• 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 .
OldWorldOrder said:
Look, you need to understand that the concept of the responsibility of a person or group for their actions exists independent of the war in Iraq or even, shockingly, your thoughts about it. Responsibility exists whether or not you're sympathetic to motivations and actions or not. Stop marrying these two ideas together.

Secondly, I think everyone on the planet is aware of shared responsibility. That's such a no-brainer that I wouldn't have even though quasi-intelligent people would bother to discuss it. Who holds the primary responsibility for a random car bombing in Ramadi that kills 8 eight people? The US or the people that planned the attack?
Click to expand...

You don't act you understand it. If you did, you would know that even with others having responsibility tied to them, we are not relieved of our responsibility. We started a war without justification. We're responsible for the consequences.
 
apdst said:
I must have. They are comparable, because war is war. You can't throw aside the historical facts that don't agree with your argument. THAT is what they call "revisionist history".
Click to expand...

No, they are not. Too many differences. Japan, a country, actually attacked us. Iraq did not. Germany who was already invading parts of the world declared war on us first. Iraq had no such ability nor threat. Pretending there are alike s the worse kind of dishonesty.
 
Boo Radley said:
You don't act you understand it.
Click to expand...

What at all gave you that impression? Or was that something to promote what you're attempting to portray?

If you did, you would know that even with others having responsibility tied to them, we are not relieved of our responsibility.
Click to expand...

Did I say that? I was talking about primary responsibility. Everyone knows that everyone on the planet shares responsibility of some sort for scores of things. I, for example, have bought things from Walmart. However, minutely, I share some blame for the building collapse in Bangladesh, then. However, if someone were to approach me and I say that I was responsible, implying that I bore primary responsibility, I'd laugh in their face. Likewise, when someone says a car bomb in Ramadi that kills 8 is the primary responsibility of the US and not the people that planned and executed that attack, people understandably laugh in their face.

We started a war without justification. We're responsible for the consequences.
Click to expand...

Whether it was with or without justification doesn't matter, that's what I've been telling you. Responsibility doesn't start when someone does something wrong and stop when you do something right. Your analogy about accidents makes no sense, because nations don't go to war by accident. It's like you can't separate the idea of responsibility and the war in Iraq.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
What at all gave you that impression? Or was that something to promote what you're attempting to portray?



Did I say that? I was talking about primary responsibility. Everyone knows that everyone on the planet shares responsibility of some sort for scores of things. I, for example, have bought things from Walmart. However, minutely, I share some blame for the building collapse in Bangladesh, then. However, if someone were to approach me and I say that I was responsible, implying that I bore primary responsibility, I'd laugh in their face. Likewise, when someone says a car bomb in Ramadi that kills 8 is the primary responsibility of the US and not the people that planned and executed that attack, people understandably laugh in their face.



Whether it was with or without justification doesn't matter, that's what I've been telling you. Responsibility doesn't start when someone does something wrong and stop when you do something right. Your analogy about accidents makes no sense, because nations don't go to war by accident. It's like you can't separate the idea of responsibility and the war in Iraq.
Click to expand...

Let me try this. You go shot, say a child, fir no real reason. The dad shoots you, during the trial. The family falls apart. The remaining children go through a lot of **** and have difficulty the rest of their lives.

Are you responsible?
 
Boo Radley said:
Let me try this. You go shot, say a child, fir no real reason. The dad shoots you, during the trial. The family falls apart. The remaining children go through a lot of **** and have difficulty the rest of their lives.

Are you responsible?
Click to expand...

Sure, just like I'm responsible for the building collapsing in Bangladesh. The primary responsibility is on either the children (depending on the choices they made), or the dad.

I've noticed twice you refuse to tell me who is primarily responsible for that hypothetical car bomb in Ramadi.

I'm sorry, friend, but it seems as if your opinion that the Iraq War was "bad" or "wrong" or whatever has skewed your critical thinking here.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Sure, just like I'm responsible for the building collapsing in Bangladesh. The primary responsibility is on either the children (depending on the choices they made), or the dad.

I've noticed twice you refuse to tell me who is primarily responsible for that hypothetical car bomb in Ramadi.


I'm sorry, friend, but it seems as if your opinion that the Iraq War was "bad" or "wrong" or whatever has skewed your critical thinking here.
Click to expand...

