyrant?

LOL....

Repeat after me: ESTIMATED ....


Same people as the " stock pile of WMD " ....

Don't forget to vote for Bush on the 3rd ....

[HammerTime33]

We need to teach our soldiers to shoot better, and we need bigger bombs.

Ohhh and we need FEWER politicians to get in the way of war, for god sakes let us kill the bastards dont send our guys over there to sit and be targets then them shoot first kill ALL and come home.

If it were up to bush we would have killed them all, though many more would be dead they would not be AMERICAN.

What about Vietnam? We could have that over with n 2 weeks too, but we were NOT ALOUD to attack them they had to attack us first, and I say that is BULL SHIT.

For what ever reasons our governments gets us in to these wars for gods sake let us kill the fuggers and get our guys and gals home.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally posted by HammerTime33
We need to teach our soldiers to shoot better, and we need bigger bombs.

Ohhh and we need FEWER politicians to get in the way of war, for god sakes let us kill the bastards dont send our guys over there to sit and be targets then them shoot first kill ALL and come home.

If it were up to bush we would have killed them all, though many more would be dead they would not be AMERICAN.

What about Vietnam? We could have that over with n 2 weeks too, but we were NOT ALOUD to attack them they had to attack us first, and I say that is BULL SHIT.

For what ever reasons our governments gets us in to these wars for gods sake let us kill the fuggers and get our guys and gals home.

Then get your fucking ass over there and start killing them like you think they should be killed.

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by directfiesta
LOL....
Repeat after me: ESTIMATED ....
Same people as the " stock pile of WMD " ....
Don't forget to vote for Bush on the 3rd ....

If you were a program, you'd be compiled in idiot++

It's a fact he built all of those palaces after the war, further if you saw the news each one of those was lined with marble, gold and all fine furnishing, some how morons like yourself take any comment refuting a statement to be 'pro bush' get a fucking grip.

The statement was Saddam let his people die, and it had nothing to do with sanctions, he managed to get all of the building materials into the country for his palaces, he managed to get night vision and GPS jamming equipment into the country and other military equipment, by choice he sat by in his palaces and left people to die.

[Verbal]

Originally posted by CamChicks
One important difference: Iraq didn't attack us. If they had, there would be very little domestic opposition to this war.

In war, whoever leaves their own country and crosses the border into another country to kill those people who live there in their homes are the hostile aggressors. In this conflict, we are the bad guys. Don't let rooting for your hometeam bias you. Just replace 'America' and 'Iraq' with fictitious country names and then re-read the story.

The bottom line is: America now has hundreds of thousands of enemys it didn't have 4 years ago.

It only took a couple dozen people to pull off 9/11. Now we've multipled the number of people who believe America is an imperialistic enemy by 1000%; turned a small gang of thugs into a global army. All they see everyday is us bombing their homes and blowing up their children, patrolling / gunning down people in the street, and they're not going to embrace our presidents excuses or justifications they way americans (sitting safely in comfort watching it on TV) give him a free pass because they've already picked a side.

Whoever wins on Nov 2nd, I'm afraid the invasion of Iraq has created enough hatred among so many that we're in for a generation of retribution/terrorism from those Iraqi's who lost loved ones. But an endorsement of the war from the american people (by re-electing Bush) will certainly make it worse. The whole world is waiting to find out if this is just a rogue administration, or if the american people themselves are responsible.

yup

[Roger]

Originally posted by xenophobic
You can buy a lot of medicine for your 'sick children' with 2.2 billion dollars, however Saddam preferred to build a palace, whom is to blame for Iraq's dying children again? sanctions? or the spending of a tyrant?

You can't buy that medicine when you're not allowed to import it. Heck they wheren't able to import pipes to get clean water.

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by Roger
You can't buy that medicine when you're not allowed to import it. Heck they wheren't able to import pipes to get clean water.

managed to get them for his palaces internal water supply, and all of their fountains? managed to get all sorts of military equipment in after the sanctions, pretty lame argument if you ask me.

[CamChicks]

Originally posted by hagbard

Everyone walks around today talking about how many jews (and others) would have been saved by attacking Germany in 1937. Its very easy to talk about things like this in hindsight. When someone has the BALLS to do it BEFORE millions die, however, hes attacked in the same way you are doing now.

Saddam wasn't Hitler. Saddam was a very loyal ally of the USA until he pissed off Bush Sr's friends in Saudi Arabia.

Saddam asked our permission before invading Kuwait, and we said we didn't care. Then the Saudi Royal Family objected and the US had to suddenly start demonizing him to justify our change in position.

Today on FOX News they still crucify him for actions that the United States paid for.

It would have been great if Saddam had really been as effective as Hitler with respect to military victories. It would have been good news for us if he had knocked off Iran and converted them into a secular state. Now, without our dog Saddam, there is no buffer left between the goals of the USA and the goals of radical Islam. We are taking all the heat ourselves. It was much better when the fundamentalists blamed Saddam for killing clerics.. now we're going to get all the blame and hatred directed towards us, and we're going to take all the hits...

http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html

[vixm]

Read this sh*t


Fuc*ed up!

