America has now killed more Iraqi civilians than Saddam

[lew]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

The US probably also killed more Japanese than did the Japanese regime. So what's the point?

Maybe that Japan attacked us and Iraq didn't?

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I don't think you can blame the US when they are killing themselves. They do this around the world every day. Is that our fault as well?

If it helps prove their point, of course it's our fault.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by lew

Maybe that Japan attacked us and Iraq didn't?

No matter how it started, we are still at war.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Is that a result of US attacks or attacks by their own people (aka insurgents, terrorists, militias, etc.)

I don't think you can blame the US when they are killing themselves. They do this around the world every day. Is that our fault as well?

Did you even read it?

The Lancet study, funded largely by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for International Studies, said while the percentage of deaths attributed to the U.S.-led coalition has decreased over the past year, coalition forces were involved in 31% of all violent deaths since March 2003. Most of the deaths in Iraq, particularly in the past two years, have been caused by insurgent, terrorist and sectarian violence.

They aren't saying the US is responsible for every death.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by smokie700

So now america is the cause of every death in Iraq? I guess when the terrorists or insurgents kill people the death is chalked up to America.

Thats exactly what I was thinking. It is the insurgents that are doing most of the killing and I honestly find that number extremely hard to believe.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Thats exactly what I was thinking. It is the insurgents that are doing most of the killing

It says the same thing right in the article.

This study doesn't say "USA has killed 600K Iraqis".

[6SpeedTA95]

Yes and the thread title specifically says AMERICA, which would be wrong.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

Seeing as how the study hasn't released the specifics on their methodology (simply saying such useful gems as, "This is a standard methodology that the U.S. government and others have encouraged groups to use in developing countries," which means absolutely nothing to me), I see no reason to believe any one particular figure over another.

You can believe Bush when he says 30K, or you can believe Burnham when he says 600K, or anything in between.

you can believe bush? thats a good one

[Thorgrim]

Every reason we had for going there has been refuted solidly, I honestly don't see the point in getting into the numbers debate right now because history will surely judge that less people died in 2000-Mar2003 than Mar2003-2006, and it won't even be close

[thomez]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Yes and the thread title specifically says AMERICA, which would be wrong.

read post #6

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Did you even read it?

They aren't saying the US is responsible for every death.

So what's the big deal then?

[smokie700]

that is if you think the 600,000 is even an accurate number.

(in response to thomez's post)

[thomez]

Originally Posted by smokie700

that is if you think the 600,000 is even an accurate number.

(in response to thomez's post)

I understand that, but I was trying to help him clarify. They are not saying America killed 600k, rather 180k,, which is still > Saddam levels.

I don't know if I can believe that or not, there is no way for me to know really

[ballz2wallz]

A good point made:

One question for Lancet, though. If 600,000 people have been killed, where are all the bodies?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

A good point made:

buried, Iraqis don't have a set custom of taking a body and reporting it to the morgue, because they have to give personal information that always leaks to militia groups that are dangerous

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

buried, Iraqis don't have a set custom of taking a body and reporting it to the morgue, because they have to give personal information that always leaks to militia groups that are dangerous

Hmm. I don't know if you've noticed a trend or not, but it doesn't seem that militias have a tendency to bury the dead. Instead, they throw them in the streets.

[smokie700]

Originally Posted by thomez

I understand that, but I was trying to help him clarify. They are not saying America killed 600k, rather 180k,, which is still > Saddam levels.

I don't know if I can believe that or not, there is no way for me to know really

agreed,

I see thread titles like this or even teh article and it just seems like politcal BS than trying to be a legit article. If the US had claimed to kill 600,000 fighters in iraq it still means that about 98% of that number were people trying to kill americans/iraqis. So therefore they deserved to die.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by smokie700

agreed,

I see thread titles like this or even teh article and it just seems like politcal BS than trying to be a legit article. If the US had claimed to kill 600,000 fighters in iraq it still means that about 98% of that number were people trying to kill americans/iraqis. So therefore they deserved to die.

You think 98% of the people killed in Iraq were "bad guys"?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Hmm. I don't know if you've noticed a trend or not, but it doesn't seem that militias have a tendency to bury the dead. Instead, they throw them in the streets.

i am talking about a sunni or shia family not going to the morgue because then the sunni/shia militias will get a list of their house address and obviously religious identification, making them ideal for an attack

[smokie700]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You think 98% of the people killed in Iraq were "bad guys"?

98% of the people killed by US troops.