| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"=?iso-8859-1?q?Chuck_E_Wood=99?=" |
| Date: |
25 May 2005 03:46:08 AM |
| Object: |
U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge
Concerns increasing that insurgents might again be refocusing strikes
on Americans.
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A car bomb exploded Tuesday next to a U.S. Army convoy
in Baghdad, killing three soldiers. A half-hour later, another U.S.
soldier, sitting in the back of a Bradley fighting vehicle at an
observation post, was killed in a drive-by shooting.
Their deaths pushed the number of U.S. troops killed in three days to
14, part of a surge in attacks that also have killed about 60 Iraqis.
Eighteen U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq during the past week,
raising concerns that insurgents might again be focusing their sights
on U.S. forces.
More than 620 people, including 58 U.S. troops, have been killed since
April 28, when insurgents launched a bloody campaign after Prime
Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari announced his new Shiite-dominated
government. The AP count is based on reports from police, hospital and
military officials.
During the same period, at least 89 car bombs have killed least 355
people, according to the AP count. An additional five suicide bombings
by individuals wearing explosives have killed at least 107 people.
Today, about 1,000 U.S. Marines, sailors and soldiers encircled the
Euphrates River city of Haditha in the troubled Anbar province, killing
at least three insurgents after launching the second major operation in
this vast western region in less than a month, an official said.
Two Marines also were wounded and evacuated, Marine Capt. Christopher
Toland said.
Helicopters swept down near palm tree groves, dropping off Marines who
blocked off one side of Haditha, while other troops on foot and in
armored vehicles established checkpoints and began moving toward the
center of this city, 140 miles northwest of Baghdad. U.S. warplanes
circled overhead.
The assault, called Operation New Market, focused on this city of about
90,000 people. Earlier this month insurgents launched a multistage
attack from a Haditha hospital, killing four U.S. troops.
On Tuesday, Sunni and Shiite clerics and politicians intensified
efforts to find a way out of the crisis that threatens a civil war.
Senior officials representing Iraq's two leading Sunni Muslim
organizations met with Interior Minister Bayan Jabr. The Sunni
officials recently demanded Jabr's resignation, holding his office
responsible for the killings of Sunni clerics and others.
Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, a prominent Shiite politician, said there would be
no civil war. "The awareness of the Iraqi people and the links between
them will prevent such a war, God willing."
Al-Hakim, who leads the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in
Iraq and the governing United Iraqi Alliance, said insurgents had been
trying to start a civil war between the Shiite majority and the Sunni
minority since Saddam Hussein's ouster.
==========================================================
.
|
|
| User: "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
25 May 2005 12:50:10 PM |
|
|
"Chuck I WoodT" <wallylorne@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:1117010767.967523.49760@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge
Concerns increasing that insurgents might again be refocusing strikes
on Americans.
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A car bomb exploded Tuesday next to a U.S. Army convoy
in Baghdad, killing three soldiers. A half-hour later, another U.S.
soldier, sitting in the back of a Bradley fighting vehicle at an
observation post, was killed in a drive-by shooting.
Their deaths pushed the number of U.S. troops killed in three days to
14, part of a surge in attacks that also have killed about 60 Iraqis.
Eighteen U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq during the past week,
raising concerns that insurgents might again be focusing their sights
on U.S. forces.
More than 620 people, including 58 U.S. troops, have been killed since
April 28, when insurgents launched a bloody campaign after Prime
Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari announced his new Shiite-dominated
government. The AP count is based on reports from police, hospital and
military officials.
During the same period, at least 89 car bombs have killed least 355
people, according to the AP count. An additional five suicide bombings
by individuals wearing explosives have killed at least 107 people.
Today, about 1,000 U.S. Marines, sailors and soldiers encircled the
Euphrates River city of Haditha in the troubled Anbar province, killing
at least three insurgents after launching the second major operation in
this vast western region in less than a month, an official said.
Two Marines also were wounded and evacuated, Marine Capt. Christopher
Toland said.
Helicopters swept down near palm tree groves, dropping off Marines who
blocked off one side of Haditha, while other troops on foot and in
armored vehicles established checkpoints and began moving toward the
center of this city, 140 miles northwest of Baghdad. U.S. warplanes
circled overhead.
The assault, called Operation New Market, focused on this city of about
90,000 people. Earlier this month insurgents launched a multistage
attack from a Haditha hospital, killing four U.S. troops.
They only have themselves to blame.
"Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword"
Christ commanded his brethren "Thou shalt not kill".
"Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you and despitefully use you"
Killing other human beings is wrong and against Christ's command to "Love
our neighbours".
Jeff...
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?07/SIFVyc2luIEhvZWxsZWUgV29uZGVyINO/0g==?=" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
25 May 2005 02:37:09 PM |
|
|
Is Canada part of the UK?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?07/SIFVyc2luIEhvZWxsZWUgV29uZGVyINO/0g==?=" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
25 May 2005 02:36:05 PM |
|
|
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
.
|
|
|
| User: "1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
25 May 2005 03:33:35 PM |
|
|
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
25 May 2005 08:08:08 PM |
|
|
"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist" <nospamatall@add.com> Spat the Words
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
That's probably a conservative (no pun intended) figure. The
damage goes beyond this even. Much of the world looks to the
US for example. Fine example we set. Mass paranoia, attack
first ask questions later, brutalize your enemy if captured
(unless of course the spot light is on you).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 12:17:38 AM |
|
|
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"=D3=BF=D2 Ursin Hoellee Wonder =D3=BF=D2" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote =
in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 12:06:44 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117343858.479142.145120@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
It's really amazing what some people will believe. 100,000 dead. What a fucking joke.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 01:44:05 PM |
|
|
"dreamwalker" <backfromthe@dead.com> Spat the Words
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117343858.479142.145120@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
It's really amazing what some people will believe. 100,000 dead. What a
fucking joke.
You're right, that's probably a conservative estimate (pun intended).
The actual figure is probably much higher. Very few American presidents
can claim responsibility for that many deaths.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 03:37:01 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117343858.479142.145120@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"=D3=BF=D2 Ursin Hoellee Wonder =D3=BF=D2" <laytonville@saber.net> wrot=
e in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
It's really amazing what some people will believe. 100,000 dead. What a f=
ucking joke.
Yeah...how's things on the reservation injun?
WH
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 09:14:48 AM |
|
|
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117343858.479142.145120@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
30 May 2005 01:48:12 AM |
|
|
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
30 May 2005 07:53:47 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
http://www.thelancet.com/home
Title: Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample
survey
100,000 is their most conservative estimate of deaths as a direct result of
US bombings after the invasion up to October 2004.
Various newspapers around the world also published the findings. See for
example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1338749,00.html
Summary of the report:
Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100000
excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from
coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
Even if these numbers are correct, it is the BODY COUNT. That means the
number of dead bodies that were actually accounted for. Like I said before,
invaders don't count the number of people they kill. Do you think after an
air strike on a city, the pilots go back and count how many people 8000
pounds of bombs killed? No, they don't care and nor do you.
Stat.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: To Stat: the correct link is here |
31 May 2005 07:48:30 PM |
|
|
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
31 May 2005 09:25:00 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not reported by
the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during the first few
months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and intensive bombings.
Stat.
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
01 Jun 2005 06:42:35 AM |
|
|
Sta wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not reported by
the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during the first few
months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and intensive bombings.
Stat.
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
Your government in Teheran killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis'.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
01 Jun 2005 06:48:58 AM |
|
|
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1117626168.d3a8a94fd65e44084e1df3687ef10330@teranews...
Sta wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not reported
by
the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during the first few
months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and intensive
bombings.
Stat.
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
Your government in Teheran killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis'.
Iraqis' whats?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
01 Jun 2005 09:12:46 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Sta wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not reported by
the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during the first few
months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and intensive bombings.
Stat.
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
Your government in Teheran killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis'.
Tony
You operate like a troll.
Or you are a complete fucking idiot, who by some astronomical
improbability, managed to discover Usenet.
I hope you're a troll. The alternative is too depressing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
01 Jun 2005 08:23:27 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android <marvin@galaxy.com> Spat the Words
itwill@happen.com wrote:
Sta wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online
media reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not
reported by the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during
the first few months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and
intensive bombings. Stat.
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
Your government in Teheran killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis'.
Tony
You operate like a troll.
Or you are a complete fucking idiot, who by some astronomical
improbability, managed to discover Usenet.
I'm surprised he survived to adulthood. In most animal societies
youngsters like him get taken by the Darwin Imperative.
I hope you're a troll. The alternative is too depressing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: To Stat: the correct link is here |
01 Jun 2005 11:18:45 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Sta wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117586910.381669.194370@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
I apologize, I posted the wrong link to the Iraq Body Count project.
