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.

 

100,000 Innocent Iraqies Dead at the Hands of Bush (from ATSNN)

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   


OH, lets not forget that privatizing will bring more jobs to the country


dont forget those privatized jobs will also be targets of insugants, thus creating more casualties.




posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2cent
Yeah I have to admit.. Edsinger, you are a true blue imbecile. A clueless one at that. Can you please go to iraq and get shot in the head? Thanks.


better be careful there *&^(*^&. over 50% of the United States feels the way I do...just you liberals feel that apppeasment would ahve worked..

Peace at all costs....


Thank God the generations before you did not have such a selfish feeling.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Um... so, what about those Red Sox?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2cent
Yeah I have to admit.. Edsinger, you are a true blue imbecile. A clueless one at that. Can you please go to iraq and get shot in the head? Thanks.


Yeah real smooth there.....liberalism at its best folks!

Well better than half of the USA agrees with me, lots of imbeciles there huh?

Maybe if we would have waited, the French and Russians would have finally helped huh?

Thank God the previous generations didnt feel as the left does now, we would not be a nation. Remember some things are worth fighting for, even those who have total goofball outlooks such as the left has.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:01 PM
link   


Therefore America attacked Saddam


ok thats great and all, but isnt saddam out of the picture? his entire military dictitorial terrorist harboring infrastructure completely whiped out, so why are we still there mr singer? to ensure the security of reconstruction? you dont need guns to rebuild a country! if they kill the people who are their to help, it just shows they are all sick weirdos and lets them rebuild their own country. we have no further busness their.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by 2cent
Yeah I have to admit.. Edsinger, you are a true blue imbecile. A clueless one at that. Can you please go to iraq and get shot in the head? Thanks.


better be careful there *&^(*^&. over 50% of the United States feels the way I do...just you liberals feel that apppeasment would ahve worked..

Peace at all costs....


Thank God the generations before you did not have such a selfish feeling.


I'm not even from your country, so don't bring your politics into this..

I'm sure in 10-15 years down the track, you'll be saying "thank god we were so selfish and decided to invade a few countries, otherwise I wouldn't be living in this street under a pile of rubble."



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by sturod84



Therefore America attacked Saddam


ok thats great and all, but isnt saddam out of the picture? his entire military dictitorial terrorist harboring infrastructure completely whiped out, so why are we still there mr singer? to ensure the security of reconstruction? you dont need guns to rebuild a country! if they kill the people who are their to help, it just shows they are all sick weirdos and lets them rebuild their own country. we have no further busness their.



Are you really serious? Why are we there still? We have a responsibility to finish what we started and to keep our word.....that is a concept that seems to ellude you anti-war folks...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   


So you call me names? Look you just dont get it. 100000 dead? Who is doing the killling? How many died under saddam? So you blame us for them all right?


Ummm...yeah cuz we were the ones who invaded them remember?




You liberals make me SICK. Give in an appease is no way to win. We all had a term for this type of behavior when we were younger. It was called . No who gets picked on? Yes, the puss....


Your ignorance makes a lot of people SICK as well. Your ignorance runs so deep that it is impossible to have any type of rational political discussion with you whatsoever.



So take the Baby killers attitude of yours and shove it!


WTF does abortion have to do with this???



Appeasment does not work, the UN does not work....


LOL...yes, invading a country that may possibly have WMD's but we aren't entirely sure is a great reason to bomb the hell out of some country...killing 100,000 innocent people. Those are lives! Do you realize that??? Just because the aren't American doesn't make them less important...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2cent


I'm not even from your country, so don't bring your politics into this..

I'm sure in 10-15 years down the track, you'll be saying "thank god we were so selfish and decided to invade a few countries, otherwise I wouldn't be living in this street under a pile of rubble."


No I will be saying thank God we confronted this threat while we still had the tools to defeat it instead of sticking my head in the sand and delaying the enevitable.......Think Chamberlain ok?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Am I the only one questioning the numbers?

Wouldn't some sort of corroboration be in order before hurling accusations back and forth?

Doesn't it strike anyone else as significant that the article claims that 2/3 of the deaths it is basing itself on occurred in Fallujah, virtually guaranteeing that no accurate national statistic can be derived from the data?

Is anyone else interested in denying ignorance here?

[edit on 10/28/2004 by Majic]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:18 PM
link   


So you call me names? Look you just dont get it. 100000 dead? Who is doing the killling? How many died under saddam? So you blame us for them all right?


Ummm...yeah cuz we were the ones who invaded them remember?


Why yes we did, and I am glad we did. Whether or not you are old enough to understand, saddam had to go......




You liberals make me SICK. Give in an appease is no way to win. We all had a term for this type of behavior when we were younger. It was called . No who gets picked on? Yes, the puss....


Your ignorance makes a lot of people SICK as well. Your ignorance runs so deep that it is impossible to have any type of rational political discussion with you whatsoever.

Ignorance? I could very well say the same about your position? You fail to see the threat? Gee John Kerry did, he saw it at one time. [/]



So take the Baby killers attitude of yours and shove it!


WTF does abortion have to do with this???

this is how I know you are not old enough to understand that. It has nothing to do with abortion, but it is the tactics used by the radical left to defame the war, accuse the troops to force withdrawal. aka Vietnam. abortion hehe that was funny




Appeasment does not work, the UN does not work....


