Iraqi death toll at 655,000
- Thread starter unknown
- Start date
staggalee83
War & Thunder
So if it bullshat, hating America for just being America, what was the problem with all this hate from these nutt job fanatics while Clinton was in office the entire decade of the 90's.
We didn't go into Iraq until 2002.............Who was blowing up shat from Sept. 11, 2001 on BACK?
What was the problem cause it damm sho was not Bush then.
Face it....................Hallie Berry could have been President and Beyonce could have been Vice President with both personally breast feeding these nutt's and they would still hate America.:smh:
ROYAL BLUE
New Member
If its Bull then take your azz over there for vacation and see how many bullets fly past your head. I have an even better idea. Go to North Korea for a vacation and then come back and tell me all about it.
Mr. SWAC
F*** THE LAKERS!!!!!!
This is not the general concensus of the people you are making generalalities about. Extremist may hate America, but everybody else hates our foriegn policies, which they should. A LOT of Americans hate them as well. Stop being brainwashed with that Bush administration drivel about everybody hating us. America is not over in Iraq for the Iraqis. We are over there for US.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
Dude......................Could ya'll please have a convo with people that don't AGREE with you without IMPLYING people are to stupid to THINK for themselves.
That is the main reason DEMO's keep getting their heads split in elections by people, GOP, that are handing them victories on a silver platter and Demo's can't even take advantage of it.
Some of ya'll can't function unless you bring BUSH out your mouth.
That's why the first post I made I laughed because I knew ya'll would end up here.....................BUSHIE, BRAINWASHED, AMERICA BAD, EVERYBODY ELSE GOOD.:emlaugh:
staggalee83
War & Thunder
So if it bullshat, hating America for just being America, what was the problem with all this hate from these nutt job fanatics while Clinton was in office the entire decade of the 90's.
We didn't go into Iraq until 2002.............Who was blowing up shat from Sept. 11, 2001 on BACK?
What was the problem cause it damm sho was not Bush then.
Face it....................Hallie Berry could have been President and Beyonce could have been Vice President with both personally breast feeding these nutt's and they would still hate America.:smh:
I'm still waiting on an answer to this without all the "conspiracy theories".
Just straight talk.
Mr. SWAC
F*** THE LAKERS!!!!!!
I know you you can think for yourself. That's what I'm trying to get you to do by telling you to open your eyes. There is no defense for our current status in Iraq or "supposed" war on terror unless you are using the Bush administration arguement. It amazes me that no matter what happens folks continue to support an ILLEGAL WAR.
And yes I used Bush's name because ROYAL BLUE used a Bush idealogy that "they hate us for our freedom" statement. You are being brainwashed, used, bamboosalled, had, run a muck, hoodwinked, etc. Explain why we invaded Iraq instead of Iran or N. Korea who were openly admitting all along their intentions for nuclear power? Now look at where we are at. These are the real issues, but you'd rather make generalities about people in the Mid-East.
And yes I used Bush's name because ROYAL BLUE used a Bush idealogy that "they hate us for our freedom" statement. You are being brainwashed, used, bamboosalled, had, run a muck, hoodwinked, etc. Explain why we invaded Iraq instead of Iran or N. Korea who were openly admitting all along their intentions for nuclear power? Now look at where we are at. These are the real issues, but you'd rather make generalities about people in the Mid-East.
J C
Well-Known Member
It hard for people to admit they were wrong. Many on this board told them so in 2002/2003. Bush name was brought in to this discussion because he led this country into a war with no end in sight. Hopefully most americans understand this now. The challenge now is how do we get the hell out and keep Iran in check. That's a tall order. You are right Mr. SWAC it was Iran all the time. The neo-cons could not see it. They were consumed over Saddam Hussein. After 9/11 he was convenient and fit the profile. Now we are stuck in a sectarian civil war and can't figure out how to get out.
unknown
New Member
U.N. refugee agency: Exodus in Iraq forces priority shift
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The United Nations estimates that up to 1.6 million Iraqis have left their homes for other countries in "a steady, silent exodus" as a result of the war and sectarian violence, forcing the U.N. refugee agency to announce a shift in priorities.
The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said it plans to focus on the deteriorating humanitarian situation facing people who are fleeing, as opposed to those returning home.
"The enormous scale of the needs, the ongoing violence and the difficulties in reaching the displaced make it a problem that is practically beyond the capacity of humanitarian agencies, including UNHCR," it said.
