• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Marines Urinate On Dead Bodies In Afghanistan

The Muslims around the world have not killed a fraction of the number killed by the US military in various places throughout the world in modern history.

Muslims have killed more people in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S. has killed less people than their enemies in all modern wars which it has been engaged in.
 
Muslims have killed more people in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S. has killed less people than their enemies in all modern wars which it has been engaged in.

Where did you read that?
 
Any of it....

Let's start with the most recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan:

Taliban Causes Most Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan, U.N. Says
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: March 9, 2011

KABUL, Afghanistan — Last year was the deadliest of more than nine years of war for Afghan civilians, the United Nations reported Wednesday, attributing 75 percent of the deaths to attacks by Taliban and other insurgents rather than coalition forces.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/world/asia/10afghanistan.html


The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) attributed 1,167 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements in the first six months of 2011, up 28% from the same period in 2010 and representing 79.8% of the total 1,462 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the conflict during this period.


http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/human rights/March PoC Annual Report Final.pdf

Researchers have found that while coalition forces accounted for 12 per cent of deaths and Iraqi forces 11 per cent, the vast majority of violent killings were killed by unknown perpetrators.

Of those by far the biggest proportion – around a third of the total – was summary executions and kidnappings between rival factions and gangs as law and order broke down.

The study by King’s College London, published in PLoS Medicine, provides the most detailed assessment so far of civilian deaths in the course of the conflict.

PLoS Medicine: Violent Deaths of Iraqi Civilians, 2003
 
Let's start with the most recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan:

"Over One Million Iraqi Deaths Caused by US Occupation

Sources:
After Downing Street, July 6, 2007
Title: “Is the United States Killing 10,000 Iraqis Every Month? Or Is It More?”
Author: Michael Schwartz
AlterNet, September 17, 2007
Title: “Iraq death toll rivals Rwanda genocide, Cambodian killing fields”
Author: Joshua Holland
Reuters (via AlterNet), January 7, 2008
Title: “Iraq conflict has killed a million, says survey”
Author: Luke Baker
Inter Press Service, March 3, 2008
Title: “Iraq: Not our country to Return to”
Authors: Maki al-Nazzal and Dahr Jamail"

"Over one million Iraqis have met violent deaths as a result of the 2003 invasion, according to a study conducted by the prestigious British polling group, Opinion Research Business (ORB). These numbers suggest that the invasion and occupation of Iraq rivals the mass killings of the last century—the human toll exceeds the 800,000 to 900,000 believed killed in the Rwandan genocide in 1994, and is approaching the number (1.7 million) who died in Cambodia’s infamous “Killing Fields” during the Khmer Rouge era of the 1970s.
ORB’s research covered fifteen of Iraq’s eighteen provinces. Those not covered include two of Iraq’s more volatile regions—Kerbala and Anbar—and the northern province of Arbil, where local authorities refused them a permit to work. In face-to-face interviews with 2,414 adults, the poll found that more than one in five respondents had had at least one death in their household as a result of the conflict, as opposed to natural cause.
Authors Joshua Holland and Michael Schwartz point out that the dominant narrative on Iraq—that most of the violence against Iraqis is being perpetrated by Iraqis themselves and is not our responsibility—is ill conceived. Interviewers from the Lancet report of October 2006 (Censored 2006, #2) asked Iraqi respondents how their loved ones died. Of deaths for which families were certain of the perpetrator, 56 percent were attributable to US forces or their allies. Schwartz suggests that if a low pro rata share of half the unattributed deaths were caused by US forces, a total of approximately 80 percent of Iraqi deaths are directly US perpetrated.
Even with the lower confirmed figures, by the end of 2006, an average of 5,000 Iraqis had been killed every month by US forces since the beginning of the occupation. However, the rate of fatalities in 2006 was twice as high as the overall average, meaning that the American average in 2006 was well over 10,000 per month, or over 300 Iraqis every day. With the surge that began in 2007, the current figure is likely even higher."

#1. Over One Million Iraqi Deaths Caused by US Occupation | Project Censored

"According to the UN, in Afghanistan the number of civilians killed since 2006 would be “only” 9,759, of which 6,269 were killed by antigovernment forces, and 2,723 by coalition or regular army forces. Another 6,300 to 23,600 civilian deaths resulting directly or indirectly from the war between 2001 – 2003 should be added to this statistic."

"The 9/11 attacks resulted in 2,996 casualties, which included 343 firefighters and 59 police officers who were in trying to save victims inside the World Trade Center. The War on Terror launched by George W. Bush Jr. has led to at least 227,000 people (more than 300,000 according to other estimates). This includes 116,657 civilians (51%) between 76 - 108,000 insurgents or Taliban Islamists (34% to 36%), 25,297 Iraqi and Afghan soldiers (11%), and 8,975 American, British, and other coalition forces (3.9%)."