LOL...yes, invading a country that may possibly have WMD's but we aren't entirely sure is a great reason to bomb the hell out of some country...killing 100,000 innocent people. Those are lives! Do you realize that??? Just because the aren't American doesn't make them less important...

The whole country had been neglected by sanctions that were not working, we have not bombed it into oblivion. As a matter of fact, it is the terorrists that are bombing most of the stuff. You see through a very narrow hole.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:24 PM
link   


Doesn't the fact that the article claims that 2/3 of the deaths it is basing itself on occurred in Fallujah, virtually guaranteeing that no accurate national statistic can be derived from the data?


LOL! The point is that there were many innocent deaths period when we shouldn't have even gone there in the first place. You see?

I don't care if there were only 100 innocent deaths...they are still lives. Those people died b/c of a big mistake our president is now trying to cover up...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
Am I the only one questioning the numbers?

Wouldn't some sort of corroboration be in order before hurling accusations back and forth?

Doesn't it strike anyone else as significant that the article claims that 2/3 of the deaths it is basing itself on occurred in Fallujah, virtually guaranteeing that no accurate national statistic can be derived from the data?

Is anyone else interested in denying ignorance here?

[edit on 10/28/2004 by Majic]


Hell yes I question the numbers! They were not near that high 6 months ago and I ahve heard of no b-52 carpet bombing of the cities there, plus most of the deaths I hear of now are terrorists killing Iraqi's......I do not think they were that hi...thats more than Gulf War 1, and those numbers were never really released buy I would say they were in the 10's of thousands...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by 2cent


I'm not even from your country, so don't bring your politics into this..

I'm sure in 10-15 years down the track, you'll be saying "thank god we were so selfish and decided to invade a few countries, otherwise I wouldn't be living in this street under a pile of rubble."


No I will be saying thank God we confronted this threat while we still had the tools to defeat it instead of sticking my head in the sand and delaying the enevitable.......Think Chamberlain ok?


Yeah, like 50-100,000 now-dead civillians were threatening you.
You just don't get it.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lecky



Doesn't the fact that the article claims that 2/3 of the deaths it is basing itself on occurred in Fallujah, virtually guaranteeing that no accurate national statistic can be derived from the data?


LOL! The point is that there were many innocent deaths period when we shouldn't have even gone there in the first place. You see?

I don't care if there were only 100 innocent deaths...they are still lives. Those people died b/c of a big mistake our president is now trying to cover up...


Yeah, its all a BUSH cover up. I get so sick of this #. The WHOLE world thought he had the weapons, now we know the UN was not going to do # about it, so we did, our president saw a threat and took it out. Have you ever wondered what saddam did in the 6 months warning he had before the invasion?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:33 PM
link   

From AP Breaking News:

Scientists estimate 100,000 Iraqis may have died in war


This article has more details and explains more about the methodology -- a survey.

Again, I can't say whether or not 100,000 people have died in Iraq since the beginning of the U.S. invasion, but neither can this study.

Yes, it has been "peer reviewed", but it is definitely not free of bias:

Les Roberts, the lead researcher from Johns Hopkins, said the article's timing was up to him.

"I emailed it in on Sept. 30 under the condition that it came out before the election," Roberts told The Asocciated Press. "My motive in doing that was not to skew the election. My motive was that if this came out during the campaign, both candidates would be forced to pledge to protect civilian lives in Iraq.

"I was opposed to the war and I still think that the war was a bad idea, but I think that our science has transcended our perspectives," Roberts said. "As an American, I am really, really sorry to be reporting this."


Right. I'm sure politics has nothing to do with it.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
Again, I can't say whether or not 100,000 people have died in Iraq since the beginning of the U.S. invasion, but neither can this study.


Neither can these guys:
Iraq Body Count



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by chaosrain

Originally posted by Majic
Again, I can't say whether or not 100,000 people have died in Iraq since the beginning of the U.S. invasion, but neither can this study.


Neither can these guys:
Iraq Body Count


Big difference between 16289 and 100000 huh?

This media assault on Bush is just amazing, make the ride they gave Clinton a cakewalk...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Edsinger I wonder who pays your salary I bet you are under bushes payroll, they way you post and defend him, knowing very well what he has done to the people of Iraq, and to us the people of this nation.

I hope the salary is worth it.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Why yes we did, and I am glad we did. Whether or not you are old enough to understand, saddam had to go......


Hi there...I'm 25. How old are you again? 35? Stop with the patronizing bullsh*t pls k thx!



The whole country had been neglected by sanctions that were not working, we have not bombed it into oblivion. As a matter of fact, it is the terorrists that are bombing most of the stuff. You see through a very narrow hole


First of all LOL @ the irony in that last sentence....

You are living in a cave if you can't see that the United States has caused great damage over there. You even have the audacity to rationalize that thousands of innocent civialians as well as 1000 american soldiers lost their lives for a worthy cause. Obviously you feel that declaring war is no big deal and the United States should be able to abuse its power as long as they see fit.

I don't care if you are 35...you have the maturity and logic capability of a child. It's time to grow up as well as open your eyes...to realize what really is going on here.

Wait nevermind you do...and you wholeheartedly approve and support our corrupt administration, which is 1000x worse.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join