It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

We Need A Vaccination for American Aggression

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
So, H1N1 kills thousands of folks. That stinks. It's tragic and unfortunately unavoidable. The best we can hope for is to 'vaccinate' the people against this deadly disease and hope for the best. Well.....we can make up all sorts of other crap as well...you know, quarantines and the like, to help us 'manage' this outbreak.


As of 4 October 2009, worldwide there have been more than 375,000 laboratory confirmed cases of pandemic influenza H1N1 2009 and over 4500 deaths reported to WHO.


www.who.int...


We'll err on the pesimistic side and say there have been six thousand deaths from H1N1 to date.

I think what we need to do is look at the REAL killer loose in the world today. The United States Government. The aggression of the United States, in the name of vengeance, freedom and protection from terrorism has had a significantly higher toll in the last few years.

If H1N1 kills ten thousand people for five years, it will still never catch up with the death toll related to the aggression of the United States.



BAGHDAD (AP) -- At least 85,000 Iraqis lost their lives from 2004-2008 in violence, the government said in its first comprehensive official tally released since the war began.



The Associated Press reported in April that the government had recorded 87,215 Iraqi deaths from 2005 to February 2009, a toll very similar to the latest release. It was based on government statistics obtained by the AP and covered violence ranging from catastrophic bombings to execution-style slayings.



Statistics from the initial months of the war have been extremely difficult to obtain as there was no functioning Iraqi government during that time and the interim government was not seated until mid-2004. The difficulties of quantifying the loss were compounded by the fact that records were not always compiled centrally, and the brutal insurgency sharply limited on-the-scene reporting. The U.S. military never shared its data.



Some experts favor cluster surveys, in which conclusions are drawn from a select sampling of households. The largest cluster survey in Iraq was conducted in 2007 by the World Health Organization and the Iraqi government. It concluded that about 151,000 Iraqis had died from violence in the 2003-05 period, but that included insurgents.

A more controversial cluster study conducted between May and July 2006 by Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, published in the Lancet medical journal, estimated that 601,027 Iraqis had died due to violence. The authors said roughly 50,000 more died from nonviolent causes such as heart disease and cancer because of deteriorating health conditions caused by the war.


ap.stripes.com...

There are numerous 'estimates' of the dead in Iraq at the source above. There is tremendous difficulty obtaining actual figures, so I choose, in this instance to give the US government the benefit of the doubt and take THEIR estimate of 85,000 dead Iraqis between 2004 & 2008. That's just a little over twenty thousand dead Iraqis per year for those four years.

Johns Hopkins University, certainly not a community college estimates the number closer to 600,000 (601,027) ). Over a HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND per year.

Either way you want to slice it, aggression perpetrated by the United States, or that which is a direct result of American occupation of sovereign nations, in the four years sampled, has been responsible for anywhere from 85,000 to over 600,000 people.

I think we need to find a vaccine immediately for this deadly disease. Some call it American Patriotism, some call it 'fighting terror', some call it 'destroying Al Qaeda', others call it a cancer on the ass of world society that needs to be cut off before it spreads any further.

The 'war' in Afghanistan has now lasted 96 months, 2 times as long as America's involvement in WWII. The 'war' in Iraq has officially 'lasted' 80 months, but we're still not done there. The war in Afghanistan is set to within a year or so, become the longest U.S. war in history.

I think instead of wasting so much time and money inoculating the world against H1N1, we should focus on ridding the world of the REAL disease - The lies and murderous actions of the United States government and her self-serving masters.

Maybe it's terminal and we just need some 'end of life' counseling, some nice meds and a dark, quiet place to close our eyes one last time.




