has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq?

Daniel — 12/15/2005 12:19:11 AM (archived)

Isn't that important news? Even if the elections lead to a stable future (hope so), what does that say about moral culpability?

(note: this figure includes the murders of people by terrorist insurgents; however even Bush includes it as it is a direct result of the invasion)

To say it would have been worse if things had been left alone there: isn't that playing the 'what if' card - hasn't that line of argument been discredited? Here, in this forum?

How can anyone justify this even if the outcome is better than the situation before? It was never a case of clear self-defence. I have been a fence-sitter on this issue but now we have official confirmation of the civilian toll. What is a decent person with a conscience going to make of it?

I ask merely for information ..

The whole thread (79 posts)

has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq? - Daniel - 12/15/2005 12:19:11 AM
- re: has anyone mentioned that this is hardly news? - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:01:20 AM
  - You dont seem to grasp the fact.... - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:48:47 AM
    - :) Just waiting for irrelavent comparisons to WW2 - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:57:17 AM
      - Nobody said freedom was cheap. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 5:54:03 PM
        
        What price freedom/ - Doug Ellison - 12/15/2005 11:21:26 PM
        
        re: What price freedom/ - SDG - 12/16/2005 5:08:01 PM
        
        Freedom vs Lives is not a valid equation - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 7:20:52 PM
        
        The scary part is......... - Lindy - 12/16/2005 12:33:44 AM
        
        re: Nobody said freedom was cheap. - az - 12/15/2005 6:36:53 PM
        
        Okay, now I'm really confused. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:47:10 PM
        
        re: Okay, now I'm really confused. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:17:01 PM
        
        Isolationism - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:37:06 PM
        
        This thread is about Iraq. - Doug Ellisont - 12/15/2005 11:26:53 PM
        
        re: This thread is about Iraq. - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 3:25:08 PM
        
        re: This thread is about Iraq. - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 12:09:50 AM
        
        re: Isolationism - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:49:21 PM
        
        re: Isolationism - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 8:56:30 PM
        
        We were asking for it? - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 8:08:19 PM
        
        We were asking for it? - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 8:04:31 PM
        
        Non-threatening - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:58:31 PM
        
        re: Nobody said freedom was cheap. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:37:40 PM
        
        Liberals don't do "alternatives." - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:04:04 PM
  - OK, so it includes military casualties. And it's not new information either. - Daniel - 12/15/2005 7:25:39 AM
    - We went over a lot of this a long time ago. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 5:59:20 PM
      - Is it your suggestion the US should now invade Iran? (n/t) - Publius - 12/16/2005 2:55:36 PM
      - re: We went over a lot of this a long time ago. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:42:03 PM
- Never mind - Donald - 12/15/2005 2:10:44 AM
  - Good point but - Buck Galaxy - 12/15/2005 9:36:05 AM
    - yes those elections are very good news. Think of this though: - Daniel - 12/15/2005 12:56:29 PM
      - I've got a better one. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:02:16 PM
        
        Freedom and democracy...and where would that be? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:45:34 PM
        
        that's not really the point here - Daniel - 12/16/2005 2:38:17 AM
        
        "Could anyone still say, 'this is worth 30,000 deaths'?" - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:08:47 AM
        
        "The Iraqis will decide if the toll is worth it or not." - R.L. - 12/16/2005 7:09:48 PM
        
        it is exactly our question to answer, as it was OUR governments which initiated the invasion (n/t) - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:30:11 AM
        
        it is exactly our question to answer, as it was OUR governments which initiated the invasion (n/t) - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:29:58 AM
        
        More on Iraqi memories of Saddam - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:59:46 AM
        
        yep credit is due to the benefits - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:49:50 AM
        
        Get real. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:39:21 PM
        
        re: Get real. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 8:22:45 PM
        
        re: Get real, continued. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 8:59:13 PM
        
        re: Get real, continued. - Azstrummer - 12/16/2005 7:31:49 PM
      - re: See the alternate timeline and please tell me where my assumptions are wrong. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 5:56:40 PM
        
        your assumptions were your assumptions. can't be wrong. (n/t) - alcaray - 12/15/2005 7:36:04 PM
- re: has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq? - SDG - 12/15/2005 12:58:25 AM
  - Good post. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:03:11 PM
  - NOW you want to critically question your president? - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:52:57 AM
    - re: NOW you want to critically question your president? - SDG - 12/15/2005 4:01:59 PM
- Well, they were going to die sometime anyway, so Bush isn't really responsible. - Bowser - 12/15/2005 12:50:26 AM
- "I ask merely for information......." - Lindy - 12/15/2005 12:45:41 AM
  - Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:06:21 AM
    - We know the election is going to be a success.....Katherine Harris was placed in charge... - Publius - 12/15/2005 10:45:37 PM
      - I'll admit, the 2002 election in Iraq was much smoother. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 12:11:39 AM
        
        re: I'll admit, the 2002 election in Iraq was much smoother. - Lindy - 12/16/2005 4:50:38 PM
        
        LOL (n/t) - SDG - 12/16/2005 1:01:31 AM
    - So which finger has the paint on it? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 5:30:31 PM
      - Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - SteveS - 12/15/2005 8:06:40 PM
        
        re: Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 8:25:19 PM
        
        re: Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - SteveS - 12/15/2005 9:24:06 PM
        
        IMHO Tom's posts are invalid by default - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 3:44:54 PM
        
        re: IMHO Tom's posts are invalid by default - SteveS - 12/16/2005 7:36:09 PM
        
        The support he provides is hardly balanced. - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 10:14:59 PM
        
        Wow. - Tom Brosz - 12/17/2005 3:48:07 AM
    - Dear Tom, F*** off. (n/t) - Tony - 12/15/2005 1:41:07 PM
      - Yeah, right. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:19:54 PM
        
        Same as your first reaction: - alcaray - 12/17/2005 6:43:17 PM
        
        Wishful thinking hardly makes that worth replying to. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:21:48 PM
        
        Yeah, the same indignant blowfish response again. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:41:10 PM
      - I see the old adage about a picture saying a thousand words still holds true. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:06:26 PM
      - Steady on, old chap - Sam F. - 12/15/2005 4:41:37 PM
        
        Yeah that's right, the Brits were not involved were they - Daniel - 12/15/2005 4:57:27 PM
        
        Tom said the "American Left" - Sam F. - 12/16/2005 8:19:46 AM
    - re: Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - Doug Ellison - 12/15/2005 11:04:30 AM
      - Q.E.D. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:14:08 PM
      - re: Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 5:29:14 PM
    - Is that a purple chad? (n/t) - Lindy - 12/15/2005 4:14:25 AM
      - No. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:35:02 AM
        
        Chad or no chad...Its a beautiful thing. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:13:21 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (79 posts)