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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (15163)	1/6/2005 9:58:59 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Reply continued: Is that respect for the UN I see .. Respect? If the UN does something correct, I will respect that. Surely those who claim to respect the UN should continue to do so now that it backs current American policy for Iraq. you say it was UN's idea to make Iraq democratic because they passed resolution 1546? I didn't say it WAS the UN's idea to make Iraq democratic before the invasion, but it clearly IS the UN's intention now and USNC res. 1546 is proof of that. Do you have names and places for this mighty resistance? No, I don't have names and places but I do recall a UN spokesman say that the Iraqi regime had killed over 300,000 of Iraq's civilians and buried them in mass graves. I don't doubt he was right given that Iraqis say the same. And we know many of Saddam's victims were from rebellions against his dictatorial rule. The obvious fact is that Iraqis are currently staging a resistance to US/UK occupation of their country that they never felt like doing against Saddam. The mighty US army is barely holding them down. Saddam would have no chance if they had revolted in such numbers and with such ferocity against him. Saddam was much more ruthless than the US first of all. Second, the resistance to the formation of a new government is now coming entirely from the Sunni Arab community (along with help from terrorists from abroad). We know the total Sunni Arab percent of the population is 15-20% of the population. Ipso facto, at least 80-85% of the population is not resisting at all. Perhaps you consider only the Sunni Arab hardliners to be real Iraqis?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (15163)	1/6/2005 10:49:31 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

There is a major problem with the rationalization in the posted article: But there are two problems with this calculation. First, Daponte (who has studied Iraqi population figures for many years) questions the finding that prewar mortality was 5 deaths per 1,000. According to quite comprehensive data collected by the United Nations, Iraq's mortality rate from 1980-85 was 8.1 per 1,000. From 1985-90, the years leading up to the 1991 Gulf War, the rate declined to 6.8 per 1,000. The author is trying to compare the death tolls during the Iran - Iraq war and imply it is similar to the death rate before the Bush invasion. This is not valid. Prior to Bush's shock and awe campaign Iraq was a stable country although one hampered by severe sanctions. This is not at all like the war years with Iran or the war years with Bush. TP

To: Brumar89 who wrote (15163)	1/7/2005 5:00:16 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

I have no doubt that you can Google your way to counter every expert opinion or study that goes against your world view of "US good. Whatever it does good. Bush good. His wars good. They don't even kill more people than peacetime." etc. This was the way you replied to estimations and projections before the war. Whenever someone posted a general, a UN inspector, etc that said "It is not a good idea to invade Iraq" or "We don't have proof that Iraq has WMDs", there you would be, a busy bee Googling until you found someone trashing them. One was a pacificist, the other not credible, another was anti-American, etc etc. So there you are. Supporting your misleader who wanted to invade Iraq with any sorry excuse they could come up with. Too blind in your faith to acknowledge what your eyes and ears tell you every day - Bush was WRONG in his reasons to invade Iraq, there were NO WMDs, Iraq was never a threat to the US that could possibly justify the loss of more than a thousand dead and 10,000 wounded Americans. Not to mention the thousands and thousands and thousands of dead Iraqis, who never did anything against America nor its interests, anywhere. All you can do is bicker over the number of dead Iraqis. This study says this but hey it might not be all that correct. Gee, if it's not 100,000 but 90,000, then it's OK, I guess. Go invade more countries, kill more people. See how many world citizens love Americans to death then...