The War on Terror in numbers » OWNI.eu, News, Augmented
 
"According to the UN, in Afghanistan the number of civilians killed since 2006 would be “only” 9,759, of which 6,269 were killed by antigovernment forces, and 2,723 by coalition or regular army forces. Another 6,300 to 23,600 civilian deaths resulting directly or indirectly from the war between 2001 – 2003 should be added to this statistic."

So Coalition troops and regular army forces were responsible for 2,723 deaths while another 30,000 or so, depending on the 6,300 to 23,600, were killed by Muslims. Is that correct?
"The 9/11 attacks resulted in 2,996 casualties, which included 343 firefighters and 59 police officers who were in trying to save victims inside the World Trade Center. The War on Terror launched by George W. Bush Jr. has led to at least 227,000 people (more than 300,000 according to other estimates). This includes 116,657 civilians (51%) between 76 - 108,000 insurgents or Taliban Islamists (34% to 36%), 25,297 Iraqi and Afghan soldiers (11%), and 8,975 American, British, and other coalition forces (3.9%)."

According to this source The War on Terror launched by George W. Bush Jr. was responsible for all deaths in Iraq with no Islamic terrorists involved whatsoever. And you agree with that, huh?
 
So Coalition troops and regular army forces were responsible for 2,723 deaths while another 30,000 or so, depending on the 6,300 to 23,600, were killed by Muslims. Is that correct?

2,723 added to another 6,300 to 23,600 killed by the US compared to 6,279 killed by anti-government forces.


According to this source The War on Terror launched by George W. Bush Jr. was responsible for all deaths in Iraq with no Islamic terrorists involved whatsoever. And you agree with that, huh?

Most were, look at the number of violent death occurring in Iraq and Afghanistan before and after our wars on them.

"More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths."
Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's the number of violent deaths in excess of the number of violent deaths in Iraq before our invasion/occupation.
 
Last edited:
2,723 added to another 6,300 to 23,600 killed by the US compared to 6,279 killed by anti-government forces.

But that's not what your link says. It clearly states that 2,723 were killed by Coalition forces. That's it.

Most were, look at the number of violent death occurring in Iraq and Afghanistan before and after our wars on them.

"More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths."
Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's the number of violent deaths in excess of the number of violent deaths in Iraq before our invasion/occupation.


The Lancet article has long been discredited and you are blaming the Coalition for every death in Iraq, none by Muslim terrorists. That runs contrary to everything we know about Iraq.
 
But that's not what your link says. It clearly states that 2,723 were killed by Coalition forces. That's it.


The Lancet article has long been discredited and you are blaming the Coalition for every death in Iraq, none by Muslim terrorists. That runs contrary to everything we know about Iraq.

You need to re-read the article because that number was "since 2006." There was another 6,300 - 23,600 killed before 2006.

The Lancet numbers are better sourced than any other numbers out there. Of course there were deaths caused by Muslims, but they pale in comparison to the numbers killed by the US.
 
"Over One Million Iraqi Deaths Caused by US Occupation

A) The Lancet survey is a fallacious study.

B) Where in those articles does it state who was responsible for the killings? Because my article makes it quite clear that the responsibility for the vast majority of the deaths is on the hands of the insurgency.
 
2,723 added to another 6,300 to 23,600 killed by the US compared to 6,279 killed by anti-government forces.

You are now just making up statistics out of whole cloth now.


Most were, look at the number of violent death occurring in Iraq and Afghanistan before and after our wars on them.

"More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths."
Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's the number of violent deaths in excess of the number of violent deaths in Iraq before our invasion/occupation.

But the majority of those deaths came at the hands of the insurgency as my article clearly states! Now you can assert that the U.S. has responsibility in this for liberating Iraq from a genocidal tyrant but at the same time allowing for the insurgency to start, however, while we may bare some responsibility for it, the blood of the vast majority of those killed in Iraq is at the hands of the insurgents.
 
You are now just making up statistics out of whole cloth now.

From the article you reference:

"Another 6,300 to 23,600 civilian deaths resulting directly or indirectly from the war between 2001 – 2003 should be added to this statistic."




But the majority of those deaths came at the hands of the insurgency as my article clearly states! Now you can assert that the U.S. has responsibility in this for liberating Iraq from a genocidal tyrant but at the same time allowing for the insurgency to start, however, while we may bare some responsibility for it, the blood of the vast majority of those killed in Iraq is at the hands of the insurgents.


Despite what you have conjured up in your mind, Iraq never requested our invasion. And you ignore that the half million to a million violent Iraqi deaths are above the number happening before our war with Iraq.

