• 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 .
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.

"Killed in war" is a rather vague term. A lot of Iraqis were killed by insurgents with roadside bombs, car bombs, suicide bombers, etc.
 
As you argued it, Hatuey was foolish because he wasn't aware of these values or how they added up (even though he was being rhetorical).

Unfortunately, for him, he has continued to demonstrate just that:

None of those other people? Hmmm...

Study: Israel leads in ignoring Security Council resolutions - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper

So there we have 3 examples of 3 countries who've violated the same if not nearly twice as many UN resolutions as Iraq, yet no invasion.


See?
 
None of those other people? Hmmm...

Study: Israel leads in ignoring Security Council resolutions - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper



So there we have 3 examples of 3 countries who've violated the same if not nearly twice as many UN resolutions as Iraq, yet no invasion.
Israel has gassed its own citizens and its neighboring citizens? Israel has defied UN Cease fire demands re weapons stockpiles? Israel is paying families of suicide bombers, allowing terrorists to hid ein their country and train in their country?
 
For one thing, we only get a small portion of our oil from the ME.

View attachment 67148795

After looking at this chart, it seems to me that if oil was all we wanted, why don't we just invade Canada and seize it. That seems to me to be a lot easier than engaging in a war half way around the world. Maybe we should ask those who are convinced our only interest in Iraq was the oil that question.
 
Israel has gassed its own citizens and its neighboring citizens? Israel has defied UN Cease fire demands re weapons stockpiles? Israel is paying families of suicide bombers, allowing terrorists to hid ein their country and train in their country?

You are missing the point here. The point is that Israel and the U.S. are inherently evil and therefore must be condemned. Facts don't enter into the equation.
 
You are missing the point here. The point is that Israel and the U.S. are inherently evil and therefore must be condemned. Facts don't enter into the equation.
Ah! My bad! Sometimes I actually take what he says seriously. ;)
 
"Killed in war" is a rather vague term. A lot of Iraqis were killed by insurgents with roadside bombs, car bombs, suicide bombers, etc.
Right...but admitting that the vast majority of Iraqis killed have been killed by Islamic terrorists (errrrr...insurgents) wouldnt play well with the cool kids. Even thought the Iraqis wrote and voted on their own constitution, elected their own government and were supported in training their police, military, and rebuilding their infrastructure and given at least a real shot at democracy, and even though the people killing Iraqis are Islamic extremists...its still and always the eeeeeevil Bush's fault. And we will continue to be given threads like this as long as Obama continues to look like **** and people like the OP feel the need to divert attention from the current goings on.
 
Considering the fact that the conflict lasted for almost ten years, I'd say that a figure at or a little above 50K probably is a fairly reasonable estimate.

However, one has to keep in mind that that number actually isn't all that bad when considered in historical context. Allied forces could end up killing that many civilians or more in a single week of bombing during WW2, Saddam killed at least two or three times that number of non-combatants during the Iran-Iraq War, and the Russians very likely killed a quarter of a million people in Chechnya during the 1990s and early 2000s without so much as batting an eyelash.

50,000 dead for an almost ten year occupation is actually a pretty decent record, all things considered.

Furthermore, it should be noted that US and Coalition forces didn't even kill most of the people listed in that figure. The vast majority of them were the victims of sectarian violence or the indiscriminate terror bombing campaigns staged by the insurgency.
 
Last edited:
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?

Logic: yeah it was a ****ty decision going over there, but at least the other party voted for it too! :roll:
 
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.

By your rationale we should have invaded Cambodia, Rwanda, and Sudan. Heck, we should be invading Saudi Arabia since their government is one of the worst abuser of human rights. Oh wait, we're friends with Saudi Arabia. Nevermind.

When will you guys begin to realize this war had nothing to do with human rights abuses?
 
Killed as a result of them living in a war zone.

But that's not true. The 1 million figure includes pretty much all deaths. The study was funded by George Soros, published by the journal that brought us "vaccines cause autism" and was conducted by the Saddam crony who was in charge of blaming the US for everything.
 
By your rationale we should have invaded Cambodia, Rwanda, and Sudan. Heck, we should be invading Saudi Arabia since their government is one of the worst abuser of human rights. Oh wait, we're friends with Saudi Arabia. Nevermind.

When will you guys begin to realize this war had nothing to do with human rights abuses?