The 2006 budget of $29 million for its Iraq operation was still $9 million short, the agency said, adding that more funding is needed to address the refugee crisis.
At least 40,000 Iraqis a month were arriving in Syria, according to U.N. staffers monitoring the border. Refugees have also fled to Iran, and "tens of thousands" are headed to Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, the Gulf states and Europe," the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said.
The agency estimated there are half a million Iraqis already in Jordan and 450,000 in Syria, adding that while some have been outside Iraq for a decade or more, arrivals have steadily risen since the war began in 2003.
Within Iraq itself, the Iraqi government and UNHCR estimate "more than 1.5 million people displaced ... including more than 365,000 newly displaced who have fled their homes and communities" since February.
That was when the Askariya mosque, a Shiite shrine in Samarra, was bombed, igniting Shiite-Sunni fighting.
Some of Iraq's 18 provinces have seen a tenfold increase in the number of internally displaced people since the beginning of the year, UNHCR said.
Full Story
A bad situation constantly getting worse.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The United Nations estimates that up to 1.6 million Iraqis have left their homes for other countries in "a steady, silent exodus" as a result of the war and sectarian violence, forcing the U.N. refugee agency to announce a shift in priorities.
The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said it plans to focus on the deteriorating humanitarian situation facing people who are fleeing, as opposed to those returning home.
"The enormous scale of the needs, the ongoing violence and the difficulties in reaching the displaced make it a problem that is practically beyond the capacity of humanitarian agencies, including UNHCR," it said.
The 2006 budget of $29 million for its Iraq operation was still $9 million short, the agency said, adding that more funding is needed to address the refugee crisis.
At least 40,000 Iraqis a month were arriving in Syria, according to U.N. staffers monitoring the border. Refugees have also fled to Iran, and "tens of thousands" are headed to Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, the Gulf states and Europe," the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees said.
The agency estimated there are half a million Iraqis already in Jordan and 450,000 in Syria, adding that while some have been outside Iraq for a decade or more, arrivals have steadily risen since the war began in 2003.
Within Iraq itself, the Iraqi government and UNHCR estimate "more than 1.5 million people displaced ... including more than 365,000 newly displaced who have fled their homes and communities" since February.
That was when the Askariya mosque, a Shiite shrine in Samarra, was bombed, igniting Shiite-Sunni fighting.
Some of Iraq's 18 provinces have seen a tenfold increase in the number of internally displaced people since the beginning of the year, UNHCR said.
Full Story
A bad situation constantly getting worse.
Croft84
Well-Known Member
So if it bullshat, hating America for just being America, what was the problem with all this hate from these nutt job fanatics while Clinton was in office the entire decade of the 90's.
We didn't go into Iraq until 2002.............Who was blowing up shat from Sept. 11, 2001 on BACK?
What was the problem cause it damm sho was not Bush then.
Face it....................Hallie Berry could have been President and Beyonce could have been Vice President with both personally breast feeding these nutt's and they would still hate America.:smh:
Did you say beast feeding? :blush:
JagHammer
Senior Troll
Sad, but true...
ROYAL BLUE
New Member
I want to get my point across without losing anyone. We are in a spiritual war and its a fact. Paul told us this in Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
"The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party - and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect His purpose." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Meditation on the Divine Will" (September 2, 1862?), pp. 403-404.
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, urgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war?seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came. 2
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.
I posted the lincoln quotes because I'm amazed at how fast another human being can tear a man down when he's striving to do right. I highlighted the lincoln quotes because I've been told all my life that the civil war was not about slavery, but when I dug for myself I found out that it was, and the 16th president of the United States said it as well. Why do we allow people to feed us BS instead of thinking honestly for ourselves?
http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln78.html
http://www.lincolnbicentennial.gov/press/stories/Jackson_Address.php
I end this in saying that those who think America is wrong for protecting our interest, then the North was wrong for tending to Southern business. Neither one of us would be where we are today if not for God and a few powerful men. The only way we can fight terrorism is with war. God has already told us that many will cry for peace, but there shall be no peace. Why are we amazed in time of war? The end is near.
"The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party - and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect His purpose." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Meditation on the Divine Will" (September 2, 1862?), pp. 403-404.
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, urgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war?seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came. 2
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.
