well, i just noticed the number almost DOUBLED in my sig recently.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

take note americans, that's 944 MORE people dead in iraq, a country the size of california, than died in the heinous WTC attacks.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/loc...27p-40361c.html

and that's using the minimum count, not the maximum. also this does not include military deaths, and circumstantial ones such as deaths from destroyed infrastructure.

mark my words america, you will reap what you sow.

___________________

Visit my site Antiwar Homepage

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith mark my words america, you will reap what you sow.

___________________
Retro ...

I point the figure directly at those who support his actions. that means YOU. (indirectly, I admit, it also means me, as i do buy american products, it's hard not to. but at least i do what i can)

you said in another thread that you are leaning towards antiwar now, because of the way that the US was handling the aftermath. well, that's all well and good, but there are 2 things wrong with that.

first, thousands of people had to die before you realized you were wrong. second, everyone knew the aftermath was not going to be handled well, and yet you supported him anyway. this is either callous or ignorant, take your choice.

sorry occrider, i do not want to turn this into a flame war, i respect you, you have good and well backed up posts, and i have no problem with you personally. It's just people like you who backed this war just make me so angry, about both the innocent deaths abroad, and the retalliation and escalation of the situation on US soil, (and possibly UK, australian, and Canadian soil) that will occur as a direct result of this foreign policy.

___________________

Visit my site Antiwar Homepage

quote:

Originally posted by JohnSmith I point the figure directly at those who support his actions. that means YOU. (indirectly, I admit, it also means me, as i do buy american products, it's hard not to. but at least i do what i can) you said in another thread that you are leaning towards antiwar now, because of the way that the US was handling the aftermath. well, that's all well and good, but there are 2 things wrong with that. first, thousands of people had to die before you realized you were wrong. second, everyone knew the aftermath was not going to be handled well, and yet you supported him anyway. this is either callous or ignorant, take your choice. sorry occrider, i do not want to turn this into a flame war, i respect you, you have good and well backed up posts, and i have no problem with you personally. It's just people like you who backed this war just make me so angry, about both the innocent deaths abroad, and the retalliation and escalation of the situation on US soil, (and possibly UK, australian, and Canadian soil) that will occur as a direct result of this foreign policy.

Well first of all, I was never pro-war with regards to the terms the war was carried out. I was always pro-disarmament and if you look back to my past posts, I always stated that it should have been carried out as a last resort. I never felt that the US had exhausted all its options and I always stated that more time should have been given and more inspectors should have been inserted. After the war had started, I adopted the approach that if the Iraqis were the true benefactors after it was all over then I would have been supportive of their liberation, ************ of the initial root causes for the start of the conflict. However, post conflict, the conduct of US military commanders and the priorities set by the Bush administration have been unacceptable. Museums should have been guarded, rioting should have been quelled, and top priority should have been given to restoring power and water. Furthermore the establishment of the US as controllers of Iraqi oil sales to rebuild the country should have been given to either the UN or an independant Iraqi committee.

I think you are jumping to conlcusions that the aftermath was predestined to have been handled incorrectly. It seemed as things were quite successful in the immediate aftermath until it later became clear that there were not enough resources devoted towards infrastructure rebuilding. So you can label me as being callous or ignorant, but I sincerely thought that the post-Iraq situation would have been handled a lot more smoothly. At any rate, I care not so much about your criticisms or anybody else's criticisms of my semi-support for what happened, the only criticism I'll actually take to heart are those of the people of Iraq. I guess we shall see what they ultimately think at the end of all of this.

___________________
Retro ...

well, fair enough i suppose.

___________________

Visit my site Antiwar Homepage

See ... no flame Wow it's been a while since there has been a serious flame war in this forum.

___________________
Retro ...

- Well, I think this should be directed to those who blindly did as Bush said, and Bush's administrations actions. There's many who were against it. Now, Im wondering where the heck are those that talked so much about supporting the war, and those who wanted the war. All of the sudden, they are QUITE!!!! This is a debate thread, and im actually suspicious to see what their opinions are. But hey, I think they see that there's nothing they could really say. ( I do this in purpose to see who responds )
- Much credit to you though occrider, I see that you are not really a follower, but more to what reality is.

well.. i suspect they are quiet because they hae nothing to say. the simple fact is that this war WAS for oil, and geopolitical dominance. thousands of people lie dead for the bush administrations greed. not to mention the brutal slaying of the UN, and the further degradation of the international repuation of what should be the greatest nation in the world.

and the people of america are not all to fault either, the largest protests ever held worldwide failed to have an effect, what else can we do?

well, the US has only proven that it only understands one thing, violence, and i guess that is what the next wave of antiwar protestors will have to resort to to stop future agression.

see? the cycle? in northern ireland, in palestine, even in the brother and sister fighting? someone has to stop it. when?

to quote RATM: "what better place than here, what better time than now?"

