100 000 civilian deaths in Iraq

not surprised ...I predicted it last year ..there'll be a lot more in the years to come
 
All in the name of freedom...

at least they're now free to die
 
Tis a sad loss of life, and many of the losses could have been prevented,
 
A few days ago a guy from the Islamic party was shot dead by occupation trrops. We phoned some of our relatives who were at the funeral, they said that when they went to take the body, they told him "he is #70", more than 200 people die everyday.
 
But he told BBC's Today that another independent estimate of civilian deaths was around 15,000.
Click to expand...

The Iraq Body Count, a respected database run by a group of academics and peace activists, has put the number of reported civilian deaths at between 14,000-16,000
Click to expand...

There are lots of estimates of the death tole.
They are also saying that the danger is now higher, but such things were bound to happen. You can't just fool yourself into thinking they messed up because things aren't all rosey right now.
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
You can't just fool yourself into thinking they messed up because things aren't all rosey right now.
Click to expand...
there's ample evidence to show that "they" ****ed up royally.
 
lots of the deathes aren't reported. bodycount only counts what's reported in the news.
For example, my dad's uncle (an important guy at the Nahrain University) was shot at but survived, his driver died however. but nobody heared about him.
Many people die without anyone knowing about them.

P.S.
I noticed a side link in that page about Falluja
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3748966.stm
I am not aware of any foreign fighters in Falluja.

If there are any foreigners here, they have blended in very well with the locals.
Click to expand...
I heared the Americans are gona start the attack on Teusday :/
 
Lil' Timmy said:
there's ample evidence to show that "they" ****ed up royally.
Click to expand...
Thats not what I said. Let me rephrase. Just because there are problems doesn't mean the country isn't on the right track. Now whether it is or not, I don't know...because I can't predict the future. But my point is, that what seems like a lack of control is simply the transition phase.
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
Thats not what I said. Let me rephrase. Just because there are problems doesn't mean the country isn't on the right track. Now whether it is or not, I don't know...because I can't predict the future. But my point is, that what seems like a lack of control is simply the transition phase.
Click to expand...

It's true that there should be an eventual end to the conflict but, at the same time, we have Israel and Palestine.

I was sad back when I thought it was 15000. 100000 is just stupidly wrong.
 
If you were president of the US right now, what would you do? It is one thing to complain, but it is another thing to provide a solution. Remember, the past can't be changed.
 
blahblahblah said:
Remember, the past can't be changed.
Click to expand...
thanks for the insight :rolleyes:

i'd pull out all troops from iraq, leave it to it's own devices for 3 years. meanwhile, i'd institute a true draft (no loopholes for the rich kids). and after three years, re-invade iraq with overwhelming numbers of troops. institute a police state for several years, while training the new iraqi security force. after about 10 years of peace and prosperity, troops are pulled out.

this massive occupation would be paid for by repealing the bush tax-cuts, and eliminating tax fraud on the part of us corporations. when the people rise up, my iraq-hardened uber-army will be in place to crush the rebellion.
 
Neutrino said:
No, but it's often a good indication of what the future will be like.
Click to expand...

I said what would you do given the current scenario. People, when posed with that question, often resort to changing past decisions which isn't possible.
 
If I were the president right now? I'd resign and choose Kerry as my replacement. :P

Well, for one, I'd stop killing civilians. or at least minimize casualties as much as possible,
Less bombing, more focus on intelligence.
Then I'd appologise for the mistakes that caused all the trouble, admit that there were no WMDs, and no signifigant Queda presence. Create a campaign that makes it clear that the continuing operations have now shifted to cleanup and damage control of a failed war. Try to win back international sympathy and establish an international force to keep the peace.

Oh, and better secure the border. The less terrorists and supplies getting in to aid the insurgents, the better.

In the end, a full withdrawl of US influence as quickly as would be safe is the best-case scenario. Show them that there will be no more occupation.

And then actually go after freakin' Al-Queda!

I know there's flaws to that plan, but that's why I'm not commanding anything. (Yet. :D)
 
Cograts G.W. Bush... you've done in 18 months what Saddam took a decade to do...
 
hasan said:
A few days ago a guy from the Islamic party was shot dead by occupation trrops. We phoned some of our relatives who were at the funeral, they said that when they went to take the body, they told him "he is #70", more than 200 people die everyday.
Click to expand...

