Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 02:34 AM

K, Old Guy...

As you dish out your relentless obfuscations, I am increasingly convinced that you are just putting us on. But now that I've taken the trouble to post, I will say a thing or two about this nonchalance about Iraqi civillian deaths that you're espousing, which is neither 'conservative' nor Christian...

The US went to war with Iraq because the President and almost all of his cabinet declared that we were in danger of an 'immenent threat'... perhaps a nuclear one. National security was invoked, and declarations were made of 'inside information' that could not therefore be disclosed to the public.

So, because the US is a Democratic nation, though this war was declared for what turns out to have been 'no discernible reason'... It is still being carried out in our names, for 'any reason that might turn up' for 'as long as it might seem reasonable'. Many of us here in the US do not wish to lose any of our 'best and brightest' (or our reputation around the world) due to a misunderstanding, and not a few of us are losing sleep over many tens of thousands of innocent civilians who have died... while giving hundreds of thousands no choice but to try to live thier 'ordinary lives' right in the middle of a guerilla war we insisted on creating.

To try to rationalize this 'event' in the middle east as being some kind of deadly norm for the region, or ours for that matter... to compare the morality of the American people to Saddam... to invent new 'reasons' for a war that had none at it's outset... is just plain unconscienable, and IMHO, absolutely incompatible with New Testament teachings.

Seems what you call 'bitching', Old Guy, just might be what our forefathers called 'patriotism'.

Read my lips... No new rationalizations.
ttr

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Oct 06 - 05:29 PM

Lancet author answers your questions - from the BBC website. Question from members of the public, with the answers given by one of the authors of the report that was published in the Lancet.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 09:44 AM

Well, McGrath, I did misunderstand you and thank for the clarification.

But you did also misunderstand me:
I can't actually see where Bev and Jerry's only post in this thread really comes into it

I am talking about the first of three Bev and Jerry posts and not about the third (they always sign their posts but often forget to insert their names after the GUEST tag):

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 10:25 AM

Just asking a question but not getting an answer.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: dianavan
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 12:04 PM

guy asks:
So why do we bitch about avoidable deaths in Iraq and not worry about the avoidable deaths in the US?

Avoidable deaths are always a concern, regardles of where they happen. Dialogue is a part of problem-solving and not just 'bitching' about something for which there is not solution. By discussing what has created the problem, perhaps a solution can be found.

...and then he asks:

How many civilians were excecuted under the Saddam regime?

I don't have those figures and I don't know if anyone does. Nobody is excusing the actions of Saddam but lets not forget he was put in power by the U.S. The deaths of Iraqis by Saddam and the deaths by the U.S. military are all a crime and can be directly attributed to U.S. foreign policy.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 12:32 PM

"So why do we bitch about avoidable deaths in Iraq and not worry about the avoidable deaths in the US?"

My impression is that you tend to find the same people who cry out against the killings in Iraq calling for the kind of changes that would cut down the carnage on the roads in their own countries.

And vice versa. People who see both sets of killings as somehow "a price worth paying."

Hence the expression "liberal crybabies".

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 02:36 PM

I think it goes like this, Old Guy.

A lot of the people who are "bitching" about avoidable deaths in Iraq, a war which, by any rational standard, was was not only entirely unnecessary, but counterproductive in any so-called "war on terrorism," are the same people who have worked to get seat-belt and air-bag regulations passed so that people have a better chance of surviving automobile accidents, got laws passed requiring the wearing of crash helmets so that motorcycle jockeys and bicyclists can avoid head injuries in falls, got warning labels placed on packages of tobacco products in hopes of getting people to think twice about smoking (vainly perhaps, but hopefully), got safety laws and regulations passed in the workplace to avoid on-the-job deaths and injuries (and are insisting against great resistance that they be enforced), object to unhealthy additives and preservatives being added to otherwise healthy foods, and. . . .    Need I go on?

All of these things may add a negligibly minuscule amount to the cost to various products, and mandate that business and industry be cognizant of certain fundamental humanitarian requirements for the health and safety of their employees. But when these laws and regulations are abided by, they do save lives and prevent injuries, and by doing so, are not only matters of oommon decency, but are found to be good for business and beneficial to the overall economy.

There are, of course, those who object to these laws and regulations, complaining that they are "needless government interference."

These exasperating people who think that avoidable deaths should indeed be avoided are sometimes call "crybaby liberals."

