• 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!

How Many Iraqis Died in the Iraq War?[W:496]

HOW MANY IRAQIS DIED?


  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
How Many Iraqis Died in the Iraq War? "And when respondents were asked in a different poll (AP/Ipsos, 2/12/07-2/15/07) to give their "best guess" about civilian deaths, 24 percent chose the option of 1,001 to 5,000 deaths.
These answers are, of course, way off the mark. Estimates of the death toll range from about 174,000 (Iraq Body Count, 3/19/13) to over a million (Opinion Business Research, cited in Congressional Research Service, 10/7/10). Even at the times of those U.S. polls, death estimates were far beyond the public's estimates." "
And when they are, they could be a massive undercount. A December 1, 2011CBS Evening News report told viewers that "more than 50,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in the war" (FAIR Action Alert, 12/2/11). This figure was sourced to iCasualties.org, which had one of the lowest estimates of civilian casualties at the time and warned readers that the number was probably a severe undercount.
The "corrected" figure that CBS put forth 11 days later was 115,676 civilians killed, and sourced to Iraq Body Count–still one of the most conservative estimates to be found (FAIR Activism Update, 12/13/11)." Does this huge discrepancy reflect poorly on our Major Media for lack of reporting? Is it OK for the USA to kill 100,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis so it's not really news. It's OK, they died because of a figmentary WMD causation. Who gives a rat's ass.
 
To the ADMIN, the format of that post is forced by the fact that when in the composing forum for the post the "ENTER" key does not work. This is the third or fourth post that this has happened on. I am a low speed phone link, but have posted many times and this problem started about three weeks ago, estimated.
 
Killed by...who exactly?
 
I thought those people died because their leader violated the terms of the ceasefire from first Gulf War. Any other reasons, real, assumed, or otherwise, was to help get more people on board with that core cause.
 
Touting the 1 million figure, years after it has been debunked, is willful ignorance.
 
Oh...wait...I get it. Obama continues to look like ****...QUICK!!! Dredge up the eeeevil George Bush and Iraq!
 
To the ADMIN, the format of that post is forced by the fact that when in the composing forum for the post the "ENTER" key does not work. This is the third or fourth post that this has happened on. I am a low speed phone link, but have posted many times and this problem started about three weeks ago, estimated.

I have the same problem.
 
I thought those people died because their leader violated the terms of the ceasefire from first Gulf War. Any other reasons, real, assumed, or otherwise, was to help get more people on board with that core cause.


It certainly couldn't have anything to do with all those Iraqis living on somebody's OIL, or not? Let's see. Iraqis got sand. Iraqis got sand fleas. Iraqis got scorpions. Iraqis got OIL. I wonder if coinky - dink is operating subliminally here, or not?
 
It certainly couldn't have anything to do with all those Iraqis living on somebody's OIL, or not? Let's see. Iraqis got sand. Iraqis got sand fleas. Iraqis got scorpions. Iraqis got OIL. I wonder if coinky - dink is operating subliminally here, or not?
Didnt you start the thread showing we did NOT in fact go in to steal their oil only a few days ago or was that someone else? I mean...it should have been blatantly obvious to anyone that we didnt seize their oil in either the 1st OR 2nd war with Iraq even though...lets be honest...if we wanted to we could have easily...so that argument is just so completely wrecked you would think people would be embarrassed to continue to raise it. And yet...
 
A range of 174,000 to 1,000,000 - that is a vast difference.

What this really tells me: they have absolutely no clue. No system for cataloguing, calculating or deciding this factor. What does this mean? The government there doesn't care about their populous at all.
 
A range of 174,000 to 1,000,000 - that is a vast difference.

What this really tells me: they have absolutely no clue. No system for cataloguing, calculating or deciding this factor. What does this mean? The government there doesn't care about their populous at all.
I think in their body count they choose to add in all the dead caused by the Islomo-extremists that continue to kill people. The rationale of course being that if Bush hadnt gone to war they wouldnt be killing Iraqis. And OK...you can even cede that point, but then you would HAVE to go to door number two which says yes...but if Bush hadnt gone to war with Iraq Saddam Hussein would still be in power and his own personal record of genocide is rather impressive as well. Better to just stick with the talking points about the eeeeevil George Bush killing Iraqis and be done with it.
 
Killed as a result of them living in a war zone.
OK...killed by Muslim extremist terrorists...got it. And how many might have died under Saddams hand based on his track record?
 
Didnt you start the thread showing we did NOT in fact go in to steal their oil only a few days ago or was that someone else? I mean...it should have been blatantly obvious to anyone that we didnt seize their oil in either the 1st OR 2nd war with Iraq even though...lets be honest...if we wanted to we could have easily...so that argument is just so completely wrecked you would think people would be embarrassed to continue to raise it. And yet...

We don't steal the OIL outright. It is now in the Western Centralized Distribution Network for Energy and being traded in US Dollars. Many US energy corporations are now profiting handsomely from the spoils of war and actually from selling the gov't the energy to fight the war and armaments suppliers have profited handsomely as well. You don't think this war was about liberty and justice, or do you? War is good business, and business is good. And only a million or so dead.
 
We don't steal the OIL outright. It is now in the Western Centralized Distribution Network for Energy and being traded in US Dollars. Many US energy corporations are now profiting handsomely from the spoils of war and actually from selling the gov't the energy to fight the war and armaments suppliers have profited handsomely as well. You don't think this war was about liberty and justice, or do you? War is good business, and business is good. And only a million or so dead.
:lamo If all people wanted was his oil there were much easier ways to go about getting it. SURELY you know a thing or two about the man and his history...correct? BS. You keep pumping up that 'war for oil' drama, baby...it looks PERFECT on you.
 