Hasan, I am deeply sorry for my country's horrendous acts on your country/cities/people. I would hate the U.S. if I were you, but it would be a misconception to think all U.S. people were for this disaster. It's the fault of our leader(s).

Ignorance is the most disgusting attribute of a President of the only super power known to the world today. I wonder why he never talks about civilian casualties?
 
sublidieminal said:
Ignorance is the most disgusting attribute of a President of the only super power known to the world today. I wonder why he never talks about civilian casualties?
Click to expand...

“We don’t do body counts” General Tommy Franks, US Central Command


that's why
 
sublidieminal said:
Hasan, I am deeply sorry for my country's horrendous acts on your country/cities/people. I would hate the U.S. if I were you, but it would be a misconception to think all U.S. people were for this disaster. It's the fault of our leader(s).
Click to expand...
I know :)
If I said something about all americans then I'm sorry, I always try not to generalize.
 
CptStern said:
“We don’t do body counts” General Tommy Franks, US Central Command


that's why
Click to expand...
That is good, I am glad we aren't wasting our time and money counting the dead.
 
hasan said:
I know :)
If I said something about all americans then I'm sorry, I always try not to generalize.
Click to expand...

So you're from Iraq? Never knew that, I thought you were from Kuwait. :)

That is good, I am glad we aren't wasting our time and money counting the dead.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Yeah, who cares about the people, hell you've blew 'em to so many pieces, that it would be too hard to count. We must not waste time, there are at least a few million more innocent civilians to kill! Dumbass.
 
PvtRyan said:
So you're from Iraq? Never knew that, I thought you were from Kuwait. :)
Click to expand...
hehe .. what gave you that though?
Actually, there is a Kuwaiti guy here, his name appeared on the front page a coupla times.
DigiQ8
 
hasan said:
hehe .. what gave you that though?
Actually, there is a Kuwaiti guy here, his name appeared on the front page a coupla times.
DigiQ8
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I confused you with him :)

What part of Iraq are you from?
 
"This conflict has been prosecuted in the most precise fashion of any conflict in the history of modern warfare", he said.

That's hilarious, considering right above it they stated that it was a very small servey.

100,000 is clearly bullshit. Everyone else estimates it at around 15-16k. Which, is very sad. The best way would clearly be no civian casualties. But that's clearly not possible. But one group pulls 100,000 out of their ass. How? Not by counting bodies, but by going the old "X and Y" route. Which CLEARLY didn't work in Vietnam when they tried to use it. They tried using mathmatical equations to find death rates, bullets fired, civilians killed, etc etc. And in the end, they were WAY off. They figured along the lines that if you gave Soldier A, X ammount of bullets, he would kill Y ammount of enemy, and Z ammount of civilians. The numbers were so far off, it was ridiculous.

Whoever said more bombing, less intelligence:

I agree. We should be looking at Isreal. We taught them all of our old systems, and then left. Now we rely on (rather useless) computer and satalite technology. When CLEARLY the old ways of sending out agents, behind enemy lines, and infiltrating the enemies hierarchy is the way to go.

These ****ers are not looking at history. Which is what everyone should be doing for the easiest possible solution to all of this to be presented.
 
PvtRyan said:
That is good, I am glad we aren't wasting our time and money counting the dead.
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Yeah, who cares about the people, hell you've blew 'em to so many pieces, that it would be too hard to count. We must not waste time, there are at least a few million more innocent civilians to kill! Dumbass.
Click to expand...

Good job there, I just can't believe the ignorance. Maybe that simple eminem video will be their "awakening". Passion of christ style (if you know what I mean) lol.
 
Lil' Timmy said:
thanks for the insight :rolleyes:

i'd pull out all troops from iraq, leave it to it's own devices for 3 years. meanwhile, i'd institute a true draft (no loopholes for the rich kids). and after three years, re-invade iraq with overwhelming numbers of troops. institute a police state for several years, while training the new iraqi security force. after about 10 years of peace and prosperity, troops are pulled out.

this massive occupation would be paid for by repealing the bush tax-cuts, and eliminating tax fraud on the part of us corporations. when the people rise up, my iraq-hardened uber-army will be in place to crush the rebellion.
Click to expand...
lil timmy 04!!!
 
Great, for Dresden, I thought we got rid of that Nazi Apologist David Irving.

Now, we have Lancet, David Irvings reincarnation. Jebus, read the top of the article. Its not doctrinated fact either.