I posted the lincoln quotes because I'm amazed at how fast another human being can tear a man down when he's striving to do right. I highlighted the lincoln quotes because I've been told all my life that the civil war was not about slavery, but when I dug for myself I found out that it was, and the 16th president of the United States said it as well. Why do we allow people to feed us BS instead of thinking honestly for ourselves?
http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln78.html
http://www.lincolnbicentennial.gov/press/stories/Jackson_Address.php
I end this in saying that those who think America is wrong for protecting our interest, then the North was wrong for tending to Southern business. Neither one of us would be where we are today if not for God and a few powerful men. The only way we can fight terrorism is with war. God has already told us that many will cry for peace, but there shall be no peace. Why are we amazed in time of war? The end is near.
Mr. SWAC
F*** THE LAKERS!!!!!!
OMG, I can go so many different directions with this, and all of them point to the same answer.
The North wasn't tending to Southern business. That was American business, and Lincoln knew that the Declaration of Independance and Bill of Rights was fraugulent if he was to allow the immorality of slavery to remain in the Union. That as well amongst other things economically. But on to the DANGEROUS group think in which you speak of.
I am so tired of these bible toatin' deceivers/cons using the bible as backing for their own political/personal gain. How do you justify a war and God in the same sentence? You just put up quotes from Pres. Lincoln, "In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time." For some reason you can't see how this applies to this current day situation. Religous fanaticism has only made the situation worse in the "war on terror" and current world affairs. We were doomed as soon as certain politicians made religion an election issue. When gay marriage becomes the #1 debate instead of saving peoples' lives I tell you there is some wickedtry (made up) going on. When now conservative means "religious" and liberal means "athias", and someone tells you to choose sides, there is no spiritual war going on. Only smoke and mirrors. Not much hurts me more than to see folks misinterpret the bible to twist words around to fit their benefit.
So you think the world is coming to an end? No matter how many times it's said, folks always think they know when the world will end. The bible says not even the Lord God knows the day or time that the world will come to an end. The word apocalypse does not mean "the end of days". I truly think some people actually pray for the end to come. So much so that we will convince ourselves it's upon us. Not only that, but will think it is their fate/purpose on this earth. And that they are acting on accordance to the will of God, because it was writen in the New Testiment (and I'm on God's side, so you are evil). This is dangerous thinking, ESPECIALLY for someone in power. Like a president. :shame:
The North wasn't tending to Southern business. That was American business, and Lincoln knew that the Declaration of Independance and Bill of Rights was fraugulent if he was to allow the immorality of slavery to remain in the Union. That as well amongst other things economically. But on to the DANGEROUS group think in which you speak of.
I am so tired of these bible toatin' deceivers/cons using the bible as backing for their own political/personal gain. How do you justify a war and God in the same sentence? You just put up quotes from Pres. Lincoln, "In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time." For some reason you can't see how this applies to this current day situation. Religous fanaticism has only made the situation worse in the "war on terror" and current world affairs. We were doomed as soon as certain politicians made religion an election issue. When gay marriage becomes the #1 debate instead of saving peoples' lives I tell you there is some wickedtry (made up) going on. When now conservative means "religious" and liberal means "athias", and someone tells you to choose sides, there is no spiritual war going on. Only smoke and mirrors. Not much hurts me more than to see folks misinterpret the bible to twist words around to fit their benefit.
So you think the world is coming to an end? No matter how many times it's said, folks always think they know when the world will end. The bible says not even the Lord God knows the day or time that the world will come to an end. The word apocalypse does not mean "the end of days". I truly think some people actually pray for the end to come. So much so that we will convince ourselves it's upon us. Not only that, but will think it is their fate/purpose on this earth. And that they are acting on accordance to the will of God, because it was writen in the New Testiment (and I'm on God's side, so you are evil). This is dangerous thinking, ESPECIALLY for someone in power. Like a president. :shame:
staggalee83
War & Thunder
"I know you can think for yourself"..................Yet in your next breath you go back to the same ole "DEMO line of thinking" saying YOU are trying to get ME to open my eyes as though my view of things is wrong because it's NOT YOUR VIEW.
In other words, You know what's best for me.
I'm BRAINWASHED...............by WHO.................MYSELF?!?!
Thank's for clearing that up. :goof:
And I dare any one of the AMERICA's bad group to say we should have invaded North Korea.
I'll bring back up every thread that had the EMPIRE BUILDING SPEW dripping from it when this shat first came up.
I also said that North Korea is CHINA'S worry.
They should have taken the lead with the one on one talks that Clinton and Carter had with them in the 90's and helped enforce the agreement's.
