If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
100,000 dead in Iraq.
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Latest independant reports suggest that the Iraq war has claimed some 100,000 deaths.
Heres the story;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3962969.stm
Heres the story;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3962969.stm
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
I think the figure of 100,000 has been grossly inflated.
And you're basing that on what exactly?
More than 100,000 Iraqi civilians have now been killed as a result of Bush and Blair's imperialistic Crusade. Those Iraqis who are still alive are now 58 times more likely to be killed than before the US-led "liberation". Mission accomplished indeed.
That Bush and Blair are a pair of lying, cheating murdering war criminals is surely beyond questioning. What this latest figures reveal should be enough in my opinion to charge them both with Crimes Against Humanity. Perhaps they could be sent to The Hague and be tried together with their ex-best friend Saddam Hussein.
As a matter of fact, it is probably true to say that the US and Britain have now been responsible for more Iraqi deaths than Saddam Hussein. Don't you love the irony? :rolleyes:
I am now reaching the point where even the war-supporting, working-class hating, public service-destroying Tories are starting to look a more attractive than that murdering scumbag ****. Despite all the good things this government has done, I don't particularly like the prospect of the Prime Minister being a butchering war criminal of the worst kind.
:mad:
It was an independant survey of 1000 households throughout Iraq.
And no Lukesh, most of those will be from our bombings, not from terrorists. And of course from diseases and such.
Herr Bremer forbade the collection of data on the war-dead.
Same as photos of US soldiers coffins were banned.
Under the circumstances it is best to believe the worst.
do you really think that more than 50,000 would be because of terrorists?
Censored by the purveyors of "freedom and democracy" (TM reg)
Considering that both Bush and Blair were told that deposing Saddam would lead to serious instability, they have some responsibility for all the deaths.
Do you know how many terrorist bombings there would have to be to kill that many people Lukesh.
Lets say you can pop 50 in one go, thats a big bomb, so 100,000 / 50 = 2,000 individual bombings. Thats a fantasticle rate of bombing.
And clearly neither do the US - who, as it happens, have killed many, many more than all the "terrorists" (by which I presume you mean those who use violence, who we don't agree with) put together.
Stop reading those tabloids, they'll rot your brain ..........
Even though it was an illegal act, and made life for the average Iraqi far WORSE?
:eek:
Too late, the rot has clearly set in already.....
By what standards exactly, what have they done?
You seem to think them varst armies of evil death merchants plowing down all before them.
The monster under your bed isnt there.
coalition troops, especially american troops are under orders to kill all insurgency, no matter what the 'collateral damage' basicaly
the terroists aims, well they arent terroists, well there are some there but most are rebel insurgents, theyre different, and thier aim is to kill as many americans as possible, and makes the americans either pull out or be even more angered and indiscriminate, thus making them kill more civilians, so more peopel lose family and decide the americans have to leave and join them
I'm just curious that someone would believe outside terrorists able to all this.
Terrorism isnt the threat its made out to be.
"Vast majority" my arse.
And besides, what you conveniently omit is that all those people would still be alive if the illegal war hadn't taken place... because there was no terrorism WHATSOEVER in Iraq before the illegal war took place.
Can't you read now? I said that Saddam should sit in trial next to his pals. Stop distorting and talking rubbish.
Should we run the numbers Luke?
Directly killed by US-led Allied forces:
First Gulf war: at least 120,000
Second Gulf war + post-war: at least 115,000 plus undisclosed number of Iraqi soldiers- let's say a conservative 10,000
Estimated victims from DU ammunition and cluster bombs: 100,000
Total number killed directly by Allies: 345,000
Directly killed by Saddam Hussein:
Some people put it at 100,000 and some at 300,000, so let's settle for 200,000
You do the maths Luke.
Don't you even know the basic of polices of the party you like so much? LOL[/B][/QUOTE]
What benefits do you speak of? Do you have a clue? LOL
Try to read what people post for once... :rolleyes:
I'm accusing Tony Blair, not the Labour party at large.
You're the loony one mate. Even many former warmongers and even neo-cons have now admitted the war was illegal and wrong. How many more people killed will it take for you to admit to it? 200 thousand? Half a million? A million?
Not for 100 000 it won't.
Nor for the 1.5million we killed with sanctions.
The "terrorists" haven't been nearly as succesful ........
Where? We are chasing after shadows. Lashing out at people we dont understand.
And thats a good reason to kill them?
I think we have given them a good few reasons to kill us actually.
This isnt a battle we can win. And no, that doesnt mean 'letting them win' because its not a war in the proper sense at all. Terrorism stems from hatred, and untill we actually do something constructive to deal with that then we will be living with The Fear for ever.
luke thier job aint to kill ,their job is scare us into abandong what makes us free fair countries, not warmongering imperialistic powers who therefore put more people on their side as they can say "look what theyre doing, theyre suppposed to be responsible"
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ Estimates between 14,160 and 16,289 civilian deaths in Iraq.
it's funny how the worlds eyes were closed to terrorism until september 11th
Thats about right? And you're basing your judgement on what? A guess?
Anyone, including newspapers or respected broadcasting corporations, who says something that goes against Luke's beliefs, is automatically dismissed.
Hmm, perhaps not the best news source ever. And even if its bang on, its 'reported' deaths. Is there a clear and effective reporting system?