bush and the coalition has killed more people than saddam hussein.

Source?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

the bible

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

peace.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/IraqBodyCount2006.htm

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It doesn't say that saddam killed 1.5 million.

 

that site suggests that the war is killing nobody and all the iraqi civilians are bieng killed by terrorists,

has baron max been reading this with you at bible camp?

peace.

 

You're right. It's more like 2 million.

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein.html

 

are you sure its not 5 billion?


peace.

 

You can read?

iranians are not iraqis. I know you extreme right wing racists have trouble distinguishing between them, but still.


He can't take all the credit for all those kills of course. The USA helped him.

 

One usually blames the invaders for destabilising an infrastructure they are incapable of maintaining or sustaining.

Especially when it is deliberate:

Sources:

The New Yorker, December 2005
Title: "Up in the Air"
Author: Seymour M. Hersh

Tomdispatch, December 2005
Title: "An Increasingly Aerial Occupation"
Author: Dahr Jamail

 

Also:

 

I have yet to see a reference to physical evidence, graves or prison cemetaries or the like, of Saddam killing more than 20,000 - 50,000 Iraqi "civilians" total over his 30 year rule.

That includes the women and children killed in his campaigns against the Kurdish revolt, and the various Shia rebellions and resistances.

Not to say he didn't kill more, and there has simply been no evidence found or presented of that, or I missed the presentation,

and not to say that 50,000 (assuming the high number) is a small number. He was a brutal, monstrous tyrant.

But the US killed that many Iraqi civilians in the first few months of invasion, one way and another.

IIRC in the agitprop campaign it started out around 250, 000, and went through 500, 000 and 800,000, dropped back to 600,000, then jumped over a million just before invasion, and has stayed over a million since. It's an interesting number to track.

 

Who cares if Saddam was an evil character? It doesnt give anyone the right to invade a whole country and kill people, not to mention the questionable resources and Oil that can be obtained after the US deals with Iraq "democratically".

And besides this whole thing, what do you guys think about whats going to happen about Iran after Iraq?? You can see the whole political BS in this whole situation.

Go to war, visit other countries, meet interesting people, and kill them...

 

Do they really? Or do they decry it only when the west becomes involved... after all, the west is supposed to set an example for the world, are they not?
What does this attitude toward the west tell you, Sam? Who in the world are seen as responsible adults, and lambasted when they do not act as such?
And who are viewed as children, incapable of rational judgement and the ability to solve their own issues?

Have a look at this poster above me, as another example.
As I said, it's an interesting kind of racism. If Iraqis are killing each other in their thousands, little is said. Plenty is said, though, when a basically white, western European power intervenes. At this point, it becomes an issue.
I'm quite willing to bet that if the coalition had not invaded Iraq, Saddam could have gone on killing until he perished from old age, and his sons for many years beyond that... and there would not have been a single post on this board about his regime.

I have yet to see anywhere near the same volume of threads or dedication to peace devoted to, for example, Zimbabwe, or the Congo.
Where are you, you humanitarian posters? What do you have to say about that?

...Nothing. America isn't involved in that.
It's only blacks killing blacks. Or Arabs killing blacks. Nothing to be overly concerned with.... it's only white wars you're interested in.

 

You can't quite call a war the US is in a "white" war, can you?

Right now, in Iraq, it's blacks killing Arabs, at least to an extent.

And before, when it was Iraqis dying from sanctions, it was lefty do-gooders who tried to get some attention. Indonesians killing Timorese? Lefty do-gooders trying to get the US to quite backing the bad guys.

As far as the Congo wars, Liberia and Nigeria and all that, you'll find a lot about them in the lefty press. It jsut doesn't get into the major media. Rwanda was called, predicted, by liberal do-gooders running government studies programs in midwestern universities -

hard to get anyone to pay attention to liberal do-gooders, though.

Personally, I'm interested in my own country's wars first. Priorities. If we weren't occupying Iraq, I'd have more time for Zimbabwe's troubles - and our role in them.

 

The problem is the white supremacist power structure in America today which serves as the support base for the acts of violence which puts Republicans like Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld in power who inturn invent lies and engage in complete hypocrisy to initiate wars in the Middle East.

 

Actually it has been shown that black people are smarter than poor white trash and mostly pick assignments that keep them away from the frontline. Poor white americans are the ones doing the major part of the killing.

 

WOW....EVEN smarter than blacks

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Or more correctly, the media is interested in the U.S as the Aboriginal injustice received far less attention than it should have in Australia.
However you are correct that there is alot more attention on the affairs of the West, that is more because what the West does usually affects the rest of the world and what Iraq or Iran does may not affect anyone else in the region, much less the rest of the world.

Since the main source of information is the media, naturally people will hear more about the west than any other group of nations.

 

Right.
So what you're telling me here is that you haven't made a single post concerning Africa because you didn't know about it.
You're telling me that all the regulars on this forum have no idea what is going on over there because there hasn't been enough media coverage... that is why they haven't posted anything? Have I got it right?

You're telling me that a war in the middle east would be unimportant and largely ignored because it doesn't affect the rest of the world, but if the USA becomes involved, it suddenly does.
In other words, you're not overly concerned with people dying. You're concerned with people dying at the hands of Americans.
Explain that.

Not a single one of you has grasped the notion that you all expect the West to "help" the middle east, or Africa, rather than assuming that they might help themselves. You do see them as inferior. And not a single one of you would ever admit it. Not a single one of you even realises it.
Waste of time.

*Edit - if you seriously believe Aboriginal injustice has not had adequate attention in Australia, then you need to open your eyes a little more. Perhaps you should go out and talk to some of them.

 

I think its more to do with the fact that there are very few Africans on this forum.