Even now China really don't wanna do shat for some reason.
Now North Korea is asking for this same farce again........................Guess we should go for it AGAIN.
You never hear about that when people start screaming bout America should talk to this 3 foot nutt face to face.
And for What..............................He's proven he ain't gonna do a damm thing he say's.
They broke every agreement that they made and used the majority of over 2 billion in aid, FOOD/AID, to further their nucler program.
If they had used that money for what the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY and the U.N. had ear-marked it for, then their people would not be starving today.
BTW: Are those student's and citizens of SOUTH KOREA still protesting and chanting for the U.S. Military to get out like they was 2 years ago?
Doubt it.........................They had "war drill's" over the weekend for their citizens so they will know where to go and what to do in case a bomb fall's their way.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
Well, after all these decades, I agree we should pull out and let them handle their border and their lovely little friend to the North.
Maybe this time they will have better luck fighting them fools by themselves.
It's been what.................Over what 4 decades now watching a baren no-go zone?
unknown
New Member
The US could give a damn about that. Just like in Japan the US promises to be the nuclear defender so they keep bases there and basically convince them not to go nuclear on their own because we're the 'bodyguard.' Thats why the arms race would be so much of a problem...nuclear ability = no need for protection = no need for US bases.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
Even in war if there had been dang near 700,000 people killed they would still be laying in the streets.
Again................The people that put out that original number were the same people that came out with them outlandish numbers about how many people died in Iraq during the ACTUAL BOMBING.
That shat was discredited by everyone that went in there including the U.N.
You wanna see what those type of numbers look in terms of dead people, 700,000, go find some pictures of Rawanda.
There would be no comparison in the 2.
Again................The people that put out that original number were the same people that came out with them outlandish numbers about how many people died in Iraq during the ACTUAL BOMBING.
That shat was discredited by everyone that went in there including the U.N.
You wanna see what those type of numbers look in terms of dead people, 700,000, go find some pictures of Rawanda.
There would be no comparison in the 2.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
If South korea is so convinced this nutt to the north won't do anything tom them, then move their forces up front and let our's go where they are needed elsewhere.
We get caught up in shat because pi$$ arse places like this won't do it for themselves but are alway's pissed at the U.S. until it looks like there arses are on the line.
No way CHINA should have let this happen.
If anything..............This made CHINA look like punk byotches since the are the SUPREME power in that region.
Little North Korea, RIGHT ON THEIR BORDER, said go F yourself China.
And for the record...............Japan is the last country that need protection.
Japan has all the technological know-how to build any military weapon they need.
They just choose not too.
If they wanted to, I'll bet they could have a bomb within 4 years of starting from scratch..................and most of that time would come from building the facilities.
If Japan wanted to field an "old fashion military", they would have one of the most powerful Navy's, Airforce, or Nuke's on Earth.
And they would not have to import the brainpower from anywhere.
unknown
New Member
In case you didnt know, the same method of study was used to find the amount of dead in Rwanda, Darfur and a few other places as this one is. It's just this one is being discounted by the administration for some WILD reason.
unknown
New Member
Actually it makes China look smart. They showed that they DONT answer to the US and they dont have to co-sign everything the US says. NK is one of Chinas allies...they didnt even want to agree to these sanctions.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
Ok.......................no need for this to go further.
No matter what it's a coverup by the U.S.
Ok............got it.:smh:
OK...................The U.S. don't go in and defer to the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY to handle this like ya'll been screaming for and it's still the U.S. fault.:smh:
China don't do a damm thing and their smart.:xeye:
Man.......................Your bias against your own home flows faster than a white water river.:smh:
unknown
New Member
I tell you what...how about disproving what I said. The same method was used to determine the amount of deaths in all instances and no one is discrediting any of the situations except for Iraq. Until then just leave the subject alone.
staggalee83
War & Thunder
Man....................Like I said on the other thread.
AMERICA BAD.
I have got on the merry-go-round with this for the last time.
I gave other studies and where the source was in my first post.
In case you overlooked them in your quest to continue the AMERICA BAD syndrome, here they are again:
The Brookins Institute .....60,000
Iraq Health Ministry............50,000
Why continue.:lmao:
My bad...............These people are in cohoot's with AMERICA I assume.
No matter what anyone say's on ANY SUBJECT, if the answer is not AMERICA BAD in some way, then it is meaningless to discuss with you.
I'll leave it alone.
I know YOUR opinion is the only one that count's.