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
isn't that what fluoride is for.
not to mention the LOADS of meds MOST americans are on like xantax, prozac, paxil, valium, klonopin, etc etc etc etc
AND of course now they are sharing with the rest of the tap drinkers of the country.

isn't that enough Rx to prevent aggression...
and really, it just exacerbates the confusion that contributes to the american agression, no?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Good point! I suggest Americans turn on and tune in. This is a phrase my father's generation followed. Coincidentaly, Afghanistan could supply America with a potent medicine that one could never overdose on. This medicine would mellow us all out. I know it sound absurd, but it would work.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
Good point! I suggest Americans turn on and tune in. This is a phrase my father's generation followed. Coincidentaly, Afghanistan could supply America with a potent medicine that one could never overdose on. This medicine would mellow us all out. I know it sound absurd, but it would work.


yes, like most pharm drugs the benefits FAR outweigh the risks...in fact the risks are virtually non-existent.
too bad most people still lack the understanding that that which is off-limits is probably the most advantageous (in our stifling society)



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
There are numerous 'estimates' of the dead in Iraq at the source above. There is tremendous difficulty obtaining actual figures, so I choose, in this instance to give the US government the benefit of the doubt and take THEIR estimate of 85,000 dead Iraqis between 2004 & 2008. That's just a little over twenty thousand dead Iraqis per year for those four years.


Check your source, Homeslice. It's not a US Government estimate, but an estimate from the Iraqi government. Says so in the first line of the story. Guess you missed that, huh?

By REBECCA SANTANA
Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD (AP) -- Iraq's government said at least 85,000 people were killed from 2004 to 2008, officially answering one of the biggest questions of the conflict - how many perished in the sectarian violence that nearly led to a civil war.

ap.stripes.com...

The report is from their Human Rights Ministry


Originally posted by KSPigpen
Johns Hopkins University, certainly not a community college estimates the number closer to 600,000 (601,027) ). Over a HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND per year.


That John Hopkins estimate has a few holes in it, too.

www.abcnews.go.com...


Originally posted by KSPigpen
Either way you want to slice it, aggression perpetrated by the United States, or that which is a direct result of American occupation of sovereign nations, in the four years sampled, has been responsible for anywhere from 85,000 to over 600,000 people.


So, "any way you want to slice it" means that if it's some insurgent blowing up a car bomb in a crowded market, killing civilians, it's still the fault of the US? Nice use of that ATS broad brush. And pretty lame, too.


Originally posted by KSPigpen
The 'war' in Afghanistan has now lasted 96 months, 2 times as long as America's involvement in WWII. The 'war' in Iraq has officially 'lasted' 80 months, but we're still not done there. The war in Afghanistan is set to within a year or so, become the longest U.S. war in history.


Didn't know there had to be a time limit on war. If it's longer than WW2, it's automatically wrong?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
I just noticed, smart conservatives and warmongers never try and justify the war. They know it cannot be justified. They remain silent and collect the profits.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 


Giving the US Government the benefit of the doubt?

I haven't read anywhere in your post that you admit most of those killings have been Iraqi on Iraqi [Sunni/Shia] caused deaths. I'm sorry but when most people read the words [Bombings] You fail to mention they are at masques or markets etc some will assume it's American jets bombing people.


Has the US caused Iraqi civilian deaths? Yes. But when some calculate all the numbers which seems to be a giant shell game by all sides they always seem to be added up with the US holding the bag.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



BAGHDAD (AP) -- At least 85,000 Iraqis lost their lives from 2004-2008 in violence, the government said in its first comprehensive official tally released since the war began.


It's been changed. The above text was quoted from a version that was posted before 4:37. They even changed the author.

So, no homeslice, the quote was correct for the time it was posted. They made no such distinction in the original text. Good try though.

They are in the process of replacing all of the articles online. Here is one that is left in Hawaii.

www.honoluluadvertiser.com...

Argue the numbers, if you want to argue about something. Pick ANY one of those estimates. the 85 thousand was the LOW estimate.

Run to the generalization of how it's the bad guys and their car bombs and market bombs that are causing all the deaths. Whatever helps you get through, buddy.

Nope, no limit on war, apparently. I can't wait to sign my children up, and their children to fight some bullcrap war based on bullcrap greed. How long should it take to 'defeat the Taliban', or 'defeat Al Qaeda'? Any idea? I want more for MY children than an endless, meaningless cycle of aggression.

How many lives of people in OTHER nations does it take to make up for the three thousand that died here? 100,000? Would that be enough? Is nine years long enough to catch a few thousand guys in caves?