If you don't see an answer, I'm not sure how blunt you need it. If we had not invaded, would there have been a bomb? Sure, the bomber holds responsibility, but so do we. It is part of the consequences of our action.

Primary responsibility? You don't believe much in cause and effect I see. That might explain your trouble here.
 
Boo Radley said:
If you don't see an answer, I'm not sure how blunt you need it. If we had not invaded, would there have been a bomb? Sure, the bomber holds responsibility, but so do we. It is part of the consequences of our action.

Primary responsibility? You don't believe much in cause and effect I see. That might explain your trouble here.
Click to expand...

Right, and I hold responsibility for the building collapse in Bangladesh. But I asked you who is primarily responsible. You seem to be avoiding answering that. Interesting. Let's see who is having trouble here:

Can you answer who's primarily responsible for the deaths caused by American air to surface missiles and bombs in the Baghdad are in March, 2003? Or would you rather avoid that, too?

How odd is it that you try so hard to avoid what's patently obvious, over and over. No one is absolving the US of blame. But you seem very reticent to admit that maybe other people bear most of the responsibility of things. How strange. I have to say it: this seems laughably politically motivated.

I hope you have the courage to answer both the question I asked you in my previous post and the question I asked in this post about American munitions. I think you're comfortable answering one and not the other, but probably won't answer either because answering the latter without the answering the former would be too transparent even for you in this conversation. Since you already agreed that you hold different, inconsistent standards, I think I'm gonna be forced to end this convo if you can't answer both those questions flatly.

Thanks for the talk, Boo!
 
thousands were killed by their own people.....
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Right, and I hold responsibility for the building collapse in Bangladesh. But I asked you who is primarily responsible. You seem to be avoiding answering that. Interesting. Let's see who is having trouble here:

Can you answer who's primarily responsible for the deaths caused by American air to surface missiles and bombs in the Baghdad are in March, 2003? Or would you rather avoid that, too?

How odd is it that you try so hard to avoid what's patently obvious, over and over. No one is absolving the US of blame. But you seem very reticent to admit that maybe other people bear most of the responsibility of things. How strange. I have to say it: this seems laughably politically motivated.

I hope you have the courage to answer both the question I asked you in my previous post and the question I asked in this post about American munitions. I think you're comfortable answering one and not the other, but probably won't answer either because answering the latter without the answering the former would be too transparent even for you in this conversation. Since you already agreed that you hold different, inconsistent standards, I think I'm gonna be forced to end this convo if you can't answer both those questions flatly.

Thanks for the talk, Boo!
Click to expand...

No, I agreed there are appropriate differences in standards. Be honest.

We're responsible for our bombing in 2003. We chose to bomb, to invade. We did not have to.

But I also don't think primary responsibility matters. It is enough that we hold responsibility. But, for the sake of insight, what would you consider primary? Would those who created the situation that not only make possible for the bombing to take place, but created the environment in which reason people knew such events would be expected, almost assured, hold a primary responsibility?
 
Boo Radley said:
No, I agreed there are appropriate differences in standards. Be honest.

We're responsible for our bombing in 2003. We chose to bomb, to invade. We did not have to.

But I also don't think primary responsibility matters. It is enough that we hold responsibility. But, for the sake of insight, what would you consider primary? Would those who created the situation that not only make possible for the bombing to take place, but created the environment in which reason people knew such events would be expected, almost assured, hold a primary responsibility?
Click to expand...

So you could only answer one before saying it didn't matter. Okay, goodnight Boo.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
No, I agreed there are appropriate differences in standards. Be honest.

We're responsible for our bombing in 2003. We chose to bomb, to invade. We did not have to.

But I also don't think primary responsibility matters. It is enough that we hold responsibility. But, for the sake of insight, what would you consider primary? Would those who created the situation that not only make possible for the bombing to take place, but created the environment in which reason people knew such events would be expected, almost assured, hold a primary responsibility?
Click to expand...


You know, Boo, we were discussing what posters might be paid to attempt to manipulate social media. You seem to attract them like dog doo-doo draws flies. You can always tell because 17 + 17 will always equal something less than 10 or 11, but even that is subject to lower adjustment. They like to twist the post to another subject and kill it. Make 'em pay!
 