___________________

Visit my site Antiwar Homepage

i haven't been around long enough in these forums to formulate an opinion on the posters...but IMO you can never accurately account for deaths in this gulf war.

why do you ask? in my opinion this war was uncoventional to say the least, most of iraqi army were not in uniformed and thus you can not adequately disseminate between actual civilian deaths vs iraqi army deaths. im not pro war, but i do not condone the press handling of the matter either. i have become very cynical about source data from many 'credible' sources because IMO information and data are so easily manipulated on both sides of the spectrum.

in the end people died and it's is a shame on both sides...

we really need to start showing war and other attrocities like suicides bombings or bombings in general (including 'precision strikes') on a individual level...who would want to kills after they see 3 000 dead (not refering to any persons or events) and their dependents suffer.

would you kill someone if you had to see their family suffer over and voer? multiply that by 3 000 times and maybe, just maybe we can realize that we are all damn human, we all bleed, we all dies, we all fear, but we all love in the end.

LASTLY, NEVER EVER SAY THE 'US'...it's not the US...it's the BUSH GOV'T, and the problem with that is that radicals use 'US' interchangably with a democratically elected (if bush was elected) gov't which changes every 4-8 years. use BUSH gov't...cuz we all know it's bush's war mongering.

___________________


You need people like me!!! You need people like me so you can point your fucking fingers, and say 'that's the bad guy!' So, what dat make you? Good? You're not good; you just know how to hide. Howda lie. Me, I don't have that problem.

Help Fight Disease TA United Research Team

It is better to die for a chance at freedom than to live a life rendered meaningless by tyranny.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter It is better to die for a chance at freedom than to live a life rendered meaningless by tyranny.

Pithy sayings prove nothing. I doubt the families of the dead feel vindicated by the fact that their loved ones died to allow the state of Iraq to become what it has today. Besides, I wouldn't mind hearing your definition of freedom: is freedom being gunned down while exercising your "right" to free speech in front of a school? Living in squalor and drinking sewerage infested water because the water treatment plants were destroyed in the war and the occupying force "hasn't got around" to fixing it yet, perhaps? Or is it having only one radio station and one TV station, both of which serve as a mouthpiece for the propoganda war being waged by the occupying force?

Temporary problems, maybe, but then what about the permanent problems? Are the US going to allow democracy to flourish or they going to put in Chabali and have done with it? If they do allow democracy to flourish, who's to say the new leader is any better than Hussein? What if an extremist Shiite theocratic party gets elected in? Or, given that many of the Baath party members are still operating in high levels of the Iraqi government and administration at the moment, who's to say that another secular Stalinist leader won't get voted in, brutalising the Kurds and Shiites just as before?

No, there is too much doubt. They may have a "chance" at being free as you put it, but 4,000 deaths is a large bet to stake. I don't think human life, particularly in these quantities, is something we should be gambling with: the idealistic pursuits of freedom, democracy and whatever other ideologies you wish to name are subservient, in my opinion, to the over-riding necessity to preserve and above all respect human life for what it is. There can be no freedom, no democracy, without humanity.

I think we've had this discussion about the utility of human life before, so I'll stop there before we retread old ground.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Pithy sayings prove nothing. I doubt the families of the dead feel vindicated by the fact that their loved ones died to allow the state of Iraq to become what it has today. [QUOTE] If pithy sayings prove nothing, the self-pity of those far too emotional to objectively analyze the bigger picture fares little better. If those families would rather see their loved ones spared than see their people live in freedom, then they are no better than tyrants, as it is those very cowardly and selfish mentalities which give rise to tyranny. [QUOTE] Besides, I wouldn't mind hearing your definition of freedom:

Freedom is the extent to which external phenomena determine one's behavior is minimized.

quote:

is freedom being gunned down while exercising your "right" to free speech in front of a school? Living in squalor and drinking sewerage infested water because the water treatment plants were destroyed in the war and the occupying force "hasn't got around" to fixing it yet, perhaps? Or is it having only one radio station and one TV station, both of which serve as a mouthpiece for the propoganda war being waged by the occupying force?

I share your concerns about these things. With each passing day it becomes more apparent that the war was a failed effort. However, the circumstances in Iraq were severe enough to have required an attempt. If one truly respects human life, one cannot allow it to be squandered and polluated by tyranny.

quote:

Temporary problems, maybe, but then what about the permanent problems? Are the US going to allow democracy to flourish or they going to put in Chabali and have done with it? If they do allow democracy to flourish, who's to say the new leader is any better than Hussein? What if an extremist Shiite theocratic party gets elected in? Or, given that many of the Baath party members are still operating in high levels of the Iraqi government and administration at the moment, who's to say that another secular Stalinist leader won't get voted in, brutalising the Kurds and Shiites just as before?

At this juncture, I believe a puppet government is the only viable option. Until the Iraqi people adjust to living in a free society, they cannot be relied upon to choose an effective leader.

quote:

No, there is too much doubt. They may have a "chance" at being free as you put it, but 4,000 deaths is a large bet to stake. I don't think human life, particularly in these quantities, is something we should be gambling with: the idealistic pursuits of freedom, democracy and whatever other ideologies you wish to name are subservient, in my opinion, to the over-riding necessity to preserve and above all respect human life for what it is. There can be no freedom, no democracy, without humanity.

Life at any cost? A puppet of flesh and blood is no more alive than one carved out of wood. Life without freedom is a lie, a facade.