Controlling Foreign Military

Actually i do admit i don’t know i have to take your word some official word from a government or someone else or some other number i find on the net

but i suppose there are factions in and out of Iraq that would like to inflate the casualty’s in the same way the u.s might want to say there were less

so where did you get the number and how do we test it can we test it?
There’s lots of lying effors in every corner the world not just Americans

 

Well most Americans do not care how many Iraqi women and children were massacred by their brave military.

So you will never know. You will certainly NEVER be told the truth.

 

95% or more of Iraqi casualties were still caused by sectarian violence, not American "shock and awe" operation. I don't expect you to call this sectarian violence responsible for all these deaths 'rather disgusting' though.

 

American soldiers didn't kill a single innocent civilian in Iraq. The innocents committed suicide.

 

Oh is that right?

So as the operation shock and awe bombs fell... the civilians all ran into the hospitals and schools and houses so that they could be killed?

 

It is very disgusting.. but not quite as disgusting as the bombing and invasion that allowed it all to happen in the first place

 

Hardly educated.

You did not know the definition of "carpet bombing".

 

While I am not a supporter of the Iraq war, do you seriously believe that American attacks on Saddam Husein's troops, the Republican Guard, government installations and military/terrorist targets are more disgusting that Sunni terror attacks on innocent Shia civilians and Shia terror attacks on innocent Sunni civilians?

 

i don’t like it much and i would accept the death of some so long as all actions were taken to reduce casualty’s . was for the war at the time was in high Scholl figured Saddam ( grr spellcheck you fail me ) was simply an evil bastard and that a nation would be better off without a dictator naive i guess. I can believe that was the case it doesn’t make sense to kill civilian on mass on purpose no one tried to kill everyone in the nation so why go out of the way to (*)(*)(*)(*) the population off with atrocity’s.

im not certain i will ever be told the truth but its worse then that even im not sure im being lied to by everyone either I might believe someone over others but I will never know even if im told the truth

 

No one is innocent in war time. Everyone is on one side or the other. If you try to stay in the middle both sides will try to kill you. And if you aren't helping one side then you are helping the other one.

 

War? what war was that then?

 

Huh? Those who try their best to avoid civilian casualties are innocent in war time even if they fail. Those who try their best to inflict as many civilian casualties as possible are guilty even if they fail. Only a complete idiot can seriously believe that the US has as a matter of policy tried to maximize civilian casualties. Only a naive ignorant moron can seriously doubt that Islamic terrorists (both Sunni and Shia) have as as matter of policy tried to maximize civilian casualties.

 

LOL,,, don't you mean "We drafted men for Vietnam"? No American servicemen were drafted in or from Vietnam.

Saying you drafted men in Vietnam means the men came from Vietnam.

BTW, if you want to refer to the geographical location of the Vietnam War, the Second Indochina War is a good reference.

 

Nope,, two entirely different bombing campaigns.

The bombing of Laos commenced in May of 1964, three months before the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Rolling Thunder commenced in March 1965.

 

Case is not closed.

Most of the deaths and casualties in Laos were civilians, around a million were killed or injured. The American bombardment killed more people than the Pathet Lao ever did. Also more people have been killed or injured since the war by UXO explosions that the Pathet Lao ever did. Something like 200 to 500 casualities yearly since 1973.

The Pathet Lao didn't go after civilian population as such, unless they had ties with America or the Royal Lao government. As the vast majority were subsitence farmers, something like 85%, they had no political ties.

 

Your nitpicking now lol

 

Your grasp of English is below par.

 

Nobody has the right to nuclear weapons. Stronger nations take them if they can.

The fact that you would ask the question "does a pathetic theocracy have the right to posess technology that can wipe out all life on earth" doesnt make you enlightened, it makes you a fool.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0"]Collateral Murder - Wikileaks - Iraq - YouTube[/ame]

This has been in the news lately. Have you not seen it? Looks like a pretty interesting form of suicide.

 

The Iraqis are a clever and interesting people.

 

pretty messed up. I've been against the invasion of Iraq the whole time.

 

Hmm. That wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that they have the power to hit back, would it? Bullies don't like being hit back. It hurts.

 

Resorting to semantic minutiae is no defence.

 

I found the following interesting:

This is from The Guardian regarding British Foreign Office de-classified documents, released in 1968;

'The Soviet Union had no intention of launching a military attack on the West at the height of the Cold War, British military and intelligence chiefs privately believed, in stark contrast to what Western politicians and military leaders were saying in public about the "Soviet threat".

"The Soviet Union will not deliberately start general war or even limited war in Europe," a briefing for the British Chiefs of Staff-marked Top Secret, UK Eyes Only, and headed The Threat: Soviet Aims and Intentions-declared in June 1968.

"Soviet foreign policy has been cautious and realistic", the department argued, and despite the Vietnam war, the Russians and their allies had "continued to make contacts in all fields with the West and to maintain a limited but increasing political dialogue with NATO powers".

Quoted from 'Rogue State', William Blum, Zed Books, London, 2006.

 

There are literally millions of Google references quoting figures of between 100,000 and 400,000 civilian deaths occurring as a direct result of Amercan bombing. Choose one.