"Out of all the Iraqi casualty surveys so far, only the Lancet surveys and the Iraq Family Health Survey were peer-reviewed."
Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are also ignoring the Iraqis we killed in 1991:

"a research professor at Carnegie Mellon University, Daponte was a 29-year-old demographer at the Commerce Department in 1992, responsible for keeping track of developments in the Middle East, when she estimated that 158,000 Iraqis -- 86,194 men, 39,612 women and 32,195 children -- had perished in the war and its aftermath."

"In a subsequent 1993 study funded by Greenpeace, Daponte updated and publicly presented her analysis of the Gulf War, raising the total Iraqi death count to 205,000. She estimated that 56,000 Iraqi soldiers and 3,500 civilians were killed during the war, and that another 35,000 died as Saddam Hussein crushed Kurdish and Shiite rebellions that rose up after the United States stopped fighting. The largest number of deaths -- 111,000 -- Daponte attributed to "postwar adverse health effects."

Estimates of deaths in first war still in dispute
 
From the article you reference:

"Another 6,300 to 23,600 civilian deaths resulting directly or indirectly from the war between 2001 – 2003 should be added to this statistic."

That's an incredible disparity and it strongly suggest that whoever presented these numbers has no real idea what they are talking about. Yet you seem too put credibility in these numbers, prepared to believe anything.

Nor does it say who was responsible for these alleged deaths but it appears safe to assume that you would also blame the Americans for any and all deaths.



Despite what you have conjured up in your mind, Iraq never requested our invasion.

Really? Saddam Hussein, one of the most vile dictators in history, never requested an invasion? Have you yet considered why that might be so?

And you ignore that the half million to a million violent Iraqi deaths are above the number happening before our war with Iraq.

Before and after this war it was mostly Muslims killing Muslims with the Coalition trying to protect the people. In fact thats starting again. If murdering Muslims was the intent the Coalition troops could have created extremely high casualties. Or have you not even considered this possibility?
 
Before and after this war it was mostly Muslims killing Muslims with the Coalition trying to protect the people. In fact thats starting again. If murdering Muslims was the intent the Coalition troops could have created extremely high casualties. Or have you not even considered this possibility?

We kill more inadvertently than the terrorists kill on purpose. Hooray!
 
Really? Saddam Hussein, one of the most vile dictators in history, never requested an invasion?

Crazy... huh?

If murdering Muslims was the intent the Coalition troops could have created extremely high casualties. Or have you not even considered this possibility?

We have gone out of our way to protect citizens. This isn't WWII where the enemy is wearing uniforms and we still bombed the **** out of hundreds of thousands of innocent non-combatants. This is an enemy that hides amongst civilians and a war where we hold our soldiers to a much higher standard than we did back then.

STILL! We have all these America Haters that bitch and bitch about how bad we are and make the poor terrorists the victims. Disgusting and pathetic. These sypathizers aren't quite our enemy... but they almost are. They spread anti-American propaganda and this creates confusion and disunity and is very different from questioning our motives or goals... they are actively undermining our troops in the field.
 
We kill more inadvertently than the terrorists kill on purpose. Hooray!

Maybe true... We inadvertently kill innocent people that drive by road side checks or are in the same apartment buildings as the terrorists hiding in them while the terrorists purposely walk into a market and blow up innocent people. Hooray for your disloyalty!!
 
Maybe true... We inadvertently kill innocent people that drive by road side checks or are in the same apartment buildings as the terrorists hiding in them while the terrorists purposely walk into a market and blow up innocent people. Hooray for your disloyalty!!


I don't consider my expectation for our side to hold ourselves to the same moral standard we hold others, to be disloyal, but that's just me.
 
I don't consider my expectation for our side to hold ourselves to the same moral standard we hold others, to be disloyal, but that's just me.

Nor do I and that is why we punish those responsible for wrong doings on our side and I see how you yet again side step a check to your argument. Additionally, we hold ourselves to a MUCH HIGHER standard than we do the terrorists. Failure to admit that will simply be the final nail in how I view you.
 
Nor do I and that is why we punish those responsible for wrong doings on our side and I see how you yet again side step a check to your argument. Additionally, we hold ourselves to a MUCH HIGHER standard than we do the terrorists. Failure to admit that will simply be the final nail in how I view you.

Well I am just devastated i tell you! :lamo

We have killed more innocent people than have the terrorists, I don't condone the unnecessary killing of civilians by anyone, regardless of the flag they fly.
 
Well I am just devastated i tell you! :lamo

We have killed more innocent people than have the terrorists, I don't condone the unnecessary killing of civilians by anyone, regardless of the flag they fly.

Which terrorists? All terrorists? What is your definition of "innocent"?
 
Which terrorists? All terrorists? What is your definition of "innocent"?

Non-combatant civilians is my definition of innocents in this context.


How many American civilians have the extremists killed? Now compare that to the number of civilians we have killed in various countries in modern history?
 
Back
Top Bottom