Back When "The West" Armed Saddam - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-27-2005, 12:56 AM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


It appears you fail to appreciate
you've hit the nail on the head there. military records are not impressive. they're just plain tragic. how many people were killed in order to set those records? honestly, you seem to look at war as a sporting event where racking up the best stats gets you into the all-star game...ignoring the fact that you're drop daisy cutters instead of throwing touchdowns.
__________________

__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 10-27-2005, 01:39 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en


you've hit the nail on the head there. military records are not impressive. they're just plain tragic. how many people were killed in order to set those records? honestly, you seem to look at war as a sporting event where racking up the best stats gets you into the all-star game...ignoring the fact that you're drop daisy cutters instead of throwing touchdowns.
Once again, you fail to understand what I'm talking about. One of the most important records is the low number of deaths, both civilian and military that resulted from the 3 week operation to overthrow Saddam's regime. Such an advance considering the firepower and urban conditions would have typically resulted in death rates that were hundreds or thousands of times what they actually were. But through the excellent training, skill, and technology of coalition forces, civilian casualties as well as military casualties were kept very low considering the conditions. US military personal saved thousands of wounded Iraqi military personal, a subject rarely covered by the media.

I'm sorry if you don't appreciate the efforts of the US military in Iraq including those of my friends. What they did was incredible and their service and sacrifice has made the region and this world a safer and more secure place.

Your presumptions about my views on war are absurd.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 01:00 PM   #18
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Whats REALLY absurd?

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 01:57 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:35 PM
That you would take seriously anything iraqibodycount has to say. This anti-war group has only one agenda, and objectivity and the facts are not one of them. The only accurate tally of casaulties comes when every body is correctly identified and studied by forensics and other investigators to determine cause of death.

Otherwise, when simply using unsubstantiated media reports, one comes up with grossly inflated figures. A perfect example of this were the media claims that 7,000 Palestinians were killed in the Israely siege and occupation of Jenin. United Nations investigators and forensic experts later determined that only 48 civilians had died in the fighting and all of the deaths were the results of accidents.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 02:24 PM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


That you would take seriously anything iraqibodycount has to say.

The only accurate tally of casaulties comes when every body is correctly identified and studied by forensics and other investigators to determine cause of death.


Otherwise, when simply using unsubstantiated media reports, one comes up with grossly inflated figures. A perfect example of this were the media claims that 7,000 Palestinians

Sounds a lot like what other deniers of mass killings have said.

Millions in death camps, where are all the bodies or mass graves
have the remains been studied to determined the truth?

Once somebody swallows the propaganda from one side they can keep putting up these smoke screens and people who want to buy the arguments will.


26,000 to 30,000 civilian deaths from 50,000 bombs is a realistic estimate.


deny, deny, deny all you want.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:05 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep



Sounds a lot like what other deniers of mass killings have said.

Millions in death camps, where are all the bodies or mass graves
have the remains been studied to determined the truth?

Once somebody swallows the propaganda from one side they can keep putting up these smoke screens and people who want to buy the arguments will.


26,000 to 30,000 civilian deaths from 50,000 bombs is a realistic estimate.


deny, deny, deny all you want.
So I guess you believe that 7,000 Palestinians were killed at Jenin?

Accuse, Accuse, Accuse, without any evidence or facts all you want. Thats real propaganda. Pick the number that fits your politcal agenda and there you go.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 03:01 AM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2



Accuse, Accuse, Accuse, without any evidence or facts all you want. Thats real propaganda. Pick the number that fits your politcal agenda and there you go.

Quote:
US admits it has counted 26,000 Iraqi dead

By Daniel Howden and David Usborne in New York
Published: 31 October 2005

The Pentagon has admitted for the first time that it is keeping track of civilian casualties in Iraq. The figures, slipped into a bar graph in a lengthy report to the US congress this month, show that the daily number of Iraqi casualties has more than doubled in the past 18 months.

The report says that nearly 26,000 Iraqis have been killed or wounded in attacks by insurgents, with an estimated 26 casualties a day between January and March of last year, rising to 64 a day in the run up to the referendum on the new constitution.

This contradicts the Pentagon's assertion that the security situation in Iraq is improving - and that appearances to the contrary reflect the media's focus on bombings in and around Baghdad.

