On a per-capita basis, I doubt it.

On a per state basis I doubt it......!!

Stop reading your own press, Im not anti US or EVEN anti Bush.... but sometimes you have to read between the lines

Alert !!!! Parrot at work !!!!

So please post a link or article backing up your claim ( propaganda ) that " civilians mostly killed by insurgents" ....
If you can't, then you are the idiot of the world.... and stop the weak name calling


:321GFY

Utter nonsense.

A famous study by Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore found that more than 100,000 civilians have been killed and "They attributed many of those deaths to attacks by coalition forces mostly airstrikes and most of those killed were women and children. The risk of violent death was 58 times higher than before the war, the researchers reported.
.
"The fact that more than half of the deaths caused by the occupation forces were women and children is a cause for concern," the authors wrote.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/10/28/news/toll.html

The election was a total waste of fucking time.

Even CNN admitted that most of the voters didn't know who they were
voting for because they had to protect the names of the officials so they
don't get assasinated.

Ok, so you go in the voting booth and vote for.. whoever the fuck... What's
the point of that?

Than again, who cares right? All the elected officials will be Bush's puppets
and it doesn't matter who the people voted for, as long as they feel like
they've made a difference (which they haven't).

Peace

One word in Lybia's case : OIL !!!!!! ( with the US, it is always OIL ! )




Next time you start blabbing your mouth, check your facts: you will look less of an idiot, as you are so fast to call people. :2 cents:

Ok fucko.


This site is run by moonbats like yourself and therefore shows a pessimistic view of the numbers http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Your intelligence pails into significance when compared with that of your rival, Taboo.

That report was simply intended as a nail into George Bush's re-election coffin. It didn't work, because only a minority of idiots believed it. You included.

Like I said above, the moonbats' over-inflated estimations are currently 15563 so that figure of 100,000 would simply be wishful thinking from someone who does not want the Iraqis to enjoy democracy.

Your right, its wishful thinking from a political party that will publically pray for peace in a region and privately giggle when a US soldier is reported dead. Their hopes are to install masive social programs that keep a barrier between the classes, making them a "social elite" class.

Journalists are traditionally liberals because they believe themselves to be highly educated people who attain socially elite status through their education. At least the ones who understand why they are liberal. Most have been brainwashed by older journalistic liberals in college.

When You have money, the next thing you want is power and respect.

weak ...

Nothing to repeat, parrot ????

Turn on FoxNews, maybe they will implant a few sentences for you ...

Huh? Haiti, Grenada, Lebanon, Vietnam, Korea, Bosnia, Somalia, Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador.

What does the word "always" mean to you?

You'd be correct, Canada is.

NO,no,no
Saddam still alive... :mad:


http://www.highendcreatives.com

Actually you left out a few...Columbia is one but there are others.

Iraq is a God-forsaken country. :(

Canada ranks high, but I don't think it would be the most benevolent country in the world either.

If I had to guess, I'd probably say a European country might take that title

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap

Although, I don't think it should be considered a contest. Any benevolent act is good and should be appreciated.

The first ten that came to mind.

why not?