(CNN)October bloodiest month yet for Iraqi civilians

[DMC_Freeride]

Cnn should of cared about the Iraqi people a long time ago when Sadam was exterminating them as was evident by the mass graves and pics. of dead men,women and children.

Yo genius... It's an AP report... So i could give you any number of prints from dozens of news sites...

So if CNN didn't care then - we shouldnt care now... Is that what your saying?? do you actually care about the people we're trying to protect?

I think he's trying to point out that Iraqi civilian deaths are only tragic today because of the US presence in Iraq.

Prior to our presence, Iraqi civilians deaths were not nearly as tragic, similar to Darfur and several other areas of the World that are neglected.

i knew what he saw saying - don't piss on my head and tell me it's r*ining...

To me - the past deaths were totally horrible - they are even MORE tragic now.. Because WE are supposed to be restoring order and democracy to the country... And we are failing...

[XtremeJibber2001]

Cnn should of cared about the Iraqi people a long time ago when Sadam was exterminating them as was evident by the mass graves and pics. of dead men,women and children.

Yo genius... It's an AP report... So i could give you any number of prints from dozens of news sites...

So if CNN didn't care then - we shouldnt care now... Is that what your saying?? do you actually care about the people we're trying to protect?

I think he's trying to point out that Iraqi civilian deaths are only tragic today because of the US presence in Iraq.

Prior to our presence, Iraqi civilians deaths were not nearly as tragic, similar to Darfur and several other areas of the World that are neglected.

i knew what he saw saying - don't piss on my head and tell me it's r*ining...

To me - the past deaths were totally horrible - they are even MORE tragic now.. Because WE are supposed to be restoring order and democracy to the country... And we are failing...

I agree with you, you're right. Unfortunately, in the media, the picture is painted much differently.

As far as the US restoring order and democracy, it's not going well as you pointed out, but I hypothesis that overall Iraqi civilian deaths are down compared to under Saddam's rule, but that doesn't make them any less tragic.

It would be both interesting and sickening to see the number of civilian deaths under Saddam versus the number of civilian deaths during US occupation. I'm going to take an educated guess and say the situation in Iraq for civilians has improved over the Saddam era, despite the awfully high number of deaths ... it's not acceptable, but I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

[DMC_Freeride]

I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

I don't live there.. I can't say...

[BigKahuna13]

Cnn should of cared about the Iraqi people a long time ago when Sadam was exterminating them as was evident by the mass graves and pics. of dead men,women and children.

Yo genius... It's an AP report... So i could give you any number of prints from dozens of news sites...

So if CNN didn't care then - we shouldnt care now... Is that what your saying?? do you actually care about the people we're trying to protect?

I think he's trying to point out that Iraqi civilian deaths are only tragic today because of the US presence in Iraq.

Prior to our presence, Iraqi civilians deaths were not nearly as tragic, similar to Darfur and several other areas of the World that are neglected.

i knew what he saw saying - don't piss on my head and tell me it's r*ining...

To me - the past deaths were totally horrible - they are even MORE tragic now.. Because WE are supposed to be restoring order and democracy to the country... And we are failing...

I agree with you, you're right. Unfortunately, in the media, the picture is painted much differently.

As far as the US restoring order and democracy, it's not going well as you pointed out, but I hypothesis that overall Iraqi civilian deaths are down compared to under Saddam's rule, but that doesn't make them any less tragic.

It would be both interesting and sickening to see the number of civilian deaths under Saddam versus the number of civilian deaths during US occupation. I'm going to take an educated guess and say the situation in Iraq for civilians has improved over the Saddam era, despite the awfully high number of deaths ... it's not acceptable, but I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

Really? The Lancet - a respected British medical journal - using well established and commonly accepted statistical methods estimate that at a minimum 300,000 people have died as a result of the Iraq War (they high end the number at 600,000). I don't know that I'd call that better.

At least Saddam kept the lights on and the trains running on time.

[XtremeJibber2001]

I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

I don't live there.. I can't say...

