Search

Add to that the 1345 from Afghanistan and the 1,339,771 Iraqi citizens who died.

LMAO! Hey Able, some crystal ball you have there buddy. That figure your spouting off concerning Iraqi casualities is total BS and you know it. Sorry but your credibility is down to nil with me now as it's obvious your a total shil for certain fringe elements who spout creative propaganda. Oh... and before you attempt insulting me as you seem to love doing when someone corrects you, I detest the previous administration more than I do the current one and believe we never should have set foot into Iraq.

The Brits have been seriously under reporting thier casualties in Helmland province by the way. Total sludge storm is brewing for the MOD over there which will add further fuel to the fire to remove labour from power.

'LMAO! Hey Able, some crystal ball you have there buddy.'

No, just facts.

'That figure your spouting off concerning Iraqi casualities is total BS and you know it. Sorry but your credibility is down to nil with me now as it's obvious your a total shil for certain fringe elements who spout creative propaganda.'

I see, so my actual facts and figures that can be found from a myriad of respected organizations are some how so flawed, that you are unable to respect them in any fundamental way? Interesting.

Interesting how, for example the Lancet survey (one of the oldest peer-reviewed medical journals in the world) estimated 654,965 deaths through 2006. This does not include suspicious deaths, or deaths calculated from Mid-2006 to the present time.

You can disagree with the numbers all you wish, but when the majority of those reporting deaths put numbers in excess of between 600,000 and 1.2 million, your efforts are all for naught.

'Oh... and before you attempt insulting me as you seem to love doing when someone corrects you'

Since when do I insult people? Many on here, for whom I even disagree with, vouched that I give factual information and present them in sysinct ways. Perhaps you confuse me with Todd?

'I detest the previous administration more than I do the current one and believe we never should have set foot into Iraq.'

Good. I wasn't going to bring up a previous administration, for I only do when there is reason to justify it. Such as in comparing individuals through the scope of history.

So I must say, for an individual who wishes to criticize me for my thoroughly researched material, you seem to have me confused with someone else. Perhaps you just started reading this blog? I have no reason to treat you any different than another human being.

'The Brits have been seriously under reporting thier casualties in Helmland province by the way. Total sludge storm is brewing for the MOD over there which will add further fuel to the fire to remove labour from power.'

That is fine, even though the British no longer patrol within the borders of Iraq as of July 28th of this year.

As far as the Iraqi & Afghanistan deaths go..they kill for sport there......even if there were NO American presence in those regions the civilian death toll will be near the same.........

To many killings because of religious and idealology beliefs..it "what they do"........

I use to think those who sacrificed for our country in the WOT were doing so in the American spirit until Obama and his left wing leftests took over. Now I think their sacrifices is an utter waste because the left winger are at the controls and it will be in vein.
I would not want to be in the military, CIA, NSA or FBI these days. I think the terrorist are going to win......

I say screw Iraq and Afghanistan - bring our troops home !

The Iraqi's can take care of themselves now after all we did for them - Ungreatful scumbags.....

Afghanistan is just a rockpile of a wasteland - We should buy the opium directly from the farmers then destroy it at the source. - This solves multiple problems in one shot at the lowest cost.

Able,

I know exactly where your figure came from and it's a sham. The Lancet survey was a total farce. The whole thing was conducted through 3rd party unchecked hirelings who called morgues and hospitals in major cities then a formula was used to calculate "casulaties" across the rest of nation based on what they were told... even in places which had no sectarian violence at all. More often than not was severely inflated for political or propaganda purposes by the morgue/hospital staff (quite likely under duress in many places.) In many cases the facility simply reported their total numbers for the time period in question... including natural death. The resulting number is so astronomical it's absurd and totally unrealistic.

Far as your method of belittling opposing voices, it's something I have seen you do time and again... perhaps you aren't aware you do so... we are in CT where the local dialect is sarcasm.

Helmland province is in Afghanistan by the way... it's the region under UK control we have been conducting the latest operation in. The ministry of defense just booted Michael Yahn out of there for not towing their official line for example. The under reporting has quite a few Brit squaddies angry at their leadership and certainly will have an impact on the upcomming election there.

'I use to think those who sacrificed for our country in the WOT were doing so in the American spirit until Obama and his left wing leftests took over. Now I think their sacrifices is an utter waste because the left winger are at the controls and it will be in vein.'