Do you recognize context and priorities and their place in decision making?

Maybe for you it doesn't have anything to do with human rights abuses. That's your decision. For me, it has always been about such. I served and I support for my reasons, you can have yours. But, hey, do us a favor and don't ascribe motives to other people. Just ascribe them to yourself, thanks.
 
Do you recognize context and priorities and their place in decision making?

Yes, I do.

Maybe for you it doesn't have anything to do with human rights abuses. That's your decision. For me, it has always been about such.

Whatever keeps your conscience 'clear.'



I served and I support for my reasons, you can have yours. But, hey, do us a favor and don't ascribe motives to other people. Just ascribe them to yourself, thanks.

And the government had its motives. You really think the State cared about human rights abuses when it has been financially supporting the worst of those abusers all these years?
 
It is all about oil. Would we have cared if Iraq had invaded Kuwait in the first place if it weren't for oil? Certainly not as much as we (the coalition) did. You are a bit all over the board with your agenda. I thought the topic was the Iraqi civilian deaths and your assertion that they died because of the WMD claims.

Has my point be so persuasive that you have abandoned that and gone on to oil?

No. We are comparing scumbags by relativity. I don't think The First Moron's killing of 115,000 plus Iraqis is any different than Saddam killing 115,000 plus Iraqis.
 
"Killed in war" is a rather vague term. A lot of Iraqis were killed by insurgents with roadside bombs, car bombs, suicide bombers, etc.

Because we brought the war to their homes.
 
And the government had its motives. You really think the State cared about human rights abuses when it has been financially supporting the worst of those abusers all these years?

It appears that the concept of priorities and the fact that the US cannot do everything at the same time, and thus must adopt a variety of policies, is beyond you. Perhaps someday absolutism will satisfy my philosophical and intellectual needs, but in the past and today I find it lacking.

Aside from the absolutism, you appear stuck in the past as interpreted by yourself. That's a nasty cage.
 
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.

Because we brought the war to their homes.

You know my first thought when I saw the topic of the OP was, which war? The one they started with Iran? The one they started with Kuwait? Then I realized it was the one they caused with coalition of countries.

But really, how may died as a result of Saddam attacking Iran and Kuwait. Just an interesting comparison.
 
Right...but admitting that the vast majority of Iraqis killed have been killed by Islamic terrorists (errrrr...insurgents) wouldnt play well with the cool kids. Even thought the Iraqis wrote and voted on their own constitution, elected their own government and were supported in training their police, military, and rebuilding their infrastructure and given at least a real shot at democracy, and even though the people killing Iraqis are Islamic extremists...its still and always the eeeeeevil Bush's fault. And we will continue to be given threads like this as long as Obama continues to look like **** and people like the OP feel the need to divert attention from the current goings on.

That's not true. I don't give a rat's ass about Obama. I'm a Green. I hope to strike a resonant chord in the collective conscience of this board. We as a Nation are guilty of the deaths of those 115,000+ Iraqis.
 
No. We are comparing scumbags by relativity. I don't think The First Moron's killing of 115,000 plus Iraqis is any different than Saddam killing 115,000 plus Iraqis.

Grotesquely false equivalence.


:barf
 
It appears that the concept of priorities and the fact that the US cannot do everything at the same time, and thus must adopt a variety of policies, is beyond you.

So what is our alliance and financial support of Saudi Arabia? Does invading that country only become priority once they don't play ball with the US?


Perhaps someday absolutism will satisfy my philosophical and intellectual needs, but in the past and today I it lacking.

This has nothing to do with absolutism and everything to do with understanding how States function. Perhaps YOUR motives were altruistic. But to claim that was the intention of the neocons and defense contractors is naive.
 
Grotesquely false equivalence.


:barf

Right, the guy who kills 115,000 is a good guyl
The guy who kills 115,000 plus one is a scumbag.
It's like reaching into a bag of turds to pull out the good one.
 
No, actually Saddam Hussein brought the war to their homes.

I find it interesting you have a quote from Mencken in your sig. A man who would have been very opposed to the Iraq War. ;)
 
No, actually Saddam Hussein brought the war to their homes.


Gosh! Have you already forgotten that great TV show "Shock and Awe," on location in Baghdad and Iraq? Produced and Directed by the leader of buffoonery and ignorance, the infamous First Moron, his slipperiness, GWBush.
 
Back
Top Bottom