This is what I've found:

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

600,000 civilians deaths over 24 years is a disgusting disgusting thought! That's 25,000 deaths a year or 2,083 a month!

Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq
Min 47,891
Max 53,130

We've been in Iraq for roughly three years. Using the maximum civilian deaths recorded that's 17,710 a year or 1,475 a month. An equally disgusting and disturbing fact.

Purely on the basis of civilian deaths ... civilian deaths have DECREASED during the US occupation. Today, civilian deaths are a result of war, prior to the US occupation, civilian deaths were a result of their opinions, heritage, religion, race, or political views despite having trains on time and electricity 24/7

Is the situation better overall, I don't know, that's up to the Iraqi's to decide.

[BigKahuna13]

I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

I don't live there.. I can't say...

This is what I've found:

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

600,000 civilians deaths over 24 years is a disgusting disgusting thought! That's 25,000 deaths a year or 2,083 a month!

Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq
Min 47,891
Max 53,130

We've been in Iraq for roughly three years. Using the maximum civilian deaths recorded that's 17,710 a year or 1,475 a month. An equally disgusting and disturbing fact.

Purely on the basis of civilian deaths ... civilian deaths have DECREASED during the US occupation. Today, civilian deaths are a result of war, prior to the US occupation, civilian deaths were a result of their opinions, heritage, religion, race, or political views despite having trains on time and electricity 24/7

Is the situation better overall, I don't know, that's up to the Iraqi's to decide.

From the iraqbodycount.org website FAQ:

Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media reports from recognized sources. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given. This method is also used to deal with any residual uncertainty about the civilian or non-combatant status of the dead. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least three members of the Iraq Body Count project team before publication.

Don't know how much faith I'd put in numbers derived using this method.
In the study I posted the Lancet used cluster sampling, which involves interviewing people to determine casuality rates for a small geographic area. Not perfect either, but probably much more accurate.

[XtremeJibber2001]

I think the situation is an improvement from the Saddam days.

I don't live there.. I can't say...

This is what I've found:

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

600,000 civilians deaths over 24 years is a disgusting disgusting thought! That's 25,000 deaths a year or 2,083 a month!

Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq
Min 47,891
Max 53,130

We've been in Iraq for roughly three years. Using the maximum civilian deaths recorded that's 17,710 a year or 1,475 a month. An equally disgusting and disturbing fact.

Purely on the basis of civilian deaths ... civilian deaths have DECREASED during the US occupation. Today, civilian deaths are a result of war, prior to the US occupation, civilian deaths were a result of their opinions, heritage, religion, race, or political views despite having trains on time and electricity 24/7

Is the situation better overall, I don't know, that's up to the Iraqi's to decide.

From the iraqbodycount.org website FAQ:

Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media reports from recognized sources. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given. This method is also used to deal with any residual uncertainty about the civilian or non-combatant status of the dead. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least three members of the Iraq Body Count project team before publication.

Don't know how much faith I'd put in numbers derived using this method.
In the study I posted the Lancet used cluster sampling, which involves interviewing people to determine casuality rates for a small geographic area. Not perfect either, but probably much more accurate.

I don't know how much faith I can put into ANY OF THESE figures ... but I can't come here posting about un-based assumptions.

I've used what I can gather and it shows that civilian deaths are down. It's equally tragic, but it's still a reduction. Feel free to scour the internet for correct numbers, but I suspect there are none.

[Atomic1]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?
Just ask yourself,who created Sadam? and who's job was it to eliminate him?
We knew what he had, and we knew what he did because we were his biggest supporter in order to keep Iran in check. It was suspect intellegence and wierd behavior by Sadam as he failed to follow any of the U.N. resolutions established after the first gulf war that made us decide it was time to end our creation of Sadam.
IMO A no win situation that the media only makes worse with it's biased coverage.

[DMC_Freeride]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

[Atomic1]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

Iraq before America's occupation>
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

[DMC_Freeride]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

Iraq before America's occupation>
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

So what... I feel bad about that too... I'm not denying that Sadam killed people.. But I'm also not denying that Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld fu cked this up royally... And the end cause is more dead kids...

So you can throw all the pictures you want in my face and I still won't understand why your doing it...

[Atomic1]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

Iraq before America's occupation>
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

So what... I feel bad about that too... I'm not denying that Sadam killed people.. But I'm also not denying that Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld fu cked this up royally... And the end cause is more dead kids...

So you can throw all the pictures you want in my face and I still won't understand why your doing it...

So you didn't care about the over 300,000 men,WOMEN and CHILDREN Sadam killed?
Is it because they didn't pay taxes or are not registered Democrats?
Doesn't the Dem. party stand on the soap box when it comes to Human Rights?
Remember those are not the Iraqi people we are fighting in Iraq but insurgents and extremists ...backed by Al-Qaeda...Same Al-Qaeda responsible for 9-11.
And how come you never see this side of the story in the media?

[DMC_Freeride]

And just how many of those so called civilians are former republican guard members?

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

Iraq before America's occupation>
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

So what... I feel bad about that too... I'm not denying that Sadam killed people.. But I'm also not denying that Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld fu cked this up royally... And the end cause is more dead kids...

So you can throw all the pictures you want in my face and I still won't understand why your doing it...

So you didn't care about the over 300,000 men,WOMEN and CHILDREN Sadam killed?
Is it because they didn't pay taxes or are not registered Democrats?
Doesn't the Dem. party stand on the soap box when it comes to Human Rights?
Remember those are not the Iraqi people we are fighting in Iraq but insurgents and extremists ...backed by Al-Qaeda...Same Al-Qaeda responsible for 9-11.

Read my post you friggin KKKarl Rove wannabe asswipe... i DO care about the deaths under Sadam...

If you care SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much about these poor people - why do allow OUR fight to occur in their country?? How is that fair??!?!?!

[XtremeJibber2001]

If you care SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much about these poor people - why do we allow OUR fight to occur in their country?? How is that fair??!?!?!

A few questions.

We could have kept the troops home and let Saddam continue his killing, would we be any less guilty today if that was the case?

We could have removed all of our troops from around the World and allowed the World to be tormented by terrorist and let the fight come to our home land, would we be any less guilty today if that was the case?

We could have flew in, bombed the sh*t out of Iraq and kill Saddam and then left their infrastructure in ruble, would we be any less guilty today if that was the case?

We could leave today, leaving the Iraqi's to fend for themselves and kill each other amidst a civil war and leave prime terrorist recruiting/training grounds, would we be any less guilty today if that was the case?

We f*** up by voting for GWB. Congress f*** up by voting for the war. GWB f*** up for allowing Rummy to keep his job. GWB and his remaining generals f***-up and continue to do so because they won't dedicate the troops and the resources to properly secure Iraq and get it off it's feet. I'm f***-up because I'm not enrolling in the Marines.

All of the above can be answered and IMHO we're guilty on all accounts. As for people f***-up, it is what it is and it's probably not going to change.

With all that said, what would you do, DMC?

[Atomic1]

I doubt many of the woman and childern dying daily by the scores were part of Sadams crew...



justify it how you want... Lot's of kids are getting killed..

Iraq before America's occupation>
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/

So what... I feel bad about that too... I'm not denying that Sadam killed people.. But I'm also not denying that Bush/Rove/Rumsfeld fu cked this up royally... And the end cause is more dead kids...

So you can throw all the pictures you want in my face and I still won't understand why your doing it...

So you didn't care about the over 300,000 men,WOMEN and CHILDREN Sadam killed?
Is it because they didn't pay taxes or are not registered Democrats?
Doesn't the Dem. party stand on the soap box when it comes to Human Rights?
Remember those are not the Iraqi people we are fighting in Iraq but insurgents and extremists ...backed by Al-Qaeda...Same Al-Qaeda responsible for 9-11.

Read my post you friggin KKKarl Rove wannabe asswipe... i DO care about the deaths under Sadam...

If you care SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much about these poor people - why do allow OUR fight to occur in their country?? How is that fair??!?!?!

DMC flexing his Internet muscles with name calling and pers. attacks!