So invading Iraq was a noble idea until Obama took over, and then invading Iraq and Afghanistan became something less than noble? Your logic makes no sense. Under either administration, good Americans and Iraqi's/Afghans died for no cause worth justifying.

We invaded Afghanistan yet the hijackers were Saudi's. Then we 'took out' the Taliban yet they posed no threat to us, espoused no anti-American hatred and simply lived in the same nation as members of Al Qaeda. We also live in a nation where Al Qaeda was, does that mean we should have civil insurrection and invade ourselves?

'The Iraqi's can take care of themselves now after all we did for them - Ungreatful scumbags.....'

Ah, like taking over their nation illegally and then instead of restoring order, power and water we guarded oil wells? Hmm, one can wonder why they'd be ungrateful.

'Afghanistan is just a rockpile of a wasteland - We should buy the opium directly from the farmers then destroy it at the source. - This solves multiple problems in one shot at the lowest cost.'

We already protect the poppy fields more than we do the innocent civilians who live in the 'rock pile' you despise so much. There are people who are content with living there, that is why they have for thousands of years, they're one of the most cherished cultures in recorded history, yet because they live on a 'pile of rocks' they're somehow uncivilized and need to be destroyed. Hmm, Native Americans were supposed to be destroyed for their lack of faith in Jesus too.

'I know exactly where your figure came from and it's a sham. The Lancet survey was a total farce.'

In case you cannot read, I referenced ONE of MANY different organizations, not merely one. No totals, other than one has the death toll any lower than 150,000 civilians within the first three years. Also, the Lancet survey has a reputation of being able to present 92% of death certificates for the recorded cases. The other 8% come from coroner reports and autopsy results.

They have people working on the ground within Iraq, who go TO the morgues after violence has broken out in order to ensure that accurate war deaths are calculated. Perhaps you're just unable to figure that out from your Wikipedia articles.

'Far as your method of belittling opposing voices, it's something I have seen you do time and again... perhaps you aren't aware you do so... we are in CT where the local dialect is sarcasm.'

Ah, so now I went from insulting you to belittling you? Are you unable to take sarcasm, is your ego so damaged by years of abuse that sarcasm destroys you? If so, you're in the wrong world my friend, the wrong world.

We guarded thier oil wells because its the only damn thing that that country can count on to support its damn self........

The terroists knew it...thats why the terroists blew up some pipelines and storage facilities....


OIL IS thats country's lifes blood, whetether WE buy it or some other oil hungry nation......

'We guarded thier oil wells because its the only damn thing that that country can count on to support its damn self........'

So you invade 'thier' country, and instead of protecting the citizens, for which Bush told us we were there, we protect our oil interests? I see. I enjoy how it is 'thier' only way to support themselves, but they need the 'help' of foreign oil companies to run them.

Giving no-bid contracts to Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP under the supervision of hand picked Council of Representatives members voted for them to be there.

'The terroists knew it...thats why the terroists blew up some pipelines and storage facilities....'

Why wouldn't 'terrorists' blow up the oil fields? They know that the main interest in Iraq was oil for the American and foreign occupying forces? It is the one line of defense they had that would account to billions of lost dollars for executives.

'OIL IS thats country's lifes blood, whetether WE buy it or some other oil hungry nation......'

It is their one many asset, so at least we agree that the invasion was based on controlling 'thier' oil so that it could be flooded into the American and foreign markets.

Not really Able..the terroists goal there isnt just to get the US out it is to control whatever government governs Iraq.........and that means conroling the oil so not even the Iraq's have control thier own destiny..........

Right now on the "crude oil food chain list" Iraq is MAYBE 5th or 6th on a list of around 11 or 12 nations we get out imported oil from..NOT a big player in the gluttony of this nation

For all I care they can blow up those countries and bring our people home. Oh i forgot we are being governed by Liberals who don't care about our country.

'For all I care they can blow up those countries and bring our people home. Oh i forgot we are being governed by Liberals who don't care about our country.'

You're being governed by a corporate entity, not anyone of the left. In the same way that when Republicans were in power you were ruled by corporate entities. You made no logical statement.