[Roger]

Originally posted by hagbard
Everyone walks around today talking about how many jews (and others) would have been saved by attacking Germany in 1937. Its very easy to talk about things like this in hindsight. When someone has the BALLS to do it BEFORE millions die, however, hes attacked in the same way you are doing now.

You're comparing Saddam, a leader of a third world country that doesn't even have much of an army to Hitler?
If Saddam is Hitler, I don't wanna know what Kim Jong Il is
And how about Sudan then? Or is genocide okay when it involves black people?

[Sin_Vraal]

I swear if bush was gonna start killing civs, he might as well wiped them all out. now bush made the U.S.A look like the scum of the earth (oh, I think we might have been that already) instead of looking like the evil dictators we really are.

I'd rather look like the evil bad guy than a dickhead.

[Roger]

Originally posted by xenophobic
managed to get them for his palaces internal water supply, and all of their fountains? managed to get all sorts of military equipment in after the sanctions, pretty lame argument if you ask me.

They had clean water, it just wasn't available to everyone because they needed new pipes,
Yes, he got military equipment that he was allowed to get.

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by xenophobic
If you were a program, you'd be compiled in idiot++

It's a fact he built all of those palaces after the war, further if you saw the news each one of those was lined with marble, gold and all fine furnishing, some how morons like yourself take any comment refuting a statement to be 'pro bush' get a fucking grip.

The statement was Saddam let his people die, and it had nothing to do with sanctions, he managed to get all of the building materials into the country for his palaces, he managed to get night vision and GPS jamming equipment into the country and other military equipment, by choice he sat by in his palaces and left people to die.

LOL ... repeat over and over again....

What the fuck is your hard-on about Saddam???

And since when the Americans gives a shit about " the iraqi people" ...

Meanwhile, great liberation and freedom.

PS: They, the iraqis, want your hairy butts out of THEIR country...

[directfiesta]

Originally posted by Roger
Or is genocide okay when it involves black people?

Yes, bodies will decompose over the centuries and oil will be available ....

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by Roger
They had clean water, it just wasn't available to everyone because they needed new pipes,
Yes, he got military equipment that he was allowed to get.

yes, and there is the key "everyone" it was available to Saddam Hussein because he had millions of dollars, and put his lifestyle over that of the Iraqi people, as for the arm's --what about the weapon systems he was not allowed to procure? like the GPS Jamming equipment purchased from Russian companies, and other equipment like night vision googles, Kornet Anti-Tank missiles which were supposed to be restricted?

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by directfiesta
LOL ... repeat over and over again....
What the fuck is your hard-on about Saddam???
And since when the Americans gives a shit about " the iraqi people" ...
Meanwhile, great liberation and freedom.
PS: They, the iraqis, want your hairy butts out of THEIR country...

Not to worry, you Canadians have your share of the blood money -- after all your pension plans are heavily invested in the war machine.

With his 2+ Billion dollars Saddam built palaces, and let his people starve.

Canada invested 2+ Billion dollars into the U.S war machine for pension profit and call on the evils of the 'unjust' war.

people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

[Rochard]

Originally posted by Gynecologist
That is bad but is dwarfed by the nubmers of Iraqi children who died in the last decade due to lack of medical supplies since the start of sanctions.

While Saddam was getting rich.

[CamChicks]

Originally posted by xenophobic
yes, and there is the key "everyone" it was available to Saddam Hussein because he had millions of dollars, and put his lifestyle over that of the Iraqi people, as for the arm's --what about the weapon systems he was not allowed to procure? like the GPS Jamming equipment purchased from Russian companies, and other equipment like night vision googles, Kornet Anti-Tank missiles which were supposed to be restricted?

Saddam had to maintain enough military strength, or at least the appearance of strength, to discourage an invasion from Iran. If Iran knew Saddam was weak, they would have gone in and taken over. Infact, if the fundamentalist Iraqis knew how weakened Saddam really was, they might have succeeded in an internal revolution. Either way, Iraq would have reverted to an islamic theocracy. (as it almost certainly will as soon as the USA leaves)

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by CamChicks
Saddam had to maintain enough military strength, or at least the appearance of strength, to discourage an invasion from Iran. If Iran knew Saddam was weak, they would have gone in and taken over. Infact, if the fundamentalist Iraqis knew how weakened Saddam really was, they might have succeeded in an internal revolution. Either way, Iraq would have reverted to an islamic theocracy. (as it almost certainly will as soon as the USA leaves)

I absolutely agree on the statement about Iraq becoming a theocracy, Iran has plenty of influence in Iraq, and that would be in their interest likewise.

However, it seems to me that people blame George W. Bush on this board for everything from unemployment to the medical insurance crisis -- yet a dictator whom spent 2+ Billion dollars on his own palaces when a large portion of his country was dying is excusable?

So far we've heard he couldn't get medicine into the country -- but he could get everything for his palaces, and could still get illegal weapon technology?

Then he couldn't get water pipes? but everyone of his palaces had lots of bathrooms ever courtyard had multiple fountains, swimming pools etc?

Hate Bush, or not logic defies the arguments defending Saddam Hussein, whilst blaming U.N Sanctions for starving the population?

