Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[Raoul_Duke]

You see violence as a way to strengthen your argument
"see the war failed"
there are 15000 people murdered in this country last year. thats 41 every day and some how a bomb being used makes that nothing?
are u serious?

See this is the whole problem with this country
spun spin spam

These people were not killed because of a war started by another country invading America.

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

A report published last week by the Government Accountability Office has revealed that the United States is "not fully able to account for US nuclear material overseas," including separated plutonium and more than 16,000 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium. The US lost track of thousands of kilos of deadly "weapon-usable" plutonium and uranium that it gave to countries as Colombia, Chile (during the chummy Pinochet years), South Africa, the EU nations, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, China, Egypt, Iran, India, Pakistan, South Korea and Israel.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11920.pdf

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

 

[NoNukes]

Let us not forget that we sent in the CIA to pay off sadam several times but unlike the dictators that play ball with us, he would not take a dime and refused to be bought. Yes he was a horrid dictator, but the reason he became an enemy of the United States was due to us not being able to buy him and control him. Its all just a money game, which is like pointing out that the sky is blue, but I guess when you dumb, you dumb.

The reason that America was able to march right into Iraq and defeat them is because many of Saddam's people were bought

no nukes with each quote your leaving the reality train further and further

That happens to be the truth.

 

[NoNukes]

You see violence as a way to strengthen your argument
"see the war failed"
there are 15000 people murdered in this country last year. thats 41 every day and some how a bomb being used makes that nothing?
are u serious?

See this is the whole problem with this country
spun spin spam

These people were not killed because of a war started by another country invading America.

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

Just this minute watched Dick Cheney interviewed on VOA.
He admitted that there were no WMDs.

 

[idb]

These people were not killed because of a war started by another country invading America.

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

Just this minute watched Dick Cheney interviewed on VOA.
He admitted that there were no WMDs.

He's still a belligerent bastard though isn't he?

 

[JRK]

These people were not killed because of a war started by another country invading America.

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

A report published last week by the Government Accountability Office has revealed that the United States is "not fully able to account for US nuclear material overseas," including separated plutonium and more than 16,000 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium. The US lost track of thousands of kilos of deadly "weapon-usable" plutonium and uranium that it gave to countries as Colombia, Chile (during the chummy Pinochet years), South Africa, the EU nations, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, China, Egypt, Iran, India, Pakistan, South Korea and Israel.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11920.pdf

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

The iraq war was about cleaning house
To start with war sux
killig sux
evil people suck

We ignored OBL and looked what it got us. Saddam gace us no choice in this matter and at the end of the day we had no choice
This was a war that had to be won. Saddam had ignored the world for years.

Dont forget there was close to 60 countries invaded with us. The UN decided not to play, we found out the real reason later

Do you allow a maniac that had a proven record that Saddam had to continue after 9-11 is the real qustion
When the UN tells the world 18 months after 9-11 that Saddam has 6500 muntions missing, that he has anthrax and nerev gas un accounted for, and later we find he has control of 550 metric tons of Yellow cake

Of course we take him out

One other item
most of the soldiers killed i Iraq were killed fighting al quidea troops, not Iraqis

Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is a popular name for the Iraqi division of the international Salafi jihadi militant organization al-Qaeda. It is recognized as a part of the greater Iraqi insurgency.

The group was founded in 2003 and first led by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who declared allegiance to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in October 2004. It was initially operating under the name Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Arabic: جماعة التوحيد والجهاد*, "Group of Monotheism and Jihad"); since 2004 its official name is Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) ("Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of the Two Rivers").[4] Foreign (non-Iraqi) fighters are widely thought to play a key role in its network.[5]
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents [hide]
1 As Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad
1.1 Origins
1.2 Goals and tactics
1.3 Activities
2 As Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn
2.1 Goals and umbrella organizations
2.2 Strength and activity
2.3 Rise and decline of al-Qaeda in Iraq
2.4 Inciting sectarian violence through mass terrorism
2.5 Operations outside Iraq and other activities
2.6 Conflicts with the other groups
2.7 Transformation and attempted resurgency
3 Some key members
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
6.1 Articles
6.2 Videos

 

[JRK]

These people were not killed because of a war started by another country invading America.

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

Just this minute watched Dick Cheney interviewed on VOA.
He admitted that there were no WMDs.

Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
Look Cheney knows that this event took place in 06 I promise you
He also knows that we did not find the piles we thought they had
It is confusing to me why you guys continue to argue a point that you know is not true. This info was presented to congress
do you have any idea how far under the prison these people would be if that was a lie?

 

[Bfgrn]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

Yes... WHAT was their crime???

100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study

Thursday 28 October 2004 19.00 EDT

About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.

The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion.

More

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?
Mahatma Gandhi

 

[Contumacious]

[The iraq war was about cleaning house........

..........Estimated War-Related Costs, Iraq and Afghanistan

According to the Center for Defense Information, the estimated cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will reach $1.29 trillion by the end of fiscal year 2011.