Have a nice day.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 02:52 PM

NY Times, January 27, 2003, John F. Burns:

"...Mr. Hussein's has been a tale of terror that scholars have compared to that of Stalin, whom the Iraqi leader is said to revere, even if his own brutalities have played out on a small scale. Stalin killed 20 million of his own people, historians have concluded. Even on a proportional basis, his crimes far surpass Mr. Hussein's, but figures of a million dead Iraqis, in war and through terror, may not be far from the mark, in a country of 22 million people."


Now back to TIAs words...

1 million over a 23 year rule averages about 120 per day, or about 3500 per month (and this includes casualties of the horrendously bloody Iran-Iraq war). Saddam was certainly a very bad man, but it seems the current situation is not vastly improved, if at all for most civilians.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 03:52 PM

I wonder what the results would have been had George H. W. Bush pushed on to Bagdad and removed Saddam Hussein as a follow-up to intervening in the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. A lot of people thought that's what the plan was, and would have been quite happy to see that happen.

But Saddam got only a slap on the wrist for that little gaff, because he was still Our Boy in the Middle East--despite his unpleasant tendency to slaughter his own people in substantial quantities.

If one thinks about it a little, it's not too difficult to see that there are a fair number of reasons why a lot of Middle Easterners are not overly fond of the U. S. and A.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 08:29 PM

There's no reason to think it wouldn't have been just about equally catastrophic, if not more so.

The difficulty didn't lie in getting to Baghdad and occupying it - it was in what to do afterwards.

Of course there would have been the difference that it wouldn't have been Dubya in the White House, and that is quite a difference. It's hard to imagine anyone else screwing things up quite so badly.

But if we imagine George Senior launching an illegal operation on that scale (without even the backing his son got from other countries), we are implicitly imagining that George Senior has been transformed into as impressive a figure as his son has turned out to be...

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 11:51 PM

I am aware that it undoubtedly would have been a mess, but at the time there was considerable international feeling that this is what Bush Senior should have done. Had he indeed done so, I think the United States would have had far more cooperation than George Junior's ill-advised junket got, and in some quarters at least, there would not have been the loss of prestige that the U. S. is now experiencing.

Among other things, the U. S. would be logically following up and removing an aggressive tyrant after he invaded one of his neighbors, not invading without provokation as the U. S. did this time.

I think there would have been a far greater willingness on the part of countries who applauded the move to help in cleaning up the mess.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 09:22 AM

Another thing is there probably still was an Iraqi chemical weapons capacity at that time.

In have a feeling that if Bush Seniorv had pushed on it would now be looked on as a catastrophic mistake, the consequences of which were still going on.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 03:17 PM

"Need I go on?" Got labeling on packaged foods that state: Remove from package before eating.

Caution: Hot beverages are hot!

Caution: Remove infant before folding for storage.

Caution: Do not iron clothes on body.

Caution: Do not use orally after using rectally.

Have a bodacious day.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 03:34 PM

Caution: Do not invade other countries.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 07:56 PM

All of which, Old Guy, seem to be called for because there are people out there who apparently need to be reminded of all these things.

(I almost went on to say that these people are called "Republican voters," which goes a long way to explaining the miserable state of the country these days, but . . . well . . . I decided that, even though true, it might be a little harsh to come right out and say.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:31 AM

Thus releiving people of being responsible for their own actions. Common sense and practicality is no longer a necessity in today's enlightened society. Everyone will be taken care of, baby sat or protected from themselves as required.

Have an boring day because no matter what you do, you will not have to bear the consequences.

"Just keep telling me about the good life, Elton, if you want a see me puke my lunch!"

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 05:16 PM

No, Old Guy, I won't have to pay higher insurance premiums if fewer people wind up going through the windshield because they didn't have brains enough to fasten their seat belts. And neither will you. It relieves you and me of the consequences of their bad judgment.

I know it's difficult, but try to think beyond your own narrow prejudices.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:14 PM

Furthermore, warning that "hot coffee is HOT," is not necessarily some "crybaby liberal" sponsored government regulation. It's to protect McDonalds' ass.

A lot of people have snorted derisively at the woman who sued McDonalds because she wound up with a lapful of scalding hot coffee and burned her legs. I have a little acquaintance with that phenomenon myself.

1. Some time ago (shortly before the infamous hot coffee lawsuit), my wife Barbara and I and a friend were returning to Seattle from Bellingham fairly late in the evening, and with about forty miles to go, we all felt in need of a snort of coffee. So we spotted a McDonalds I pulled up to the window and ordered three large coffees. After I had pulled into a parking spot, Nancy, sitting in the back seat, let out a yell. The bottom of her Styrofoam cup had dropped out and dumped its very hot contents in her lap—exactly what had happened to the woman who sued McDonalds. Nancy's legs got scalded pretty badly and she was pretty damned uncomfortable for the next week or so.   