[CamChicks]

Originally posted by xenophobic
I absolutely agree on the statement about Iraq becoming a theocracy, Iran has plenty of influence in Iraq, and that would be in their interest likewise.

However, it seems to me that people blame George W. Bush on this board for everything from unemployment to the medical insurance crisis -- yet a dictator whom spent 2+ Billion dollars on his own palaces when a large portion of his country was dying is excusable?

So far we've heard he couldn't get medicine into the country -- but he could get everything for his palaces, and could still get illegal weapon technology?

Then he couldn't get water pipes? but everyone of his palaces had lots of bathrooms ever courtyard had multiple fountains, swimming pools etc?

Hate Bush, or not logic defies the arguments defending Saddam Hussein, whilst blaming U.N Sanctions for starving the population?

I dont pretend to get all weepy about the Iraqi people. They're mostly religious extremists anyway, and when thinking stategically you can't afford to care about individuals. I hate to see the USA killing them there because I know their families will seek revenge on us. I'm just perplexed as to why Bush supporters keep calling Saddam a "madman" for fighting the same fight we are now. (and we are being more messy about it and less effective) Who do you think he was killing and imprisoning? All the same radicals who are running around beheading people now. Without someone as brutal as Saddam to control them, they will control the country.

[Roger]

Originally posted by xenophobic
However, it seems to me that people blame George W. Bush on this board for everything from unemployment to the medical insurance crisis -- yet a dictator whom spent 2+ Billion dollars on his own palaces when a large portion of his country was dying is excusable?

So you want to invade my country also because our politicians are corrupt?

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by CamChicks
I dont pretend to get all weepy about the Iraqi people. They're mostly religious extremists anyway, and when thinking stategically you can't afford to care about individuals. I hate to see the USA killing them there because I know their families will seek revenge on us. I'm just perplexed as to why Bush supporters keep calling Saddam a "madman" for fighting the same fight we are now. (and we are being more messy about it and less effective) Who do you think he was killing and imprisoning? All the same radicals who are running around beheading people now. Without someone as brutal as Saddam to control them, they will control the country.

Ah, please do not see my argument equating holding Bush responsible for one thing, and not holding Saddam to the same measure as an endorsement of President Bush, the guy is a complete Muppet, and this election we have two idiots to choose from.

It's rather unfortunate that when we're fighting 'radicals' they themselves are victims -- manipulated by ex-government leaders, and ME terrorists into fighting, most of the Iraqi insurgents are desperate, they are unemployed and do not have municipal services, which helps breed radicals, you cannot stop the creation of insurgents whilst the conditions that pushed people into insurgency still exist.

The attacks on Civilian contractors is a prime example of keeping the conditions in Iraq bleak, in order for ME Terrorists/insurgents to gain popular support, the more contractors leaving means more water pipes are not fixed, houses damaged in the war are left in shambles etc. which causes more Iraqi's to be frustrated and fight.

This was another short coming of the Bush Administration, when he told the World, "Hey, you can't have contracts in Iraq if you didn't fight in the War" the rebuilding of Iraq is slower because of the arrogance of that statement, and as such more insurgents are being indoctrinated into the fold because of the conditions they live in.

[greentea]

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by Roger
So you want to invade my country also because our politicians are corrupt?

Can you please quote the section where I said the Invasion of Iraq was justified because he was corrupt?

I believe I said that the U.N Sanctions did not starve the Iraqi people, Saddams negligence and reckless spending starved the Iraqi people.

[Roger]

Originally posted by xenophobic yes, and there is the key "everyone" it was available to Saddam Hussein because he had millions of dollars, and put his lifestyle over that of the Iraqi people, as for the arm's --what about the weapon systems he was not allowed to procure? like the GPS Jamming equipment purchased from Russian companies, and other equipment like night vision googles, Kornet Anti-Tank missiles which were supposed to be restricted?

And while at it, why doesn't Bush give up his billions to help the less fortunate?

You feel like telling other countries how to spend their money? Perhaps you should start by those tyrants who you're allies with.

You're complaining about night vision googles? I doubt he got restricted materials.

[Roger]

Originally posted by xenophobic Can you please quote the section where I said the Invasion of Iraq was justified because he was corrupt?

You didn't.

I believe I said that the U.N Sanctions did not starve the Iraqi people, Saddams negligence and reckless spending starved the Iraqi people.

And yet they where doing fine before the sanctions and had the best health care system in the region.

[xenophobic]

Originally posted by Roger
And while at it, why doesn't Bush give up his billions to help the less fortunate?
You feel like telling other countries how to spend their money? Perhaps you should start by those tyrants who you're allies with.
You're complaining about night vision googles? I doubt he got restricted materials.

Funny because here you are again, with the "Bush and his Billions" The Government of the United States already do give much aid both domestically and foreign -- the Iraqi Government, and Saddam Hussein bought fucking palaces you asshat, how is that even the same?

Funny how you choose the argument of Night Vision goggles, the least threatening of the technologies I mentioned, and seeing as it's all over the news agencies worldwide I won't bother arguing it with you - look it up.