DaveFagan said:
You know, Boo, we were discussing what posters might be paid to attempt to manipulate social media. You seem to attract them like dog doo-doo draws flies. You can always tell because 17 + 17 will always equal something less than 10 or 11, but even that is subject to lower adjustment. They like to twist the post to another subject and kill it. Make 'em pay!
Click to expand...

Good job, Dave. Attack the poster, instead of the idea.
 
Boo Radley said:
You didn't read we're responsible for bombing in 2003?
Click to expand...

I specifically asked for who was primarily responsible for both two things: the hypothetical car bombers in Ramadi or the US (assuming you acknowledge that the US doesn't really use car bombs, who knows with you) and about the the bombings in and around Baghdad in 2003. You only answered one, before decrying that primary responsibility didn't matter. Very convenient.

I think your bias is extremely clear and I think it's very doubtful you're going to change your mind, so why bother? Dave Fagan will certainly agree with you, so you have a fan there.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
I specifically asked for who was primarily responsible for both two things: the hypothetical car bombers in Ramadi or the US (assuming you acknowledge that the US doesn't really use car bombs, who knows with you) and about the the bombings in and around Baghdad in 2003. You only answered one, before decrying that primary responsibility didn't matter. Very convenient.

I think your bias is extremely clear and I think it's very doubtful you're going to change your mind, so why bother? Dave Fagan will certainly agree with you, so you have a fan there.
Click to expand...

I even talked about the car bombing. Did you read that?

I'm not sure why people exhibiting bias comment on the bias of others. Everything that happen after we invaded would not have happened had we not invaded. Why is this hard for you to grasp? We're responsible for that.
 
Boo Radley said:
I even talked about the car bombing. Did you read that?

I'm not sure why people exhibiting bias comment on the bias of others. Everything that happen after we invaded would not have happened had we not invaded. Why is this hard for you to grasp? We're responsible for that.
Click to expand...

I asked for a flat answer and you couldn't do it. I wonder why.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
I asked for a flat answer and you couldn't do it. I wonder why.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I look to discuss. I laid out clearly what I think. You need to advance it. Don't look for he answer you want, but address the one you have. I gave your more than enough to respond to.
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm sorry, but I look to discuss. I laid out clearly what I think. You need to advance it. Don't look for he answer you want, but address the one you have. I gave your more than enough to respond to.
Click to expand...

Right. You can answer one flatly and not the other. You can give a binary answer to one, a clear answer identifying someone being primarily responsible, but not to the other.

Goodnight.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Right. You can answer one flatly and not the other. You can give a binary answer to one, a clear answer identifying someone being primarily responsible, but not to the other.

Goodnight.
Click to expand...

I asked fir more clarification before answering. That's not improper.
 
Boo Radley said:
Everything that happen after we invaded would not have happened had we not invaded. Why is this hard for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

hahaha! The US did something, so everything after is the fault of the US.

Wait, what about the reverse... Everything that didn't happen would have happened had we not invaded? hahaha
 
ecofarm said:
hahaha! The US did something, so everything after is the fault of the US.

Wait, what about the reverse... Everything that didn't happen would have happened had we not invaded? hahaha
Click to expand...

Sure. But that would not have likely been as deadly. Why can't you just accept we're responsible for our actions and the consequences of those actions.
 
Boo Radley said:
Sure. But that would not have likely been as deadly. Why can't you just accept we're responsible for our actions and the consequences of those actions.
Click to expand...

One cannot blame everything on a party just because that party took some action in the past. That's patent nonsense. It's the same as to claim that invading certainly prevented the genocide of millions and nuclear war.
 
ecofarm said:
One cannot blame everything on a party just because that party took some action in the past. That's patent nonsense. It's the same as to claim that invading certainly prevented the genocide of millions and nuclear war.
Click to expand...

Everything related to that action, you sure can. And there is nothing that would suggest Iraq was going or could do either genocide nor nuclear war.
 
Boo Radley said:
Everything related to that action, you sure can.
Click to expand...

This is like blaming someone for everything bad in your life because they called you a name in 3rd grade. Absolute, no doubt, pathetic nonsense.
 
ecofarm said:
This is like blaming someone for everything bad in your life because they called you a name in 3rd grade. Absolute, no doubt, pathetic nonsense.
Click to expand...

Or like blaming the British for helping create the US in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom