Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Support the French! Viva Democracy! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (4757)	1/18/2004 10:16:22 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7834

It's too bad we're not keeping any (public?) records of the Iraqi death toll, because at some point those morphed claims of our humanitarian mission in Iraq are going to look pretty bad (and maybe they already do- who knows how many we've killed, or caused to be killed). If you add up the numbers of those killed by Americans, those killed because of Americans (like the 20 killed today by the gate of the compound), and those assassinated because Americans can't make the country safe (and assassinated because Saddam kept the lid on ethnic violence) I'm wondering if we're already well past the number of Iraqis that Saddam would have killed. It's hard to get good numbers on Saddam's murders, because people always want to lump in the Iranian war dead, and the Kurds- and that's intellectually dishonest, since we were ok with those deaths, and Saddam was our pal when he was killing those folks. The numbers that would be really interesting to compare, are the numbers of regular citizens killed under Saddam, versus the numbers dying now. I bet the kill rate of Iraqis is way up, which makes the claim that we're humanitarian killers, somewhat....hypocritical. If anyone ever gives us good numbers on the dead, it will be interesting to do a comparison.