You can slice it any way you like, America is occupying a couple sovereign nations that aren't the United States. Call it whatever you want. Even taking the smallest estimate, at least 85,000 people in Iraq have died since America came to the rescue and 'freed' them from the oppression they were living under.

It doesn't really matter if the Johns Hopkins estimate is off....we can just focus on the one by the puppet government in Iraq, if you like. The argument still stands.

The United States has it's hands in other countries, inciting hatred, creating insurgence and occupying lands that are not ours.

What do you recommennd, sparky? Maybe we should just keep fighting until 2050 or so....maybe by then we will have made the 'bad guys' 'pay' for attacking America.






Ok, let's forget about the Iraqis, they don't deserve to live any way. Let's focus on AMERICAN lives.

www.globalsecurity.org...

Hmm... over 4500 dead American soldiers in Iraq? So, let me see if I understand the logic. We get 'attacked', we go to a couple foreign lands and we, in essence, expose our men and women to dangerous things that result in MORE of them being killed during our 'revenge' than were killed by the 'bad guys' in the first place?

Who makes this stuff up?


[edit on 14-10-2009 by KSPigpen]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 

These figures lay at the feet of the US the Shia that kill Sunni, and SUnni that kill Shia, blood feuds, honor killings, irresponsible roadside bombings, bombings at police stations, bombings at markets, on and on, and on.

They are still engaged in a low level religious civil war. Nothing to do with the US, or any other troops.

Saddam knew how to keep the lid on this jug - he wholesale slaughtered hundreds of thousands at whim. You seem to find this preferable.

In Afghanistan?

We haven't killed nearly enough.

You see, when you kill enough, the other side is either incapable of killing further, or unwilling to die further.

That's how you know you killed enough.

We aren't there yet.

Oh. Didn't I see that 100,000 were killed by guerrillas in Africa today?

Get over it.

There's always folks who just need killing.

Always have been, always will be.

Always.


[edit on 14-10-2009 by dooper]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
Run to the generalization of how it's the bad guys and their car bombs and market bombs that are causing all the deaths. Whatever helps you get through, buddy.



I dont know you tell me here are some of the latest headlines.


Militia leader among eight killed in Iraq bombing

Baquba, Iraq - At least eight people were killed and seven injured when a bomb exploded in a market in the mostly Sunni town of Buhriz on Tuesday evening, medics and witnesses told the German Press Agency dpa. Laith Mashan, the leader of the local Sahwa, or "Awakening," government-allied militia and two of his associates were killed in the blast, police told Baghdad's Aswat al-Iraq news agency.



Iraq bombings target reconciliation meeting, killing 26

The midday bombings targeted the Anbar provincial council's headquarters during a meeting between representatives of the Shiite Muslim-led government and local members of the Awakening movement, a Sunni Muslim group that turned against the insurgency in 2006.

Two car bombs exploded in rapid succession in a parking lot outside the government offices where the meeting was being held, then a suicide attacker detonated a third bomb outside the city's hospital as those injured in the first explosions were arriving.


Triple bombing kills scores in Iraq's Anbar Province

At least 25 people were killed and dozens wounded in a triple bombing in the western Iraqi city of Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, on Sunday. The bombings occurred during a reconciliation meeting, sparking fears of a resurgence of violence in an area that was the epicenter of the insurgency until local tribal leaders allied with the US to drive out insurgents in late 2007.



8 Iraqis killed in bombing/New report on Iraqi deaths

Three successive bomb explosions killed at least eight people and injured 42 in the northern Iraqi city of Karbala today. Two bombs exploded in main streets of the Shiite holy city, another one in a market area.



Suicide Bombing Kills Six In Iraq's Diyala Province

At least six people were killed in a suicide bombing in the volatile northeastern Iraqi province of Diyala on Tuesday, according to police officials and local media reports.

The casualties occurred when a suicide bomber detonated his explosive-packed vest inside a cafe in the town of Buhriz, located south of the provincial capital of Baquba. Ten others were injured in the explosion.

Iraq: Bomb attack kills two soldiers, injures four

Three civilians were killed and six others were injured when a roadside bomb apparently targeting a police patrol exploded in the neighbourhood of al-Thawra, west of the city of Mosul, some 400 kilometres north of Baghdad.