Read more: Estimated War-Related Costs, Iraq and Afghanistan — Infoplease.com Estimated War-Related Costs, Iraq and Afghanistan — Infoplease.com

 

[Bfgrn]

The three trillion dollar war

The cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts have grown to staggering proportions

Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.

The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

Most Americans have yet to feel these costs. The price in blood has been paid by our voluntary military and by hired contractors. The price in treasure has, in a sense, been financed entirely by borrowing. Taxes have not been raised to pay for it - in fact, taxes on the rich have actually fallen. Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.

More

 

[Raoul_Duke]

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

A report published last week by the Government Accountability Office has revealed that the United States is "not fully able to account for US nuclear material overseas," including separated plutonium and more than 16,000 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium. The US lost track of thousands of kilos of deadly "weapon-usable" plutonium and uranium that it gave to countries as Colombia, Chile (during the chummy Pinochet years), South Africa, the EU nations, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, China, Egypt, Iran, India, Pakistan, South Korea and Israel.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11920.pdf

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

The iraq war was about cleaning house
To start with war sux
killig sux
evil people suck

We ignored OBL and looked what it got us. Saddam gace us no choice in this matter and at the end of the day we had no choice
This was a war that had to be won. Saddam had ignored the world for years.

Dont forget there was close to 60 countries invaded with us. The UN decided not to play, we found out the real reason later

Do you allow a maniac that had a proven record that Saddam had to continue after 9-11 is the real qustion
When the UN tells the world 18 months after 9-11 that Saddam has 6500 muntions missing, that he has anthrax and nerev gas un accounted for, and later we find he has control of 550 metric tons of Yellow cake

Of course we take him out

One other item
most of the soldiers killed i Iraq were killed fighting al quidea troops, not Iraqis

Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is a popular name for the Iraqi division of the international Salafi jihadi militant organization al-Qaeda. It is recognized as a part of the greater Iraqi insurgency.

The group was founded in 2003 and first led by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who declared allegiance to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in October 2004. It was initially operating under the name Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Arabic: جماعة التوحيد والجهاد*, "Group of Monotheism and Jihad"); since 2004 its official name is Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) ("Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of the Two Rivers").[4] Foreign (non-Iraqi) fighters are widely thought to play a key role in its network.[5]
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents [hide]
1 As Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad
1.1 Origins
1.2 Goals and tactics
1.3 Activities
2 As Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn
2.1 Goals and umbrella organizations
2.2 Strength and activity
2.3 Rise and decline of al-Qaeda in Iraq
2.4 Inciting sectarian violence through mass terrorism
2.5 Operations outside Iraq and other activities
2.6 Conflicts with the other groups
2.7 Transformation and attempted resurgency
3 Some key members
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
6.1 Articles
6.2 Videos

Can you answer the question please. here it is again ;

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No most of those killed here last night were killed for a fuccking chunk of coke cooked down and called crack

Nothing to do with freedoms, peace, and the preservation of life for years to come in a country that weapons, war and killing was all it existed for until 2003

Just this minute watched Dick Cheney interviewed on VOA.
He admitted that there were no WMDs.

Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
Look Cheney knows that this event took place in 06 I promise you
He also knows that we did not find the piles we thought they had
It is confusing to me why you guys continue to argue a point that you know is not true. This info was presented to congress
do you have any idea how far under the prison these people would be if that was a lie?

You are lying, period. The admin would have yelled from the roof tops if they had found the stock piles of WMDs, particularly nuclear material, they had been warning the world about.

This is not about interpretation now, it is about your deliberate lies.

 

[JRK]

A report published last week by the Government Accountability Office has revealed that the United States is "not fully able to account for US nuclear material overseas," including separated plutonium and more than 16,000 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium. The US lost track of thousands of kilos of deadly "weapon-usable" plutonium and uranium that it gave to countries as Colombia, Chile (during the chummy Pinochet years), South Africa, the EU nations, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, China, Egypt, Iran, India, Pakistan, South Korea and Israel.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11920.pdf

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

The iraq war was about cleaning house
To start with war sux
killig sux
evil people suck

We ignored OBL and looked what it got us. Saddam gace us no choice in this matter and at the end of the day we had no choice
This was a war that had to be won. Saddam had ignored the world for years.

Dont forget there was close to 60 countries invaded with us. The UN decided not to play, we found out the real reason later

Do you allow a maniac that had a proven record that Saddam had to continue after 9-11 is the real qustion
When the UN tells the world 18 months after 9-11 that Saddam has 6500 muntions missing, that he has anthrax and nerev gas un accounted for, and later we find he has control of 550 metric tons of Yellow cake

Of course we take him out

One other item
most of the soldiers killed i Iraq were killed fighting al quidea troops, not Iraqis

Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is a popular name for the Iraqi division of the international Salafi jihadi militant organization al-Qaeda. It is recognized as a part of the greater Iraqi insurgency.

