Middle east outcome

**SuperChuck** · 07-18-2006, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by WhiteWidow

Even if that website were accurate or mentioned any reasons why it should be credible, I probably wouldn't care.

Hahaha, click on View Database. It lists each and every report and its source. Running down the most recent few, it lists CNN, AFP, AP, Reuters, and Washington Post. If those aren't accurate sources, I'm not sure what is.

They actually used to do a much better job, listing what each news outlet was reporting for each incident. If you didn't think our news sources were craptacular before, this would have convinced you. The US news outlets were routinely lower than the BBC or Al-Jazeera numbers.

Civilians die in war and that sucks. But when your war is based on falsified intelligence and you target civilian areas under false pretenses, that's pretty borderline terrorism. When Kuwaitis were killed in Hussein's invasion, we called it atrocities. When we bomb a market, it's called "collateral damage". It's all a matter of perspective.

**Kenyth** · 07-18-2006, 12:11 PM

If they weren't killed directly by us, I don't see why we should be held accountable. By that logic the parents of the suicide bombers are also responsible for the deaths because they conceived the killer. How many of these deaths were still occurring before the war even started?

I'm not saying I think the war in Iraq was the greatest idea ever. I'm saying that blaming the US for every violent death in Iraq now that we're there is bullshit.

**SuperChuck** · 07-18-2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by Kenyth

If they weren't killed directly by us, I don't see why we should be held accountable. By that logic the parents of the suicide bombers are also responsible for the deaths because they conceived the killer. How many of these deaths were still occurring before the war even started?

I'm not saying I think the war in Iraq was the greatest idea ever. I'm saying that blaming the US for every violent death in Iraq now that we're there is bullshit.

Yeah, I wish they'd separate out direct US deaths vs. terror attacks.

I do know that it was up around 4000 civilian deaths before the ground campaign started. I would think the majority of the deaths are directly caused by US acts, but that's just based on finger counting (5 people here and 20 there).

I can see where they're going with including the suicide bombings as an indirect result of US activity, but like you said, there's only so much blame you can place on the US for that. I mean, I was opposed to the war in Iraq from day 1, but I didn't imagine the outcome would be al Qaeda suicide bombing the hell out of it.

**JHarri31** · 07-18-2006, 11:00 PM

I really really didn't want to get involved in this, but god damnit...

1. Can you possibly imagine any terrorist organization taking the absurd steps that we have to preserve civilian life??? As afore mentioned, we precision strike, drop supplies, and treat POWs with a civility above and beyond any other country we engage.

2. I don't buy the stats on that site for anything. Is there any differentiation between military casualties, civilians killed by insurgents, or civilians killed by their own countrymen? Also, when you have a war that lasts for three years and you can (or at least attempt) to catalogue every Iraqi death that means that we are doing one hell of a job preserving life. Lastly, if you could actually count the civilian deaths caused by the US invasion you should try comparing that to the number of civilians that would have been killed by Sadam's dictatorship.

3. We as a country are losing our evolutionary edge. We see a country that threatens our citizens, security, and way of life and we SHOULD bomb them until they aren't a threat anymore. We live, those who oppose die, that's how the terrorists operate. If they had weapons and military power like we do the US would be a patch of radioactive dirt and we'd all be dead.

4. How you can compare Bush to the psychos running nations like Iran, Iraq (formerly), N. Korea, Lebanon, Afghanistan (formerly), etc.; you are out of your mind. You might not like his politics, but give me a break.

I hate arguing with liberals b/c they believe that ranting and raving are substitutes for facts and logic. You show me a Democrat candidate that has a PLAN for withdrawal from Iraq (pulling everyone out after a 12 month deadline is not a plan) and I will actually consider for voting for one. A platform that says "I am not Bush so vote for me" is the reason that Kerry had the worst popular vote % since before the Reagan era.

Reply as you please, but don’t expect a reply. Dueling with the libs on this board is like pounding your head against a brick wall. Actually, when I do pound my head against the wall I can actually see the wall’s point of view.

**Shelby07** · 07-18-2006, 11:58 PM

The site is stupid and the author obviously has an agenda. How many were killed before we got there in the previous 3 years? Does he have a site for that? The author of that site wants to blame the US for every death in a country that's been at war with itself and neighboring countries for 2,000 years. Give me a fucking break and use your head for something other than a god damn hat rack. Sometimes I wonder if these people who think they are so smart have the brains to think their way out of a fucking paper bag! I don't know who is worse, the ones that post this shit or the ones that rally around it. That was one of the most idiotic things I've ever seen.