3000 people died on 9/11. we killed 100,000+ civilians in Iraq. is that okay?

[BustedS13]

putting aside the "fuck em all die sand people die" mentality for a minute, is it acceptable for us to do 30 or more 9/11s on a country? if somebody pulled that shit here the rest of the planet would be glass.

edit: they're not directly related, but they're KINDA RELATED.

[lflkajfj12123]

you set yourself up for failure on this one

saddam hussein is #13 for the largest genocides in the 20th century (600-800k) and ran a totalitarian government compared to josef stalin (secret police, torture, murders, assassinations, destruction of food sources of rivals, etc.)

terrorism is actually not a real threat to us at all until these groups have rich state sponsors such as saddam, i think the message of- sponsor terrorists and we will come after you, is more than important even if we disregard saddams horrendous way of running a country. totalitarian governments don't respond to good intentions.

i know it may seem at times our government makes decisions at the flip of a coin and the media likes to exaggerate public opinion to the fullest but we wouldn't be the the largest superpower in the world if we didn't have the truly intelligent people (behind the scenes) that make these kind of decisions at the top.

so to answer your question, should we have made the decision before the war to use military force to destroy saddam husseins government in iraq?

YES x900000000 our civilian death count is small compared to saddam's and if you think about it if it wasn't for his government we wouldn't have had to intervene in the first place. you can tally our death count onto his in my opinion.

[ronmcdon]

Realistically I see Americans are going to care about effective media exposure more than anything else.
Lot more American lives get lost to cancer too (relative to 9/11), but do you see the media & public throw a large a commotion about that?
If more $ was put into cancer research rather than the war against terrah probably a lot more lives would have been saved and a lot less lost in the last 10 years (totally debate-able of course).
I'm just not convinced ppl take lives lost as serious thing unless it serves some profit/political agenda

Good luck with getting ppl to care about lives of foreigners, much less contemplate on whether it's acceptable.

[ZilviaKid]

Originally Posted by s0apgun

you set yourself up for failure on this one

saddam hussein is #13 for the largest genocides in the 20th century (600-800k) and ran a totalitarian government compared to josef stalin (secret police, torture, murders, assassinations, destruction of food sources of rivals, etc.)

was america #14?

[Walperstyle]

busted, a lot of those 100,000 casulaties are from the Iraqi army and IED explosions, and other forces combined.

I'd put $100 that the majority were killed by other Iraqi's then allies.

[lflkajfj12123]

Originally Posted by ZilviaKid

was america #14?

ah~ha

hate on. canada is a derivative of the united states success. without the united states superpower and robust economy, your economy would fall apart. you can thank us for your survival instead of interpreting us as the bringers of hell on earth. we buy 75% of your exports and you buy almost all our imports! we're responsible for your awesome standard of living that you probably have never thought twice about.

i know it must be hard for canada to sit on all its natural resources and never have to think about political or ethical decisions at large.

[LoneStarSilvia]

Originally Posted by Walperstyle

busted, a lot of those 100,000 casulaties are from the Iraqi army and IED explosions, and other forces combined.

I'd put $100 that the majority were killed by other Iraqi's then allies.

Agree with statement. American's aren't the ones running into market places and mosque's with bombs strapped to their bodies. Their civilians may not be as evil as predicted, but how can you differentiate when one of them can have enough explosives strapped to their back to take out a whole block?

Remember, it only takes one.


Plus, how is proven that American's alone have killed 100k civilians? I know they aren't over there lining them up and mowing them down.

[lflkajfj12123]

^ their radicals are as evil as predicted

[x3thelast]

silly if we REALLY wanted kill civilians we would have done so more efficiently. Easy as dropping more bombs on higher populated targets. Why we didnt do that? Because we are TIED down by the UN and have to follow the rules of engagement, do the other side follow that? NOPE. Ive done my tour there, i know first hand.

[ch1873857]

i cant believe what im reading. OP's ignorance makes me want to vomit.

[240guru]

Originally Posted by x3thelast

silly if we REALLY wanted kill civilians we would have done so more efficiently. Easy as dropping more bombs on higher populated targets. Why we didnt do that? Because we are TIED down by the UN and have to follow the rules of engagement, do the other side follow that? NOPE. Ive done my tour there, i know first hand.

What's your MOS? Combative? I doubt it, lol.

How about branch? Probably Navy, ghey.

[badbob2121]

This topic was destined to fail before it started.

If you dont understand the number difference in casualties, then maybe you should sign the contract and go find out why first hand instead of bitching about something you dont understand.