Previously, the US military has insisted it kept records of the casualties among only its own personnel, and avoided discussion about civilian tolls. It also refuses to release information on the number of Iraqi civilians killed or wounded by US forces.

Washington and London have regularly doubted independent estimates of the number of Iraqis killed since the 2003 invasion.

Pentagon officials said the report was only a rough estimate and did not distinguish between civilian casualties and members of Iraq's nascent security services killed or wounded in insurgency attacks.

"They have begun to realise that when you focus only on the US it gives the impression that the US doesn't care about Iraqis," Anthony H. Cordesman, a military expert at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a research group in Washington told The New York Times.

Greg Hicks, a Pentagon spokesman, trying to play down the significance of the information, said: "It's a kind of a snapshot. The Defence Department doesn't maintain a comprehensive or authoritative count of Iraqi casualties." The estimates in the graph were based on casualty reports filed by US and allied forces who responded to attacks, but Mr Hicks noted that troops did not respond to all attacks.

The graph appeared in a quarterly audit of Iraq operations. Analysis carried out by the independent group Iraq Body Count, which compiles statistics for civilian casualties based on reports by news outlets, suggests the figure of 26,000 casualties would correspond to a death toll of nearly 6,500 - based on a ratio of one death for every three casualties.

This figure is lower than Iraq Body Count's estimate for the same period of 11,613, which includes those killed by US and allied forces. It is also lower than the Iraqi Interior Ministry estimate for the period from August 2004 to May this year of 8,175.

The appearance of the graph will increase pressure on the Pentagon to be more open in releasing data on fatalities in Iraq.

Hamit Dardagan from Iraq Body Count told The New York Times: "We now know that the US military does keep records of Iraqi civilian deaths. There seems to be no obvious reason for keeping them a secret."
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 09:08 AM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep




Another crap article with the title "US admits 26,000 dead Iraqi's", then if one actually takes the time to read the article, you learn that its not 26,000 dead Iraqi's but 26,000 dead and wounded, which is far different from what the title claims. In addition, it is only estimate based on reports. It is not a detailed analyses identifying people and studying how they were killed. Its about as reliable as the same BS put out by Bodycount.

The article only reinforces the points I was making, especially the title which is contradicted by the information within the article.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 10:48 AM   #24
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


That you would take seriously anything iraqibodycount has to say. This anti-war group has only one agenda, and objectivity and the facts are not one of them. The only accurate tally of casaulties comes when every body is correctly identified and studied by forensics and other investigators to determine cause of death.

Otherwise, when simply using unsubstantiated media reports, one comes up with grossly inflated figures. A perfect example of this were the media claims that 7,000 Palestinians were killed in the Israely siege and occupation of Jenin. United Nations investigators and forensic experts later determined that only 48 civilians had died in the fighting and all of the deaths were the results of accidents.

^^^ Is there ANY point in having a reasoned discussion with an IDIOT like this?
__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 12:02 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Right, enough. Have some courtesy people, please. STING - don't dismiss other people's points of view as crap. FatBratchney - don't call other people idiots.

If you disagree with someone's opinions or with an article someone else has posted then please find a way to express your disagreement without the use of insults. Alternatively, carry on with the insults and your access to FYM will be removed. It's really your choice.

*Fizz.
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 10-31-2005, 02:01 PM   #26
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Local Time: 01:35 PM
Its ALSO your CHOICE as to what level of Neo-Con BULLSHIT is allowed to go unmolested.

Your message board rules would be vaporized in the average News Room in the Corporate Media.

Do they adhere to YOUR code of conduct?
Would Bill O'Reilly or Ann Coultier countenance a "fair and balanced" debate?

PLEASE--GET REAL!

I am sure there are many peeps who are irritated with the abundance of airtime giving to common neo-con gibberish...in the papers/news/internet media.

EVERYWHERE--neo-cons are afforded all kinds of airtime to propagandize--FREE from harassment.

Your rules only entrench the situation.

You KNOW -->NO AMOUNT of "reasoned debate" will change the mentalities of those whose mentalities MUST BE CHANGED.


So WHY BOTHER with the pretense of "fact based critiques"?
__________________

__________________
FatBratchney is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com