Here is the correct link:
Admittedly it looks more serious, but remains irrelevant as their
methodology relies only on media reports:
"Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media
reports and eyewitness accounts".
Clearly they don't claim to account for any deaths that are not reported by
the media which is the case for most deaths occurred during the first few
months of the invasion when Iraq was under massive and intensive bombings.
Stat.
What do you care about dead Iraqis?
Your government in Teheran killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis'.
Tony
You're forgetting pantyboy you scumbag that we don't all suck up to our
govt's. and follow what they say and agree with what they do,
especially when they're blatently wrong and lying through their arses.
Some of us think for ourselves, have our own minds and opinions.
The authority *****-sucking is done by the likes of you...people who
need to be led, can't function without being led, even when they're
being led to the slaughter.
WH
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
30 May 2005 11:28:34 PM |
|
|
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
http://www.thelancet.com/home
Title: Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample
survey
100,000 is their most conservative estimate of deaths as a direct result of
US bombings after the invasion up to October 2004.
Various newspapers around the world also published the findings. See for
example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1338749,00.html
So what? They reported that some group surveyed a limited number of
Iraqis, and using a complicated formula based on old death statistics
from Saddam's regime (which we all know must be 100% reliable), they
made a number of assumptions to come up with their 100,000 number.
Summary of the report:
Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100000
excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from
coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
No, it's not a discussion forum; and no it's not supposed to be funny.
It's deadly serious, you moron.
Even if these numbers are correct, it is the BODY COUNT. That means the
number of dead bodies that were actually accounted for.
The Iraq Body Count project looks at death certificates, and news
reports to come up with its number ... unlike your source, which is
making assumptions based on projected numbers using old Saddam Hussein
regime statistics as its base. And if your number is correct, why
haven't reporters in Iraq noticed that many deaths? That number is
simply preposterous. But I know you're going to believe it anyway,
because it fits your warped mindset.
Like I said before, invaders don't count the number of people they
kill. Do you think after an air strike on a city, the pilots go
back and count how many people 8000 pounds of bombs killed? No,
they don't care and nor do you.
Okay, since you're going to tell me what I don't care about, why don't
I tell you what you don't care about ... you don't care about the Iraqi
people being slaughtered by the terrorist insurgency. In fact, you not
only don't care about those Iraqi people being slaughtered by the
terrorist insurgency, you're glad it's happening.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
31 May 2005 09:13:02 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117513714.007474.168800@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result
of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders
and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
I don't know. You can ask the authors. If they timed the report to come out
before the elections, so much more power to them. What is wrong with
informing the American public of the atrocities that their government is
carrying out in their name before an election?
http://www.thelancet.com/home
Title: Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster
sample
survey
100,000 is their most conservative estimate of deaths as a direct result
of
US bombings after the invasion up to October 2004.
Various newspapers around the world also published the findings. See for
example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1338749,00.html
So what? They reported that some group surveyed a limited number of
Iraqis, and using a complicated formula based on old death statistics
from Saddam's regime (which we all know must be 100% reliable), they
made a number of assumptions to come up with their 100,000 number.
The methodology used is the same as every study done of estimated casualties
or health studies and so on. The highest probability estimate was around
100,000. The immediate reaction from people like yourself was it must be
much lower. Yeah, maybe it's much lower; but maybe it's much higher. In
fact they did it very conservatively. They excluded Fallujah because that
would have raised the extrapolated estimate, they included the Kurdish
areas, no fighting there, which would reduce the extrapolated estimate, and
in general they did a careful and rather conservative analysis.
They didn't use any compiled statistics from Saddam or others. In their
sampling, they only counted the number of deaths before the invasion when
there was proof, such as a death certificate. The methodology is well
explained in the report. Read it before criticizing it.
But it's either been ignored or the silly claim: well it's only an estimate,
so maybe it's too high. True, it's only an estimate, so maybe it's too low.
But whatever the number is, whether it's 50,000 or 150,000, it's obviously a
major atrocity. This is what people like you can't get through their heads.
You write off a serious study by American researchers from a reputable
university because some discussion forum says the body count is only 20,000.
Ok, let's say it's 20,000. Does that make everything ok to you?
Between the first Gulf war and this invasion, the rate of cancer in Iraq
shout up 1500% - that's 15 times more - due to the massive use of DU by the
American forces. As Galloway put it, many Iraqi children born with
deformations die before even knowing they are Iraqis. But they die precisely
because they are Iraqis. You can spin, and apologize for these crimes
against humanity all you want, but facts remain facts, and history is
recording all this.
