I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell. - Harry Truman
Really TTH? You honestly believe that over 1.2 million Iraqis have died as a result of the 2003 invasion?? This is one seriously biased account. Most every other credible account of the deaths in Iraq is no where near this magnitude. My conclusion, you will cite any source, no matter how unreliable, to support your anti-war hypothisis. Your credibility strained.Your own cited quote:"It is at least 10 times greater than most estimates cited in the US media," Of course it is, it is also off by a 10x order of magnitudue.It would be funny, if it were not so pathetic.
The link cites The Lancet and Opinion Research Business. Why are these biased, or more biased than your sources? What is your source, by the way? Your position on this war, despite the fact that virtually every single prediction, justification, and rationalization used by you and your fellow supporters has turned out to be false, is what's truly pathetic. You continue on simply to save face, because you can't admit you are wrong. Whatever the correct number of dead is, each one is immoral, and it's not what Jesus would do.
Simple question, do you believe that 1.2 million or more Iraqi are dead as a result of US action?A simple Yes or No will do.
No. I think it could be higher or lower. It depends on how you define the U.S.'s role in the cause of death, direct or indirect. I think there is no way of knowing an exact figure. We know one thing, however, we cannot trust the military or the government for estimates. The credibility of both on this issue is shot. The U.S. military, as we've seen in recent news stories, is in an active propaganda program against U.S. citizens. Who knows how much disinformation is out there. Therefore, an outside organization like The Lancet, MAY be more credible.
Post a Comment