600,000 Dead Civilians, financed by me and you

my2hands

i am responsible for the financing of 600,000 dead civilians. makes me feel real good about my government, and my federal taxes. even if we dont support the war, we are all supporting it financially. how does that make you feel?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2396031.ece

British Backtrack on Iraq Death Toll
By Jill Lawless
The Independent UK

Tuesday 27 March 2007

British government officials have backed the methods used by scientists who concluded that more than 600,000 Iraqis have been killed since the invasion, the BBC reported yesterday.

The Government publicly rejected the findings, published in The Lancet in October. But the BBC said documents obtained under freedom of information legislation showed advisers concluded that the much-criticised study had used sound methods.

The study, conducted by researchers from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and the Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, estimated that 655,000 more Iraqis had died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. The study estimated that 601,027 of those deaths were from violence.

The researchers, reflecting the inherent uncertainties in such extrapolations, said they were 95 per cent certain that the real number of deaths lay somewhere between 392,979 and 942,636.

The conclusion, based on interviews and not a body count, was disputed by some experts, and rejected by the US and British governments. But the chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, Roy Anderson, described the methods used in the study as "robust" and "close to best practice". Another official said it was "a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones".

soulsinging

good riddance.

my2hands

soulsinging wrote:

good riddance.

thats not even fucking funny dickhead

soulsinging

my2hands wrote:

thats not even fucking funny dickhead

it is if you're mother nature. we're a scourge on this planet. and we've always slaughtered each other. if it wasnt us killing 600,000 iraqis it would be someone else killing 600,000 other people. im so tired of hearing about iraq. we fucked up, we're there, and we can't take it back. let it go.

my2hands

soulsinging wrote:

it is if you're mother nature. we're a scourge on this planet. and we've always slaughtered each other. if it wasnt us killing 600,000 iraqis it would be someone else killing 600,000 other people. im so tired of hearing about iraq. we fucked up, we're there, and we can't take it back. let it go.

then why dont you do the planet a favor and remove one more scourge? or maybe the scourge is your mother, grandmother, brother, sister?

i wonder if you would joke if it was your mother that had her head blown off, and was dismissed as "collateral damage"?

i bet it wouldnt be a fucking joke then, now would it?

josevolution

soulsinging wrote:

it is if you're mother nature. we're a scourge on this planet. and we've always slaughtered each other. if it wasnt us killing 600,000 iraqis it would be someone else killing 600,000 other people. im so tired of hearing about iraq. we fucked up, we're there, and we can't take it back. let it go.

so you are implying that if the US didn't invade IRAQ 600,000civilians would of perished anyway ,some how that logic does not make sense to me ..

jeffbr

We didn't kill 600,000 people, nor did we finance the killing of 600,000 iraqis.

jeffbr

josevolution wrote:

so you are implying that if the US didn't invade IRAQ 600,000civilians would of perished anyway ,some how that logic does not make sense to me ..

I'm pretty sure a few Iraqis were killed under Saddam's reign before we got there. Correct me if I'm wrong.

chromiam

did you finance insurgents and other terrorists who make IEDs and other bombs??? cause I sure didn't....

soulsinging

my2hands wrote:

then why dont you do the planet a favor and remove one more scourge? or maybe the scourge is your mother, grandmother, brother, sister?

i wonder if you would joke if it was your mother that had her head blown off, and was dismissed as "collateral damage"?

i bet it wouldnt be a fucking joke then, now would it?

im a pretty cold-hearted person. death has never seemed like a very big deal to me.

soulsinging

josevolution wrote:

so you are implying that if the US didn't invade IRAQ 600,000civilians would of perished anyway ,some how that logic does not make sense to me ..

yes. somewhere. they would have died of starvation or disease. they die every day, all over the planet. we've sped it up a bit perhaps and made ourselves culpable for some of the death, which is shameful. but we did it, and i dont see a point in continuously dwelling on it or flogging ourselves for it like medieval self-hating and guilt-ridden catholics. learn from it and move on. making 1900 threads on the pearl jam msg pit about it is not going to alter future policy or bring back the dead people.

my2hands

soulsinging wrote:

im a pretty cold-hearted person. death has never seemed like a very big deal to me.

sorry to hear that

soulsinging

my2hands wrote:

sorry to hear that

dont apologize, you didnt offend me.

josevolution

jeffbr wrote:

I'm pretty sure a few Iraqis were killed under Saddam's reign before we got there. Correct me if I'm wrong.

correct on that ......

my2hands

chromiam wrote:

did you finance insurgents and other terrorists who make IEDs and other bombs??? cause I sure didn't....

this study takes into account deaths that have resulted because of the invasion.


i find it funny that after we invade, destroy the fucking place, and slaughter everything in sight (see "shock and awe") we start to blame others for the mess and death toll. nice try chrom, it doesnt fly with me.

my2hands

soulsinging wrote:

im a pretty cold-hearted person. death has never seemed like a very big deal to me.

until it is someone you know i assume? it is easy to dismiss death if it doesnt affect you personaly.

my2hands

jeffbr wrote:

We didn't kill 600,000 people, nor did we finance the killing of 600,000 iraqis.

whatever helps you sleep at night...

it is a fact that the 600,000 dead are a direct result of the invasion and 4 year war. dont kid yourself.

josevolution

soulsinging wrote:

yes. somewhere. they would have died of starvation or disease. they die every day, all over the planet. we've sped it up a bit perhaps and made ourselves culpable for some of the death, which is shameful. but we did it, and i dont see a point in continuously dwelling on it or flogging ourselves for it like medieval self-hating and guilt-ridden catholics. learn from it and move on. making 1900 threads on the pearl jam msg pit about it is not going to alter future policy or bring back the dead people.

at least you acknowledege the fact that it was perhaps one of the worst decisions to have been made by any president in our history ,do you think BUSH will ever fess up to his mistakes ??

cincybearcat

my2hands wrote:

i am responsible for the financing of 600,000 dead civilians. makes me feel real good about my government, and my federal taxes. even if we dont support the war, we are all supporting it financially. how does that make you feel?

Well, honestly, it makes me feel embarassed, upset, apologetic and pissed off all at once for several different reasons.

jeffbr

my2hands wrote:

whatever helps you sleep at night...

it is a fact that the 600,000 dead are a direct result of the invasion and 4 year war. dont kid yourself.

Plenty of others dispute the study. Don't kid yourself. You've built a reputation of doom and gloom. I know it helps you get through the day having something to feel shitty about.

I've never been a proponent of the war, I hate that we're there, and I wish we'd get the hell out tomorrow. But 655,000 since the invasion doesn't equal 655,000 because of the invasion.

my2hands

cincybearcat wrote:

Well, honestly, it makes me feel embarassed, upset, apologetic and pissed off all at once for several different reasons.

me too, good way to put it.