[x3thelast]

Originally Posted by 240guru

What's your MOS? Combative? I doubt it, lol.

How about branch? Probably Navy, ghey.

sorry war vet. Didn't know we had a modern warfare vet here. Have you served in a war zone before sir? Good job making this account just to say what you said. Btw if you forgot already the Seals are also in the NAVY. If that makes them "ghey" then by all means I need to end my 8 years of service.

[cc4usmc]

I know for a fact that a lot of civilians get themselves killed. We've been in that country for years but they act like they're completely oblivious to our presence.

I don't know how many times my life was in danger and because I DIDN'T follow SOP, civilians who are just plain dumb didn't die. Driving fucking blind is cool in Iraq.

[tqstarburst]

I love these type of threads.


Everyone gets all worked up. That's why i'd rather just stay quiet.

[ineedone]

Originally Posted by cc4usmc

I know for a fact that a lot of civilians get themselves killed. We've been in that country for years but they act like they're completely oblivious to our presence.

I don't know how many times my life was in danger and because I DIDN'T follow SOP, civilians who are just plain dumb didn't die. Driving fucking blind is cool in Iraq.

Not sure if this is still the case but as of a couple years ago only something like 5% of the Iraqi population had access to internet. If you were from one of the more remote areas doubt you would even knew white people existed.

From what I have heard, some Afghany tribes think the US military are just aliens from outer space flying around blowing shit up. Now imagine how scared to shit you would be if that was your world.

[cc4usmc]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Not sure if this is still the case but as of a couple years ago only something like 5% of the Iraqi population had access to internet. If you were from one of the more remote areas doubt you would even knew white people existed.

Damn, I never thought about that. What would this world come to without the Internet?

[codyace]

Originally Posted by BustedS13

putting aside the "fuck em all die sand people die" mentality for a minute, is it acceptable for us to do 30 or more 9/11s on a country? if somebody pulled that shit here the rest of the planet would be glass.

edit: they're not directly related, but they're KINDA RELATED.

An unwarented, unsolicited attack

vs

A known occupation, with NATO war rules, and a previously announced presence. We generally adopted the feeling of 'they know the game, so why do they push their luck'.

[codyace]

Originally Posted by ineedone

Not sure if this is still the case but as of a couple years ago only something like 5% of the Iraqi population had access to internet. If you were from one of the more remote areas doubt you would even knew white people existed.

A couple years ago I was in iraq, and was in areas that were still damaged from the Gulf War...areas that they never rebuilt, yet still lived in. Let me assure you that I've never seen more TV Dishes atop rubbel in my entire life. Sure they don't have the internet, but they had direct access to world news.

And if you want an example, this was OIF 2 and 3 that I was there

5 or 6 dishes in this picture...and I bet they were up long before we were in Kirkuk




The media reaches everywhere, through cell/tv/paper. Sure no internet, but neither did the Vietnamese...and they certainly knew what was going on.

[codyace]

Originally Posted by cc4usmc

I don't know how many times my life was in danger and because I DIDN'T follow SOP, civilians who are just plain dumb didn't die. Driving fucking blind is cool in Iraq.

Without a doubt I can't even begin to list the amount of times some dipshit in a taxi or some generally confused person decided he was going to drive towards/into/around a US convoy....it's like they either didn't know (which I doubt) or just didn't care. SOP said to blast them, but after the first month or so you begin to understand their disregard and sorta/kinda live with the fact that these crazy guys were just going to act as if we were Iraqi citizens.

[word sux]

Originally Posted by s0apgun

you set yourself up for failure on this one

saddam hussein is #13 for the largest genocides in the 20th century (600-800k) and ran a totalitarian government compared to josef stalin (secret police, torture, murders, assassinations, destruction of food sources of rivals, etc.)

terrorism is actually not a real threat to us at all until these groups have rich state sponsors such as saddam, i think the message of- sponsor terrorists and we will come after you, is more than important even if we disregard saddams horrendous way of running a country. totalitarian governments don't respond to good intentions.

i know it may seem at times our government makes decisions at the flip of a coin and the media likes to exaggerate public opinion to the fullest but we wouldn't be the the largest superpower in the world if we didn't have the truly intelligent people (behind the scenes) that make these kind of decisions at the top.

so to answer your question, should we have made the decision before the war to use military force to destroy saddam husseins government in iraq?