In the nearby district of al-Islah al-Zaraai, a family of six, including three small children, were injured when a bomb exploded in their neighbour's house, police said.

A group of gunmen on Monday fatally shot an Iraqi construction contractor outside Ramadi, police said. They declined to say whether the killing was an underworld crime or politically motivated.


[edit on 14-10-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
www.centcom.mil...


WASHINGTON (Oct. 8, 2009) – Attacks committed by al-Qaida and other insurgents operating in Baghdad and its environs continue to drop three months after U.S. combat troops moved out of Iraqi cities, a U.S. brigade commander posted there said Thursday.



Today, overall enemy attacks in the Baghdad region -- including improvised explosive devices and explosively formed projectiles -- “remain pretty low,” Green said.

Concurrently, he said, casualties among U.S. forces in the Baghdad area have experienced “a significant downturn.”


Seems to me to be a pretty clear correlation between American occupation and deaths on BOTH sides. Funny how things start calming down when the U.S starts pulling out.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I just read the thread posted by the ATS owners banning political references that might offend someone.

Calling the U.S. government the "killer of the world" offends me and I'm quite sure plenty of others.

I'm asking for a ban on this sort of thread and the references contained therein as well on the same grounds.

Thank you.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 



Either way you want to slice it, aggression perpetrated by the United States, or that which is a direct result of American occupation of sovereign nations, in the four years sampled, has been responsible for anywhere from 85,000 to over 600,000 people.



W-A-R

What do you expect from a war?

In Desert Storm, many more were killed in 3 days.


# Of Iraq's 545,000 troops in the Kuwait theater of operations, an estimated 100,000 were killed, and
# 300,000 were wounded.


www.u-s-history.com...

Furthermore, you try to blame the US for all of the deaths just because of their mere presence. I don't ever recall hearing the US tell the enemy to blow up its own people.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen

Run to the generalization of how it's the bad guys and their car bombs and market bombs that are causing all the deaths. Whatever helps you get through, buddy.

Who makes this stuff up?



Early Divisions at Root of Sunni-Shia Conflict

2006 Article: Shia and Sunni Muslims in Iraq continue to clash violently, and their conflict appears to have no solution. Juan Cole, Professor of Middle East History at the University of Michigan, talks with Andrea Seabrook about the differences between the two Islamic sects and why the differences seem so intractable.

The religious differences that contribute to Iraq's sectarian violence have deep historical roots. We asked University of Michigan professor of Middle East history, Juan Cole, when the split took place between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Mr. JUAN COLE (University of Michigan): Well, it's something that occurred over a long period of time in scholars' views, but the key moment was when the prophet Mohammed died. And the question was, who would succeed him?




[edit on 14-10-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
[It's been changed. The above text was quoted from a version that was posted before 4:37. They even changed the author.

So, no homeslice, the quote was correct for the time it was posted. They made no such distinction in the original text. Good try though.


Geez, that's funny. Every article that I read about this story said the Iraqi government. Funny that the Stars and Stripes would get something like this wrong.
Good try, tho.


Originally posted by KSPigpen
Run to the generalization of how it's the bad guys and their car bombs and market bombs that are causing all the deaths. Whatever helps you get through, buddy.


Oh, ok. I should just automatically forget that it's some dirtbag insurgent that's doing the killing, and just blame the US. Wow, that's so much easier than doing research about the actual fighting. Just take the easy way out!


Originally posted by KSPigpen
Nope, no limit on war, apparently. I can't wait to sign my children up, and their children to fight some bullcrap war based on bullcrap greed. How long should it take to 'defeat the Taliban', or 'defeat Al Qaeda'? Any idea? I want more for MY children than an endless, meaningless cycle of aggression.


Let me guess, in high school, you were the kid that asked, "When they named the 100 Years War, how did they know it was going to last that long?" How about this; it takes as long as it takes. I know you'll have a hissy fit over that, but hey, life sucks. Get a helmet. You ain't doing the fighting.