But hence, its from a media, whose openly been against the "Blair Witch" ever since 9/11. Quoted:

A study published by the Lancet says the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion.

Unofficial estimates of civilian deaths had varied from 10,000 to over 37,000.

The Lancet admits the research is based on a small sample - under 1,000 homes - but says the findings are "convincing".

Responding to the Lancet article, a Pentagon spokesman defended coalition action in Iraq.
Click to expand...

I cant believe people would be willing to believe this. Whats more, they have no credible sources directly linking to the toll to be accurate.

If you want better speculation, why not guess yourself?
 
Well perhaps if theyd stop attacking us they wouldnt die.
 
Under 1,000 homes?

What kind of homes are these?

If I could, I'd want the forum members to ask themselves these questions when pondering this inaccurate criteria.


  1. *Under what conditions were these casualties estimated to have occured by?

    *If these conditions existed, would these conditions manifest themselves to be either, a.) Artillery (thought to be used by the US during the Fallujah Campaigns) b.) Guided Missles (thought to be recently used in Samarra) c.) Unassociated attrocities (look up Vietnam for some of those basic instances) or d.) Carpet Bombings with indirect payload

    *If a subordinate condition existed, which contributed the use of the said primary conditions, what would this be?

    *If this subordinate condition was met, under what examples do these 1,000 homes lay, that could not be immediately carried out if the same conditions were repeated, in other instances not directly associated with the scenario?

    *If examples existed previous, who was missing or unaccounted for?

    *If the said amount of people existed, have the said amount of tallied been accounted for by Coalition or Iraqi (themselves) citizens?

    *Of the 1,000 homes being studied, which are the conditions for these homes?

    *Of the condition for these homes, how many people lived within the house?

    *Of the condition for these homes, how many people lived around it?

    *Of these homes, which were victims of plausible four options [see above], which of those primary conditions was indicated at the sites of these homes?

    *Of the conditions, what was left of the homes, and what more specifically, was the reported radius of the said conditions?

    *Of the conditions and those victim, who could bear witness moreover to said claims, that either of those conditions existed, either fictiously or factly?

    *Of those could bear witness, locale to the towns, and of those locale, what percentage of the population thoughroughly agrees?

    *Was the population indicated a threat previous?

    *Does the population believe there was a threat previous?

    *What is the current state of the towns, and who was in charge?

    *Did the town, or those who support the conditions existed, believe a certain prestige was admitted to those associated after the conditions existed?

    *Of the people in position, for those in control of the town, when where these incidences reported or had occured?

    *What was the recovering effort indicated after the said conditions had existed and been commited?

    *Does a recovering effort have filed the tallied or destruction toll?

    *What was the researched proximity, of a plausible effort commited by Artillery or Troops, to Coalition or Resistance location, during or before the events had occured?

    *If this criteria is anwsered, approximately how close or witness where these said weapons, five, ten, thirty, to sixty minutes of the incident occuring post?

    *Post in days, the same question in dealing with condition proximity?

    *Who is the direct accuser?

    *Who is the direct assaliant?

    *If the assaliant to the crime was responsible for those conditions, and was within proximity of the town, with or without accord to witness bearing testimony, what evidence is left with us that this incident occured, when the correct measure of judgement is left absent?

    *If the assaliant to the crime was responsible for those conditions, which conditions were accused of being used, and which pluasible conditions are physically evident or available to the assaliant?

    *If the assaliant to the crime was responsible for those conditions, of which range or ranges, do these conditions exist or had existed, and what weapons/situations prior, could be exactly matched to the locations of said assalaint(s) to the location of these conditions?

    *If the assaliant to the crime was responsible for those conditions, should they have existed, whats not to assume those conditions were their before the operation of the assaliant?

    *If the conditions where they're before the assaliant, under which conditions were these?

    *If the conditions existed before the assaliant was accused, or before the incidents hierarchy to the assaliant, under which was the control for these conditions, and what was the effort to report or cleanup afterward?

    *What was the incident seen as before the assaliant could be associated, and does that opinion differ now or before then?

    *What behavior was displayed by those people in the homes prior to attacks--and what association do they have to its possible provakation?

    *What behavior was displayed, before those conditions, by the people in power for that town or location?

    *Where any movements or relocations having been reported, before the conditions were met, from or away around the sites?

    *Of those within location to the conditions, how many could testify that they bore witness?

    *Of those testifying, or accusing of an assaliant to those conditions, could have been within the physical proximity of the incident, to accurately report?

    *Is it likely to assume, that these people have proofed correctly enough to be there at the witness to these conditions, that they infact, where not there at all?

    *From which these evidences are based, how can we, nuetral minds, develope a correct list of criteria that is nuetral and unbiased, amungst those accusing and accused, that might, under specific research, prove a right or wrong, without defining ourselves in a pernuptual agreement with one side, or the next?

    *If said conditions existed, do they exist now?

    *If said conditions did not exist, will they exist later?

    *If said conditions have occured, but the incident was not located near the accusers source, is it a representation of a blatant misunderstanding, or an injustice perpertration of facts on the accords of hearsay?

    *If those accused are proofed to just be providing hearsay, under which defined their moral, and the movements to this criteria?

    *If for what the conditions did exist, at what time and date did these incidences occur, and who can bear witness to its physical being on those said times or dates?

    *Of the people located around the sites, how many where witness either by site or sound, to the said accusation?

    *Of those victim, what are all the names. Remains or not, surely those accounted for of being missing, would be physically, "missing"?

    *Of those people located around the sites, did anything provoke them to move or act irrationally before the conditions were met?

    *If the criteria is indeed correct, or underwhich proof can be manifested physically providing with us the imagery, sound, or bodies associated with the said conditions?

    *If none of these can be directly applied without associating to a previous incident, under which can we tell where we can locate this evidence?

    *If a condition was met, for a said attrocity, under which command was it directed, and where and which units were said to be present in that area who might have possibly been involved or bore witness to?

    *If a condition was met, and in this instance, a projectile is being blamed, how big is the crater, and does the bore of the crater match with the produced estimates amungst a calibre associated with wither .lbs, .cms, or .mm's?

    *If this condition was met, and in this instance, a projectile is being blamed, under whose command was it directed, or under which orders called for the projectile to be launched, and furthermore, is the ammunition speculated to be used coventional or non-coventional?

    *Of those that were killed, is their physical evidence of bodies or fragments, with enough genetic diveristy, that could fill in the roll of roughly 80,000-100,000 of those accused dead?

    *If remains could not be found, have researchers found the correct detail of the conditions, that might have put the articles of evidence elsewhere?

    *Of the missing evidence, was their anything suggest the evidence might have been intentionally hidden or not available?

The list could go on, but I might bore you. I'll prompt more questions later, but this is just to get you thinking.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Under 1,000 homes?

snip .
Click to expand...


dear god kerberos stop defferring blame ..people died we dont need analysis to lay blame ..the blame is quite clear: the US is responsible ..even if they didnt pull the trigger they are still responsible ..they invaded on a sham of a pretense, without an invasion there wouldnt have been 100,000 civilian deaths ..you cant dispute that ..no one can

man sometimes I'm conviced all of you that support the war are either dangerously naive or the lives of people of iraq (men, women and children) mean nothing to you which would in essence prove the dangerously naive part
 
SubKamran said:
Read 1984 too? I need to put those as my sig too. One second. :cheers:

And it's no surprise to me... :x Just, don't get me started.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I love it. It gets one thinking...
 
Foxtrot said:
That is good, I am glad we aren't wasting our time and money counting the dead.
Click to expand...


Wasting time and money counting the dead? That is outrageous, they aren't just "the dead" they were people! They were innocent people (civillians) who were living their daily lives with familys, jobs, hobbies, goals and aspirations when we came in and dropped ****ing munitions on their houses and blew them to pieces. For what? You know whats a real waste of time and money? Allowing poeple like you to eat/breathe/reproduce.
 
I was saying that in the other thread last month, and around three members were flaming me about the source of this information.

MY point is I was 100% accurate with my estimation number of death in Iraq.

;(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Acurt1982
The Success and Failure of Silence: Gordon Freeman in 'Half Life' and 'Half Life 2'
Replies
1
Views
2K
Chowder
Chowder
Shyam
100 People Killed
Replies
7
Views
634
unozero
unozero
teh_watchererer
Police have raoul moat cornered
Replies
37
Views
2K
Wanted Bob
Wanted Bob
Shift
12 Dead in Cumbria shootings
Replies
27
Views
2K
kazsymonds
kazsymonds
Back
Top