YES x900000000 our civilian death count is small compared to saddam's and if you think about it if it wasn't for his government we wouldn't have had to intervene in the first place. you can tally our death count onto his in my opinion.

yea and we helped fund that genocide and even supplied them with the mustard gas that was used.


or did we forget that little detail?


true, the funding and gas was supposed to be used against iran but we didn't do shit back then when he used it to kill the kurds and kept funding him.

[codyace]

Originally Posted by word sux

yea and we helped fund that genocide and even supplied them with the mustard gas that was used.


or did we forget that little detail?


true, the funding and gas was supposed to be used against iran but we didn't do shit back then when he used it to kill the kurds and kept funding him.

That's like blaming every gun shop owner for a murder that occured with a handgun he sold.

[lflkajfj12123]

Originally Posted by word sux

yea and we helped fund that genocide and even supplied them with the mustard gas that was used.


or did we forget that little detail?


true, the funding and gas was supposed to be used against iran but we didn't do shit back then when he used it to kill the kurds and kept funding him.

I'm sorry but I think you've been incredibly misinformed. United States did NOT supply them with mustard gas. Most came from Singapore, India, and the Netherlands under their own production licensing. We had no part in the weapons used at the Halabja incident.

We did export many different military technologies to Iraq for their own military research and production including chemical and biological weapons but those were specifically used in missile research, which were recovered unused years later. United States immediately closed their contract of exporting military technology with Iraq after the attack on the Kurds and placed them on the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.

[word sux]

Originally Posted by codyace

That's like blaming every gun shop owner for a murder that occured with a handgun he sold.

thats a pretty piss poor comparison


its more like if the gun shop was selling guns to known serial killers then maybe I see your point...

[word sux]

Originally Posted by s0apgun

I'm sorry but I think you've been incredibly misinformed. United States did NOT supply them with mustard gas. Most came from Singapore, India, and the Netherlands under their own production licensing. We had no part in the weapons used at the Halabja incident.

We did export many different military technologies to Iraq for their own military research and production including chemical and biological weapons but those were specifically used in missile research, which were recovered unused years later. United States immediately closed their contract of exporting military technology with Iraq after the attack on the Kurds and placed them on the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.

U.S. And Iraq Go Way Back - CBS News

we pulled them off the list before the Kurdish genocide occured in 1983


The worst human rights abuses of Hussein's tenure took place during the genocidal al-Anfal Campaign (1986-1989), in which Hussein's administration called for the extermination of every living thing--human or animal--in certain regions of the Kurdish north.

When Iraq used chemical weapons against the Kurds in 1987, there was anger in Congress and the White House. But a memo in 1988 from Assistant Secretary of State Richard W. Murphy stated that "The U.S.-Iraqi relationship is … important to our long-term political and economic objectives."



we knew it was going on yet we kept helping them and turned a blind eye to it. just like the genocide in East Timor that we helped supply and allowed to go on for over 30 years...

[lflkajfj12123]

K so we knew what was going on in the world but that doesn't make us responsible for their actions

also furthers my point that it was right for us to enter iraq and destroy hussein's government

[word sux]

Originally Posted by s0apgun

K so we knew what was going on in the world but that doesn't make us responsible for their actions

also furthers my point that it was right for us to enter iraq and destroy hussein's government

no it does not but we are still responsible for our own actions.


we are not the worlds police and we have no right going around invading country's when its convenient for certain people

[codyace]

Originally Posted by word sux

thats a pretty piss poor comparison


its more like if the gun shop was selling guns to known serial killers then maybe I see your point...

Comparitivly it may be poor, but my comment remains the same in regard to the concept of it all. When we 'funded' Iraq way back then, but how we were going to predict they'd use it years later against their own? Again, just like a gun dealer selling handguns...how would they know?

[codyace]

Originally Posted by word sux

no it does not but we are still responsible for our own actions.

we are not the worlds police and we have no right going around invading country's when its convenient for certain people

I agree we shouldn't be the world's police, however at what point do we as American's...with our able military and clout, decide enough is enough and step in to help other humans?

That's the fine line though; as American's should we sit back and let them commit genocide? In WWII we were lauded as hero's for doing that in Europe...but now it's not ok?

Dont' write me off as blind; I also hate when we do things in the interest of our own 'need' (as in the current conflicts at their rate) but it would be hard for me to say that we shouldn't have invaded both places...now if you ask me about the fact we've been there for 10 years that's a different story.

[word sux]

Originally Posted by codyace

Comparitivly it may be poor, but my comment remains the same in regard to the concept of it all. When we 'funded' Iraq way back then, but how we were going to predict they'd use it years later against their own? Again, just like a gun dealer selling handguns...how would they know?

we were helping them during these atrocities not just before