The Truth is Unspeakable; American Sniper unloads on 'American Sniper'

a reply to: EternalSolace

I will have respect for the men and women in the militaries across the world who've volunteered to prevent future millions of victims at the hands of scum like ISIS.

Dang right invade a country.. Kill a milion peeps or so. Install a puppet governemt and create a power vacume so the likes of ISIS can walk right in and kill more people and you have repsect for the people that done this..

If those aholes had not been there in the first place ISIS would not be in Iraq. The US wepons drops to ISIS are not helping either...

So if you have no repsect for ISIS then you should also have no respect for the US military that put them there in the first place. Nor should you have repesct for US foreign policy that created and excaberbated the problem..

purp..

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: EternalSolace

I will have respect for the men and women in the militaries across the world who've volunteered to prevent future millions of victims at the hands of scum like ISIS.

Dang right invade a country.. Kill a milion peeps or so. Install a puppet governemt and create a power vacume so the likes of ISIS can walk right in and kill more people and you have repsect for the people that done this..


purp..

Show me definitive proof that the combat soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan knowingly and willingly went over there to kill a million innocent and install a puppet government.

Simple fact is that you can't. It's all rhetoric that folks like you use to make a soap box. Except, that box is made of sand and is easily washed away when asked for proof.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: cavtrooper7

AND purplemrer illustrates what I said to you earlier. THE liberal mind doesn't seem to grasp that warriors don't perpetuate war or violence we just try to stop

Well you have done a real good job of stopping violence in Iraq. The occupation killed far more people than Saddam did and heck they are still dying now..

Give yourself a pat on the back..:

Except that's not actually true.

The estimates for the number of people Saddam killed are 500k-1million.

You stand by your flawed and highly-criticized study that claims the U.S. somehow caused 1 million deaths but the other studies have all estimated 150k-400k.

I still want to know how you reconcile the fact that multiple studies have results much lower than 1,000,000 but you cling to one of the two studies that shows grossly exaggerated numbers. You clearly have an agenda and care nothing about the legitimacy of the studies.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: squittles

The guy's record can be verified in a bit. I will make some calls, send out some emails. May take over the weekend, but I will find out.


I agree, he sounds like a liar and a poser.

Just to return to the OP, this above quote is of great interest, and one of the things that first brought me to ATS.

If you find out anything of interest macman, please do share it in this thread. If Garett Reppenhagen is telling the truth about his experiences, that is one thing. If he is lying, that opens up a whole different can of worms.

To reiterate what I said in the OP, I'm loathe to comment on the motivations of anyone who has served. Whatever my personal politics, I am willing to listen to those who have served, and I have no reason to disbelieve what they say. I do think there is an enormous difference between those who serve in the military, and those who make the decisions when, where, and how to deploy that military.

It is easy to criticise, and much more difficult to listen openly.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Answer

Ofc they where critical of the study they are scientists. But they did the study and fact remains to date it is the only scienitfic study on the total death count of Iraq. Most other figure have been provided by the likes of governments..

Now please be my guest and go on beleiving that governements dont lie. Did you know the US no longer count civilain deaths. They learnt that from the vietnam war. Public opionion is everything in war thats why the US stopped the Iraq government from releasing body bag counts..

If you cant see if thats kk

happy days

purp..

So assuming the Lancet surveys were accurate, how do you account for the 500k or so missing death certificates that were never recorded by the Iraqi government?

How do you account for the fact that the purported areas where these massive numbers of people were killed do not show population decline that would certainly accompany such a high rate of death?

How do you account for the Iraqi Health Minister saying that the rate of bodies coming into the morgue was closer to 100 per day during the most vicious fighting of the war?

How do you account for the fact that the highest percentage of deaths in the Lancet study were from gunshots... even though a rational person would assume airstrikes and artillery cause much more collateral damage?

Or could it be that the Iraqis surveyed by the Lancet study did not like the war and they gave false numbers in hopes that it would influence the public's opinion of the war and lead to a hasty exit by the troops? Could it be that the Iraqis surveyed actually lost a relative or friend that was an enemy combatant but they reported that person as a civilian casualty to the Lancet study? That couldn't POSSIBLY be it, right?

Your intellectual dishonesty is taxing.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: cavtrooper7

AND purplemrer illustrates what I said to you earlier. THE liberal mind doesn't seem to grasp that warriors don't perpetuate war or violence we just try to stop

Well you have done a real good job of stopping violence in Iraq. The occupation killed far more people than Saddam did and heck they are still dying now..

Give yourself a pat on the back..:

Except that's not actually true.

The estimates for the number of people Saddam killed are 500k-1million.

You stand by your flawed and highly-criticized study that claims the U.S. somehow caused 1 million deaths but the other studies have all estimated 150k-400k.

I still want to know how you reconcile the fact that multiple studies have results much lower than 1,000,000 but you cling to one of the two studies that shows grossly exaggerated numbers. You clearly have an agenda and care nothing about the legitimacy of the studies.

The point still stands and that is the point.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: EternalSolace

I will have respect for the men and women in the militaries across the world who've volunteered to prevent future millions of victims at the hands of scum like ISIS.

Dang right invade a country.. Kill a milion peeps or so. Install a puppet governemt and create a power vacume so the likes of ISIS can walk right in and kill more people and you have repsect for the people that done this..

If those aholes had not been there in the first place ISIS would not be in Iraq. The US wepons drops to ISIS are not helping either...

So if you have no repsect for ISIS then you should also have no respect for the US military that put them there in the first place. Nor should you have repesct for US foreign policy that created and excaberbated the problem..

purp..

