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: epicure who wrote (17397)	5/31/2005 2:50:03 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

I agree with you. I'm not sure if there is a good estimate for the number of combatants we killed, and how many are Iraqi, how many from outside the country, etc. Any idea? I would guess over 50,000 total? 100,000? Can't be sure. Every one of them has a family that now hates the US more than before we did this illegal invasion though. To me attacking Iraq would only have been justified if the UN sanctioned it, and they did not. And I still would have had a problem with the US doing 90% of it. The US should have done no more than 20% of anything like this - if we must be involved. Europeans, Asians, South Americans, and people from the Middle East should do the rest, IMO. >> I count the combatants as well as the civilians. I don't think they ought to be dead either- and their families are probably just as pissed off as the families of the civilians. Opinions will differ on how many of THEM it is ok to kill. I don't think we should have killed any unless we had a very good reason, and of course I don't think we had a very good reason. Opinions always differ on who it is ok to kill, and how many killings are ok. I'd rather be guessing on the light side for that one.