Originally posted by KSPigpen
How many lives of people in OTHER nations does it take to make up for the three thousand that died here? 100,000? Would that be enough? Is nine years long enough to catch a few thousand guys in caves?


Once again, who knows how long it will take. "OK, guys, you got nine years to find Osama. Get to work! Once your time is up, we leave, regardless." That makes a lot of sense.



Originally posted by KSPigpen
It doesn't really matter if the Johns Hopkins estimate is off....we can just focus on the one by the puppet government in Iraq, if you like. The argument still stands.


It doesn't matter?
You're joking, right? First of all, you say that John Hopkins is a great place (and they are) and we have to believe them. Now, it doesn't matter if they are off on their count. Pick a side!


Originally posted by KSPigpen
The United States has it's hands in other countries, inciting hatred, creating insurgence and occupying lands that are not ours.


Name a country that hasn't had their hands in other countries.


Originally posted by KSPigpen
What do you recommennd, sparky? Maybe we should just keep fighting until 2050 or so....maybe by then we will have made the 'bad guys' 'pay' for attacking America.


What's this "we" stuff, Gus? You actually doing any fighting? Like I said, you fight until the job is done. Pretty simple, but a lot of people seem to have trouble with that. Must be the "Microwave Generation" that thinks everything has to be done now, this instant. Things take time, if you want to do them properly.


Originally posted by KSPigpen
Hmm... over 4500 dead American soldiers in Iraq? So, let me see if I understand the logic. We get 'attacked', we go to a couple foreign lands and we, in essence, expose our men and women to dangerous things that result in MORE of them being killed during our 'revenge' than were killed by the 'bad guys' in the first place?


Sounds like war to me. Isn't that what happens? You get attacked, you send your army to go and kill people and break their s**t. Sucks, and it's not pretty, but that's what happens.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Nope there's no agenda here.


Just ignore all the suicide bombers blowing up civilians. The cause of death doesn't matter as long as we can pin it all on the Americans.

[/sarcasm]


Edit to add: Let's also ignore that that 85k are the result of sectarian violence. Which by the way for those who have no clue what sectarian violence is, has absolutely nothing to do with the US and everything to do with the Sunni/Shia battle over religion.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Jenna]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
www.liveleak.com...


American soldiers in Iraq decribe how they can kill civilians.

American soldiers in Iraq discusss how they can kill innocent civilians and get away with it by planting a 'drop' weapon next to the murdered civilians body.


This report by the New England Journal of Medicine breaks down the CAUSES of the civilian deaths in Iraq.

content.nejm.org...

The table available here breaks it down for us.

content.nejm.org...

A cursory glance should indicate to you that a small percentage (about 25%) of civilian deaths is actually a result of suicide bombings. It's a favorite thing to jump on when someone tries to justify the deaths, but it just doesn't really pan out.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by KSPigpen
Hmm... over 4500 dead American soldiers in Iraq? So, let me see if I understand the logic. We get 'attacked', we go to a couple foreign lands and we, in essence, expose our men and women to dangerous things that result in MORE of them being killed during our 'revenge' than were killed by the 'bad guys' in the first place?


Sounds like war to me. Isn't that what happens? You get attacked, you send your army to go and kill people and break their s**t. Sucks, and it's not pretty, but that's what happens.


Thing is, just at what point did America actually get 'attacked' by any of the people it supposedly is currently at war with?... 9/11?, wasnt that done by Saudis? Dont see no damn american troops any where near their damn place.

Oh and Centurion1211, I wouldnt use that argument personally since youve said some things politically that some would find offensive. Siting rules simply to silence a person who says something you dont agree with is low.

Yes I Star and Flagged, im against war in all forms, and america does have a pretty bad track record in these matters. You'd have to be blind or deliberately ignorant not to see that.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
The table available here breaks it down for us.

content.nejm.org...

A cursory glance should indicate to you that a small percentage (about 25%) of civilian deaths is actually a result of suicide bombings. It's a favorite thing to jump on when someone tries to justify the deaths, but it just doesn't really pan out.


Good source.

The majority of the civilians were killed by executions, followed by small arms fire. Let me guess, you're going to say that it was all by US Soldiers, right?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join