2. Shortly thereafter, I dropped into a McDonalds to grab lunch (it isn't the healthiest thing I could eat, and I don't eat them that often, but I'm rather fond of the fillet-o-fish sandwich). I also ordered a large coffee. I had one of those pressed paper trays that drive-ins sometimes pass out to hold your drinks without spilling them, and I set the coffee cup into the depression on the tray (made for exactly that purpose), and drove to a nearby park to enjoy the pastoral scene, watch the squirrels, and eat my lunch. When I got to the park and reached for my coffee, I noticed that the passenger seat was soaking wet with coffee. The disk at the bottom of the cup had dropped out and dumped the contents on the seat.

I checked the cup and noticed that the disk that fit into the bottom of the cup was held in place only by a small flange, and when you flex the cup slightly (it's practically impossible to hold a Styrofoam cup without flexing it a bit), the disk can easily slip off the flange and spill its contents right out the bottom.

That's what happened to the woman who filed the law suit.

McDonalds admitted that they serve their coffee much hotter than most restaurants and drive-ins, which increases the probability of being scalded when the coffee dumps while you're waiting for it to cool down to a drinkable temperature. As a result of "that stupid woman's frivolous law-suit," McDonalds now serves their coffee at a more drinkable temperature (but still good and hot) and they've done something about their Styrofoam cups so the bottom won't drop out.

They also warn their patrons that (although not as quick off the boil as it used to be) the coffee is still hot. A lot of other restaurants and drive-ins followed suit in an effort to reduce their liability.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:16 PM

The moral of that story is that one should know the reason behind certain things before popping off and revealing one's ignorance.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:31 PM

Ironing clothes on the body can sometimes be quite a handy thing to do, when done sensibly.

But isn't this rather drifting? In a thread about the best part of a million people being killed as a result of decisions taken by our governments, which have never been admitted as mistakes.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 07:52 PM

Dang, I never had that kind of trouble with a cup of coffee.

Do you think we should outlaw hot coffee because it is too dangerous?

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:08 PM

It may be an urban legend but I heard that some guy thought he saw 666 on his hand so he cut it off with a circular saw. She was taken to a hospital with his hand. They wanted to re attach his hand but he would not let them do it. The doctor contacted a judge and was told he could not re attach the hand against the guy's wishes.

Later on he sued the hospital for not re attaching his hand.

Now what kind of a hand mounted warning label do we need to cover that possibility?

Don't cut off your hand?

Re attach all severed hands whether the patient agrees or not?

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:22 PM

In most states there are warrents that can be issued against folks who wish to harm themselves... Someone dropped the ball on 666...

When I was a social worker in Virginia it was called a "Green Warrent" and there were times when I had to call a judge and get one aginst someone so messed up that they were about to hurt themsellves or someone else...

Like I said, someone dropped the ball at the hospital as most hosiptals have social workers that deal with these kinds of situations...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:41 PM

Well the Guy had already hurt himself. Should somebody have made a warning label to keep this from happening?

Maybe on the saw: Warning. Do not use this saw to amputate bodily extremities because the Hospital might screw up and not re-attach them when you tell them not to.

After all, there are people that need to be reminded of all these things.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 mon
From: Old Guy
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 08:48 PM

How come tobacco is not outlawed? Could it be that our lawmakers are taking money from the tobacco lobby?

I would say that results in over a thousand per day people dying as a result of decisions taken by our governments, which have never been admitted as mistakes.

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Nov 06 - 12:48 AM

Of course!

Old Guy, I have to believe that you're some kind of comedian, because nobody can really be that big of a twit.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Iraq War Casualties - 2,660 civilians in 1 month
From: Cruiser
Date: 16 Jan 07 - 11:16 AM

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

U.N.: 34,352 Iraqi civilians killed in '06


"BAGHDAD, Jan. 16 (UPI) -- The United Nations said Tuesday 34,452 Iraqi civilians were killed by violence in Iraq in 2006, three times as many as reported by Iraq's Interior Ministry.

Human rights envoy Gianni Magazzeni also said in his report more than 36,000 people were injured in the fighting, largely between Sunni and Shiite Muslim militants.

Magazzeni said the figures were compiled from data collected by the Health Ministry, hospitals, mortuaries and other agencies, the BBC reported.

The Iraqi government's official death toll for 2006 was 12,320. Baghdad officials have routinely criticized independent groups' various death and injury tolls as exaggerated, the report said. There was no immediate government response to the U.N. report."