To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (17100 ) 4/14/2003 7:04:58 PM From: Sully- Respond to of 89467 "but Saddam killed perhaps 500,000" Multiply by 3 or 4 to get close to the correct, generally accepted number."then the USA is a distant second in war crimes" Could you cite the specific war crimes that were committed?"THEY is an overly simplistic term to apply to an enemy force if the majority wanted to surrender, then how hard did we make it for them to do so?" Like many, many millions of leaflets. Many were returned to our troops by surrendering forces to make sure they knew the proper way for Coalition troops to identify them. Sadly many Fadein Saddam & paramilitary troops pretended to surrender & picked up their weapons & killed our troops, so it's obvious the leaflets were widely known. Again, if they were forced to stay & fight or be killed by their own troops, don't blame Bush. Blame the real war criminals.... Saddam & his henchmen."USForces killed largely unarmed ragtag military, coerced to serve under a dictator, shot for attempting desertion, and whose families also were threatened" Well, I've already answered most of this twice. I do take issue with the unarmed part though. Saddam had huge stores of weapons everywhere in Iraq. If they were unarmed, it was pure folly by Saddam's forces & absolutely not Bush's fault. <i<"still unsure how Saddam threatened our US security any connections found with AlQaeda? or do you believe the flimsy falsified documents provided by Powell to the UN? this argument is pointless" Jim, don't get into revisionist history. The terrorists were there in multiple terrorist camps. There were AlQaeda in Iraq, plus a group linked to Al Qaeda. We didn't plant them there. They were already there. So were the terror camps. There were absolutely no falsified Powell documents about this."it is about oil oil fields were protected right away not foreign journalists not museums of antiquity not public property not private property congratulations" Um, that was about attempting to avoid an environmental disaster much larger than the one Saddam caused in Kuwait when only 700 oil wells were blown up & set afire. That was the primary reason for protecting those wells. Perceive it any way you want, but history clearly supports the need to protect them & history shows that we got there before it got out of hand. All other material crap was not worth jeopardizing our troops over. Protecting all manner of museums ( a genuine tragedy), etc., would have made for thousands of easy targets for the Fadein Saddam & other foreign terrorists to pick off. Phuck the material crap. Our troops are more important. The oil wells were worth the risk because of monumental environmental concerns. And there was very little private property looted from all the reports I've seen. It was mostly government & Ba'ath Party properties. And the looting has subsided considerably from what I'm hearing. Shops are opening & things are slowly returning toward peace & civility."I label your comments and arguments, not you not yet "kneejerker" was just a warmup" I guess we won't be going to see Matrix: Reloaded this weekend bongbrain? :-\