OK...killed by Muslim extremist terrorists...got it. And how many might have died under Saddams hand based on his track record?


Sort of the point. Saddam may have thousands of Iraqi dead on his conscience. The war of choice initiated by the lead buffoon, GWBush, put the deaths of about a million on ol' GW's conscience. So he has the record for Iraqi kills by several orders of magnitude.
 
It certainly couldn't have anything to do with all those Iraqis living on somebody's OIL, or not? Let's see. Iraqis got sand. Iraqis got sand fleas. Iraqis got scorpions. Iraqis got OIL. I wonder if coinky - dink is operating subliminally here, or not?

It would be a more compelling argument if we actually ended up with more oil than sand fleas or scorpions.

We should have taken the oil. That would have been the best thing for Iraqis.
 
Sort of the point. Saddam may have thousands of Iraqi dead on his conscience. The war of choice initiated by the lead buffoon, GWBush, put the deaths of about a million on ol' GW's conscience. So he has the record for Iraqi kills by several orders of magnitude.
And all those dems that voted to support the war...and all of them that cited Iraqs WMDs both before and after Bush was elected. Surely you include them...right?
 
It would be a more compelling argument if we actually ended up with more oil than sand fleas or scorpions.

We should have taken the oil. That would have been the best thing for Iraqis.

How so? Our Corporations are profiting by drilling, processing, transporting, refining, and retailing the Iraqi OIL. The Iraqis are getting paid as guilt money so it doesn't look like we are stealing their OIL.
 
Saddam may have thousands of Iraqi dead on his conscience.

Hundreds of thousands, via genocide alone. Starvation for hundreds of thousands more. Invading Iran cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Many hundreds of thousands (more than a million), over an about 20 year period, through genocide, starvation and the invasion of neighbors alone. This does not (as your 1 million stat does) include natural deaths and routine accidents. If we include non-direct murder, natural events and accidents, then Saddam's number approaches 10 million.

What kind of ignorance allows for Bush to be responsible for more Iraqi deaths than the 20 year genocidal dictator?
 
Last edited:
Hundreds of thousands, via genocide alone. Starvation for hundreds of thousands more. Invading Iran cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

Many hundreds of thousands (more than a million), over an about 20 year period, through genocide, starvation and the invasion of neighbors.

What kind of ignorance allows for Bush to be responsible for more Iraqi deaths than the 20 year genocidal dictator?
Well...the kind of ignorance that originates with a hatred of 'the guy' and a willingness to overlook all the other factors.

Sorta like Sean Penn walking hand in hand with Saddam while being showed the millions of dead children and then rather than blaming the dictator for abusing the oil for food and medicines program blaming...well...George Bush...the guy that came in after 8 years of Clinton enforcing the programs.
 
Hundreds of thousands, via genocide alone. Starvation for hundreds of thousands more. Invading Iran cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Many hundreds of thousands (more than a million), over an about 20 year period, through genocide, starvation and the invasion of neighbors. This does not (as your 1 million stat does, include natural deaths and routine accidents). If we include non-intentional murder, natural events and accidents, then Saddam's number approaches 10 million.

What kind of ignorance allows for Bush to be responsible for more Iraqi deaths than the 20 year genocidal dictator?

Anything without links is BullCrap. This is a heavy load. Don't forget to include in GWFirstMoron deaths those caused by DU exposure, long term.
 
Anything without links is BullCrap.

Dave, we don't need links to know the numbers. It's common knowledge.

Invasion of Iran: 500k (dead Iraqis)
Genocide of Kurds: 200k
Genocide of Marsh Arabs: 50k
Starvation via selling baby and child food: 400k

That's 1.1 million, just on the invasion of neighbors, genocide and direct starvation. He also slaughtered many thousand and starved countless while spending all the country's cash on rape palaces and cronies.

He institutionalized rape, Dave.
 
Last edited:
Dave, we don't need links to know the numbers. It's common knowledge.

Invasion of Iran: 500k (dead Iraqis)
Genocide of Kurds: 200k
Genocide of Marsh Arabs: 50k
Starvation via selling baby and child food: 400k

That's 1.1 million, just on the invasion of neighbors, genocide and direct starvation. He also slaughtered many thousand and staved countless while spending all the country's cash on rape palaces.

He institutionalized rape, Dave.


The invasion of Iran was a Reagan/Bush orchestrated fiasco. We sold Saddam the precursors for his poison gas and gave him satellite info on Iranian military locations, etc.
The US embargo is reputed to have caused the death of a million Iraqis. Those two items put a million and a half on a conscience. It's nice if you don't want it to be true, but reality sucks.
 
Dave, we don't need links to know the numbers. It's common knowledge.

Invasion of Iran: 500k (dead Iraqis)
Genocide of Kurds: 200k
Genocide of Marsh Arabs: 50k
Starvation via selling baby and child food: 400k

That's 1.1 million, just on the invasion of neighbors, genocide and direct starvation. He also slaughtered many thousand and starved countless while spending all the country's cash on rape palaces and cronies.

He institutionalized rape, Dave.

There is no question Saddam was evil, and I don't think anyone is disputing that fact. So does that it make it all right that many Iraqis died because of the American invasion?
 
Back
Top Bottom