The majority of the left oppose these wars on many justified grounds, and still oppose Obama for wishing to continue to fight them. So I'd like for you the further explain your point, because it truly makes no sense.


'Right now on the "crude oil food chain list" Iraq is MAYBE 5th or 6th on a list of around 11 or 12 nations we get out imported oil from..NOT a big player in the gluttony of this nation'

They also are the key to gaining oil imports that will not be threatened. If one were to look at the nations listed before Iraq they would see that other than Canada (for which the majority of oil comes from tar sands), they are unstable nations.

Angola, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Venezuela. Now, wouldn't it make sense for the United States to obtain oil wells in a country they can control, or hope to control? Such is the case in Iraq. They currently have 115,000,000,000 barrels in reserves putting them fourth behind Iran, Canada and Saudi Arabia. Currently they lack the proper infrastructure to export the amount needed/wanted by the open market and that is why the 2007 Oil Law was rushed into the Iraqi Parliament.

'Not really Able..the terroists goal there isnt just to get the US out it is to control whatever government governs Iraq'

I see. So were there terrorist in Iraq before hand? Or do you still believe the already debunked lie?

SAddam Hussain had an iron fist in that country, he controlled whatever he wanted to control...to think that there wasnt a training camp or 2 in that country is being naive...Saddam would have never gave up his power without a fight to even Al Qaida, doesnt keep him from not harboring them, just like Syria....NO the terroist groups didnt have a "hand" there BUT that doesnt mean it wasnt part of a plan they may have ...the overthrow of the Hussain regime gave them & Iran PLENTY of opportunity, especially on the part of this country's mishandling of that country in the beginning...


I worked in the oil industry in the mid 70's to the early 80's...with the present rate of oil consumption on this pathetic planet, lead by this country, it is VERY safe to say by 2050 or 2060 oil will ALMOST be a memory, the Middle East and country's like Mexico have big declines in there oil reseves.......thats REALLY isnt far from now....there will ALWAYS be traces of it but not enough to sustain this planets appetite for it..........right now oil is HUGE bargining chip, but it soon wont be............

LMAO! Alrighty then Able.

"Also, the Lancet survey has a reputation of being able to present 92% of death certificates for the recorded cases. The other 8% come from coroner reports and autopsy results"

Yeah... right... they make claims of such but the sad truth is that Iraq did not have such a good system of paperwork. Think for a moment and don't try to strain yourself... that 1.3 million figure is on par with Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge's worst and amounts to thousands of killed every day for the period in question. Total bull twinkies... on the worst days during the heaviest periods of violence no more than a couple hundred died in a single 24 hour period... and most of them were killed by their neighbors in tribal squabbles.

Aside from the decision to go into Iraq from the get go... the worst failing was Rumsfeld's asinine idea that we could invade a country, depose it's leadership, disband it's military, and not have to actually occupy. If we had done what we did back in 1945 there would have been no breakdown of society.

Instead our troopies were ordered into force protection mode for three months during which looting and tribal violence got to the point that folks had to form militias to protect their property and families. Add Iran's meddling to the mix and it was a surefire recipe for a disaster.

Now that we are actually doing the right thing there the level of violence is so low that mortality rates are lower than they were under Saddam. It's too bad that the sane voices of people like Petraeus were silenced by the doorknobs during the early part... might of made a huge differance in how things turned out.

'SAddam Hussain had an iron fist in that country, he controlled whatever he wanted to control...to think that there wasnt a training camp or 2 in that country is being naive.'

Actually its truthful, as there were no known training facilities within Iraq, and only one article by the highly slanted Weekly Standard makes a flaccid argument at best that there were, with limited factual analysis to back up their flimsy argument. To not believe facts is naive.

'Saddam would have never gave up his power without a fight to even Al Qaida, doesnt keep him from not harboring them, just like Syria'

Iraq was a mostly secularist country, as Saddam chose to rule in such a way. So explain why an already paranoid dictator would knowingly allow RELIGIOUS freedom fighters to live and train within his borders? Do I believe it was possible for members of said group to have traveled to Iraq, surely, but to train? No evidence has even been reported.

Slobodan Milošević didn't want to give up his power either, but with a valid coalition he was deposed.

'NO the terroist groups didnt have a "hand" there BUT that doesnt mean it wasnt part of a plan they may have'

They also could of had plans to open a Dairy Queen.