Summary of the report:
Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100000
excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from
coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths.
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
A discussion forum is your source? Is this supposed to be funny?
No, it's not a discussion forum; and no it's not supposed to be funny.
It's deadly serious, you moron.
Oh, I am sorry. It's not a discussion forum. It's an "Open Community"
thingy. You register as "yoyo", jojo", or "Rebel without a pause" and post
away your whatever. Other people also register and read your whatever and
post their own whatever either as a reply to your whatever, or as their
original whatevers. And this is your main source for writing off a serious
study by a bunch of professionals who at least sign their own names to what
they write.
Between you and me, who qualifies better as a moron now?
Even if these numbers are correct, it is the BODY COUNT. That means the
number of dead bodies that were actually accounted for.
The Iraq Body Count project
It's become a project now? They better hire a lot of people for this one!!
looks at death certificates, and news
reports to come up with its number ... unlike your source, which is
making assumptions based on projected numbers using old Saddam Hussein
regime statistics as its base. And if your number is correct, why
haven't reporters in Iraq noticed that many deaths?
Believe me they have noticed it if they are not imbedded journalists. In
fact, that's all they've been noticing since this invasion started. Massive
death, destruction and sorrow. And they've been reporting it all between
dodging bullets and escaping Pentagon assassination attempts. But for some
strange reason CNN and FOX don't seem to think their reports is news worthy.
So you haven't heard it. Switch to any independent news source and you will
hear many many reports about American atrocities in Iraq.
That number is
simply preposterous. But I know you're going to believe it anyway,
because it fits your warped mindset.
Or maybe you're not going to believe it even if we brought the bodies for
you to count for yourself. But I don't think you are that stupid. I think
you're just fundamentally too dishonest to admit to anything that doesn't
fit your fairy tale world of American scouts freeing Iraq. You do it day in
day out on this group so this is not an isolated case. It's a pattern of
deceit. Maybe with some self deceit involved as well, but I doubt it.
Stat.
Like I said before, invaders don't count the number of people they
kill. Do you think after an air strike on a city, the pilots go
back and count how many people 8000 pounds of bombs killed? No,
they don't care and nor do you.
Okay, since you're going to tell me what I don't care about, why don't
I tell you what you don't care about ... you don't care about the Iraqi
people being slaughtered by the terrorist insurgency. In fact, you not
only don't care about those Iraqi people being slaughtered by the
terrorist insurgency, you're glad it's happening.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
31 May 2005 05:19:58 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
If you think putting the word "Study" in quotes in one of your posts,
and questioning when academics do anything, is going to sully Johns
Hopkins' reputation, you're sadly mistaken.
Let's see .... Johns Hopkins versus a homemade forum on linux. Which is
more credible? Hmmmm .... decisions, decisions ...
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
31 May 2005 07:43:22 PM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
If you think putting the word "Study" in quotes in one of your posts,
and questioning when academics do anything, is going to sully Johns
Hopkins' reputation, you're sadly mistaken.
I think the result of their complicated statistical formula is
questionable.
Let's see .... Johns Hopkins versus a homemade forum on linux. Which is
more credible? Hmmmm .... decisions, decisions ...
Sorry, I posted the wrong link -- the correct link should have a "net"
instead of a "com" --
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
31 May 2005 07:52:05 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
If you think putting the word "Study" in quotes in one of your posts,
and questioning when academics do anything, is going to sully Johns
Hopkins' reputation, you're sadly mistaken.
I think the result of their complicated statistical formula is
questionable.
Statistics is a complicated field, that's why you can still get a PhD in
Mathematics on topics in Statistics.
Let's see .... Johns Hopkins versus a homemade forum on linux. Which is
more credible? Hmmmm .... decisions, decisions ...
Sorry, I posted the wrong link -- the correct link should have a "net"
instead of a "com" --
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
Which records only "reported" deaths, ie - deaths mentioned in the news.
If you would note previous discussions and news articles, nobody was
counting or reporting Iraqi deaths during the firebombings.
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
31 May 2005 07:50:40 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117435692.457108.186070@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
My "ludicrous" claim is based on a study by the Center for International
Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies of Johns Hopkins University,
published by The Lancet and available at their site:
Yes, I'm quite aware of that "study." Was it merely a coincidence that
it was released just prior to the US election last November?
If you think putting the word "Study" in quotes in one of your posts,
and questioning when academics do anything, is going to sully Johns
Hopkins' reputation, you're sadly mistaken.
I think the result of their complicated statistical formula is
questionable.
Statistics is a complicated field, that's why you can still get a PhD in
Mathematics on topics in Statistics.
Let's see .... Johns Hopkins versus a homemade forum on linux. Which is
more credible? Hmmmm .... decisions, decisions ...
Sorry, I posted the wrong link -- the correct link should have a "net"
instead of a "com" --
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
Which includes "reported" deaths, ie - in the news. If you would note
previous discussions and news articles, nobody was counting or reporting
Iraqi deaths during the firebombings.
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
30 May 2005 06:27:19 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
MonsieurStat wrote:
Most of the 100,000 were killed during the first 6 months as a result of
intensive bombings. Americans, as is the tradition with most invaders and
occupiers, never count the number of people they kill...
Stat.
I have supplied a link to a website that says differently. Where is
your website to back up your ludicrous claim?
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
Steve,
The Liberal website can be found at:
http://www.we-liberals-miss-Saddam.org
Tony
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 03:36:00 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"=D3=BF=D2 Ursin Hoellee Wonder =D3=BF=D2" <laytonville@saber.net> wrot=
e in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
Yeah...the number is about right When the yankies dropped bombs, and
when they do it today, the media don't report the deaths. Seems that
yankie splitter bombs don't kill people.
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
Just "insurgents" Douglas. These are people fighting the illegal
invasion and occupation of their country. They are no different than
the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan who your govt. armed to the teeth to ward
off the invasion by the Soviet Union!
Keep it real!
WH
=20
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
29 May 2005 04:53:04 PM |
|
|
"WH" <bollogs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117398960.678686.249160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Steven Douglas wrote:
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
Yeah...the number is about right When the yankies dropped bombs, and
when they do it today, the media don't report the deaths. Seems that
yankie splitter bombs don't kill people.
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
Just "insurgents" Douglas. These are people fighting the illegal
invasion and occupation of their country. They are no different than
the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan who your govt. armed to the teeth to ward
off the invasion by the Soviet Union!
Keep it real!
WH
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
Today's friends is tomorrow's enemies. Nothing new about that. It's been occuring throughout
history. Allowing the USSR to gather a foothold in the Afghan region would've been intolerable. The
US acted while the Europeans shrugged their shoulders.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
30 May 2005 06:38:26 AM |
|
|
"dreamwalker" <backfromthe@dead.com> wrote in message
news:2b27f$429a39c4$40762657$18904@powerweb.allthenewsgroups.com...
"WH" <bollogs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117398960.678686.249160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Steven Douglas wrote:
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
"Ó¿Ò Ursin Hoellee Wonder Ó¿Ò" <laytonville@saber.net> wrote in
message
news:1117049765.797290.120220@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Who out there can give a good estimate on the number of humans
killed as a direct result of the USA invasion and occupation of
Iraq?
I think the figure is about 100,000.
In two years, it would take about 140 deaths a day to reach that
number. How many days have you heard 140 people died in one day? Have
you ever heard 140 people have died EACH and EVERY day?
Yeah...the number is about right When the yankies dropped bombs, and
when they do it today, the media don't report the deaths. Seems that
yankie splitter bombs don't kill people.
I just saw a report that said 45 people have died in the last two days.
45 people in two days, killed by terrorist insurgents. Where is the
ANGER with the terrorists? They are the monsters who are continuing the
killing of innocent civilians.
Just "insurgents" Douglas. These are people fighting the illegal
invasion and occupation of their country. They are no different than
the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan who your govt. armed to the teeth to ward
off the invasion by the Soviet Union!
Keep it real!
WH
http://www.iraqbodycount.com
Today's friends is tomorrow's enemies. Nothing new about that. It's been
occuring throughout
history. Allowing the USSR to gather a foothold in the Afghan region
would've been intolerable.
Why's that then? What would be the strategic advantage , Mr Wannabe-soldier?
Hint - the North West Frontier was only ever considered of strategic
importance by the British, pre 1946...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "jojo" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. soldiers killed as Iraqi attacks surge |
01 Jun 2005 09:53:27 AM |
|
|
Does anyone have any suggestions on another alternative solutions
beside sending the troops to die over in Iraqui
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