I agree except that the politicians, not the military, made the decision. I suspect that the intention was to destabilize the entire Middle East, allow al Qaeda and other groups to flood into Iraq and flourish elsewhere, and create perpetual war: THE big money maker for oil cartels and military industrialists and corporate militaries like Blackwater.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Show me definitive proof that the combat soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan knowingly and willingly went over there to kill a million innocent and install a puppet governmen

See the troops may or may not have known they where going to install a puppet government it makes no difference to me. If you want proof they commited war crimes look no further than Wikileaks (which can no longer be linked on ats)

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: cavtrooper7

AND purplemrer illustrates what I said to you earlier. THE liberal mind doesn't seem to grasp that warriors don't perpetuate war or violence we just try to stop

Well you have done a real good job of stopping violence in Iraq. The occupation killed far more people than Saddam did and heck they are still dying now..

Give yourself a pat on the back..:

Except that's not actually true.

The estimates for the number of people Saddam killed are 500k-1million.

You stand by your flawed and highly-criticized study that claims the U.S. somehow caused 1 million deaths but the other studies have all estimated 150k-400k.

I still want to know how you reconcile the fact that multiple studies have results much lower than 1,000,000 but you cling to one of the two studies that shows grossly exaggerated numbers. You clearly have an agenda and care nothing about the legitimacy of the studies.

The point still stands and that is the point.

A smart person doesn't try to make a point with faulty logic.

That's like saying

"All Muslims are terrorists and terrorists deserve to die."
"But all Muslims aren't terrorists..."
"Yeah but my point still stands."

a reply to: Answer

An old adage for you. You can take a horse to water you cannot make it drink: I will take one of your points for there i will expect you to deduce the rest...

How do you account for the Iraqi Health Minister saying that the rate of bodies coming into the morgue was closer to 100 per day during the most vicious fighting of the war?

The number apparently does not include the unidentified bodies that pass through the Baghdad morgue in a given month. The morgue has reportedly been ordered to no longer release that data.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Now ATS is a conspiracy site. There is a smoking gun for you go and do some reading..

purp..

a reply to: Answer

The point still stands and that is the point.

Nothing faulty about such logic..

A = A = A

wheres the fault in that..?

a reply to: purplemer

If they had LET us finish D.Storm like our prisoners kept asking us to maybe it might have been different.
We had to tell them to STOP talking about it as we were worried loyalists would harm them later.
The is no pat only sadness for the loss.
My friends who are still there HAVE been thanked for taking OUT Saddam.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Answer

An old adage for you. You can take a horse to water you cannot make it drink: I will take one of your points for there i will expect you to deduce the rest...

How do you account for the Iraqi Health Minister saying that the rate of bodies coming into the morgue was closer to 100 per day during the most vicious fighting of the war?

The number apparently does not include the unidentified bodies that pass through the Baghdad morgue in a given month. The morgue has reportedly been ordered to no longer release that data.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Now ATS is a conspiracy site. There is a smoking gun for you go and do some reading..

purp..

Since we're discounting sources, I'm not going to put any faith in an article on a site that has this as a stated goal and whose articles are all blatantly anti-US:

The Global Research website was established on the 9th of September 2001, two days before the tragic events of September 11. Barely a few days later, Global Research had become a major news source on the New World Order and Washington’s “war on terrorism”.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Answer

The point still stands and that is the point.

Nothing faulty about such logic..

A = A = A

wheres the fault in that..?

The fault is in using unproven overinflated numbers to make your point.

This has been an interesting thread. I just have one question for those who keep complaining about the USA invading, looting, killing millions, and glorifying those who have served honorably to defend this country and others. This has been asked at least 3 times in this thread, but no real answers.

What is your solution to stopping all this that you so despise? Give a real, thought out, and viable solution.

a reply to: Answer

I still want to know how you reconcile the fact that multiple studies have results much lower than 1,000,000 but you cling to one of the two studies that shows grossly exaggerated numbers

Simply because that is the only Scientific study done....

purp.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Answer

I still want to know how you reconcile the fact that multiple studies have results much lower than 1,000,000 but you cling to one of the two studies that shows grossly exaggerated numbers

Simply because that is the only Scientific study done....

purp.

Yet, even sources that champion the study and the words from the men who performed the study admit that the numbers are not solid and there is a lot of room for error... mainly because there were only certain areas of Iraq that were accessible to the survey team.

Source

The estimated numbers from the study are 392,979 to 942,636 with only 31% of the violent deaths being attributed to coalition forces.

In other words, when you say "1 million Iraqi civilians were killed by the U.S.", you're being 100% intellectually dishonest.

It's another propaganda movie. How the hell do you think they got military equipment? The CIA actually provides it to them, you can see it on the CIA website.

If only we could all stop pretending that America didn't start ALL these messes they need to "protect" themselves from;

Maybe some of you would make sense/be able to form a cogent argument.
Blind Patriotism is rife here I see..

Have fun you blood lusty beasts

originally posted by: cosmic66
If only we could all stop pretending that America didn't start ALL these messes they need to "protect" themselves from;

Maybe some of you would make sense/be able to form a cogent argument.
Blind Patriotism is rife here I see..

Have fun you blood lusty beasts

Actually, most of us posting in favor of Chris Kyle in this thread have stated our opinion of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan elsewhere on ATS. I'd say we're fairly united in our opinion that the wars were the fault of the U.S. and were an unnecessary waste of life and resources. The difference is, we don't hate on the troops because they aren't the ones responsible.

But hey, if you want to paint with a broad brush of ignorance and pretend that we don't know what we're talking about... go right ahead.