'the overthrow of the Hussain regime gave them & Iran PLENTY of opportunity, especially on the part of this country's mishandling of that country in the beginning'

Yes, the United States along with its minimalist cohorts gave the chance for there to be more terrorist within the Iraqi borders because the troops did not create valid infrastructure after the invasion. Only months post-invasion did terrorist cells begin appearing within the borders.

'I worked in the oil industry in the mid 70's to the early 80's...with the present rate of oil consumption on this pathetic planet, lead by this country, it is VERY safe to say by 2050 or 2060 oil will ALMOST be a memory'

That is a very conservative estimate, the oil supply within Canada will surely be gone by then for the majority of it comes from tar sands which are completely unreliable and hard to extract oil from. The United States itself has limited oil reserves, even untapped potential.

I hope for the day when oil is off the table, for it is a resource that has created as much violence and destruction as religion.













'Now that we are actually doing the right thing there the level of violence is so low that mortality rates are lower than they were under Saddam.'

Let us see, so the fact that violence is still occurring in a slightly upward tract is completely ignorable? We've done nothing right when it comes to Invasion of Iraq. All indications are that people lived much better lives while under Saddam, than they do now under the U.S. backed military junta we call the Iraqi Parliament. We gave them no freedom, we gave them bloodshed and violence.

'It's too bad that the sane voices of people like Petraeus were silenced by the doorknobs during the early part... might of made a huge differance in how things turned out.'

I would say listening to the United Nations Security Council about weapons of mass destruction and the lack of any would have made an even more important difference.

'Aside from the decision to go into Iraq from the get go... the worst failing was Rumsfeld's asinine idea that we could invade a country, depose it's leadership, disband it's military, and not have to actually occupy. If we had done what we did back in 1945 there would have been no breakdown of society.'

Yes, but we instead went in and secured oil wells instead of providing infrastructure. Most of Iraq is still without proper water or electricity, putting them in a worse position for the wear.

'Instead our troopies were ordered into force protection mode for three months during which looting and tribal violence got to the point that folks had to form militias to protect their property and families. Add Iran's meddling to the mix and it was a surefire recipe for a disaster.'

There has never been valid proof of Iran 'meddling' in anything. It was another lie in order to expand T.W.A.T. into another nation with oil reserves for our nation to pounce upon.

'Yeah... right... they make claims of such but the sad truth is that Iraq did not have such a good system of paperwork.'

So you're saying Iraqi's somehow do not understand a system of paperwork, their doctors are somehow less prepared and are systematically incapable? Interesting. Especially when a large majority of those who issued the death certificates were from other countries, a vast majority were foreign aid workers.

Under Saddam there were anywhere from 800,000-1,000,000 reported deaths not factoring in the Iraq-Iran war. Those numbers rival the amount dead within six years of a needless war.

Hmm 24 years.. 1,000,000 dead... 6 years.. 1,000,000 dead. Someone should do the math on this, we may have found something!

' Think for a moment and don't try to strain yourself... that 1.3 million figure is on par with Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge's worst and amounts to thousands of killed every day for the period in question. Total bull twinkies...'

Yes, and the Khmer Rouge were also in power for thirty years, as opposed to the six years it took to create 1,000,000 needless deaths in Iraq. In Cambodia a large portion of the deaths were due to starvation, in most conservative estimates 400,000-500,000. Also, their government attempted to resemble that of a working Communist government, where as in Iraq lawless still reigns.

You may not wish to accept that Americans are behind the senseless violence due to some sort of jingoistic servitude, but numbers cannot be denied and neither will history.

It is also interesting how in Rwanda close to 1,000,000 people died within 100 days. So, to deny that it is implausible is to deny the existence of an already plausible case.

Shocking and Awefull!
Can`t we wait until our shores are invaded or our borders?
I think the Navy and the Coast Guard can watch our shores and the Air force can watch the skys.
The National Guards Marines and the Army will greet any invaders.
Thats not our turf overseas,it`s extra danger.
Why put our "trained" soldiers in harms way after all we put into them in training to be killed, some in a week.
I say we save em all until the day someone has the audasity to come over here and we have all our trained soldiers still alive because we didn`t send them away to get killed and we rush them all at once.
~Peace Glenna~