The group was founded in 2003 and first led by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who declared allegiance to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in October 2004. It was initially operating under the name Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Arabic: جماعة التوحيد والجهاد*, "Group of Monotheism and Jihad"); since 2004 its official name is Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) ("Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of the Two Rivers").[4] Foreign (non-Iraqi) fighters are widely thought to play a key role in its network.[5]
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents [hide]
1 As Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad
1.1 Origins
1.2 Goals and tactics
1.3 Activities
2 As Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn
2.1 Goals and umbrella organizations
2.2 Strength and activity
2.3 Rise and decline of al-Qaeda in Iraq
2.4 Inciting sectarian violence through mass terrorism
2.5 Operations outside Iraq and other activities
2.6 Conflicts with the other groups
2.7 Transformation and attempted resurgency
3 Some key members
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
6.1 Articles
6.2 Videos

Can you answer the question please. here it is again ;

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

I did
i ignored it for a reason, With respect to so many that have a lack of understanding of how one resolves issues
That event you alleged happened had nothing to do with Saddam
I answered you question thus

 

[JRK]

The three trillion dollar war

The cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts have grown to staggering proportions

Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.

The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

Most Americans have yet to feel these costs. The price in blood has been paid by our voluntary military and by hired contractors. The price in treasure has, in a sense, been financed entirely by borrowing. Taxes have not been raised to pay for it - in fact, taxes on the rich have actually fallen. Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.

More

dude you thread is so far off I feel sorry for you and anyone who thinks that is true
to satrt with the cost of the war is over
it cost no more to have the 10,000 (at most) to keep those in Iraq as ir would to keep them in Germany
that leaves over 2 trillion dollars to take care of the wounded according to those numbers
Do you realize thats medicae X 4 years fo millions with cancer, etc....

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News

 

[JakeStarkey]

The outsourcing of the war to private no-bid contracters, instead of doing the work within the Corps of Engineers and hiring native Iraqis at decent wages to rebuild their country, demonstrated that privatization of war continues to be stupid and financially ruinous, as well as missing a wonderful opportunity to take away nationwide Iraqi support for the insurgency.

 

[Bfgrn]

The three trillion dollar war

The cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts have grown to staggering proportions

Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes

The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.

The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.

And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.

Most Americans have yet to feel these costs. The price in blood has been paid by our voluntary military and by hired contractors. The price in treasure has, in a sense, been financed entirely by borrowing. Taxes have not been raised to pay for it - in fact, taxes on the rich have actually fallen. Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.

More

dude you thread is so far off I feel sorry for you and anyone who thinks that is true
to satrt with the cost of the war is over
it cost no more to have the 10,000 (at most) to keep those in Iraq as ir would to keep them in Germany
that leaves over 2 trillion dollars to take care of the wounded according to those numbers
Do you realize thats medicae X 4 years fo millions with cancer, etc....

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News

DUDE...your right wing propaganda ONLY INCLUDES the cost for military and related activities, including training of Iraqi forces and diplomatic operations.

I am interested to see how our military hardware and armaments regenerate themselves magically...

 

[JRK]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

Yes... WHAT was their crime???

100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study

Thursday 28 October 2004 19.00 EDT

About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.

The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion.

More

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?
Mahatma Gandhi

1) mosr have been killed by al quida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) more people have been murdered in the US during the same time
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2009

3) Saddam killed as many as 1 million iraqis
[edit] Number of VictimsAccording to The New York Times, "he [Saddam] murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead. His seizure of Kuwait threw the Middle East into crisis. More insidious, arguably, was the psychological damage he inflicted on his own land. Hussein created a nation of informants — friends on friends, circles within circles — making an entire population complicit in his rule".[9] Others have estimated 800,000 deaths caused by Saddam not counting the Iran-Iraq war.[10] Estimates as to the number of Iraqis executed by Saddam's regime vary from 300-500,000[11] to over 600,000,[12] estimates as to the number of Kurds he massacred vary from 70,000 to 300,000,[13] and estimates as to the number killed in the put-down of the 1991 rebellion vary from 60,000[14] to 200,000.[12] Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.[15]

Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JakeStarkey]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

Yes... WHAT was their crime???

100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study

Thursday 28 October 2004 19.00 EDT

About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.

The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion.

More

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?
Mahatma Gandhi

1) mosr have been killed by al quida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) more people have been murdered in the US during the same time
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2009

3) Saddam killed as many as 1 million iraqis
[edit] Number of VictimsAccording to The New York Times, "he [Saddam] murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead. His seizure of Kuwait threw the Middle East into crisis. More insidious, arguably, was the psychological damage he inflicted on his own land. Hussein created a nation of informants — friends on friends, circles within circles — making an entire population complicit in his rule".[9] Others have estimated 800,000 deaths caused by Saddam not counting the Iran-Iraq war.[10] Estimates as to the number of Iraqis executed by Saddam's regime vary from 300-500,000[11] to over 600,000,[12] estimates as to the number of Kurds he massacred vary from 70,000 to 300,000,[13] and estimates as to the number killed in the put-down of the 1991 rebellion vary from 60,000[14] to 200,000.[12] Estimates for the number of dead in the Iran-Iraq war range upwards from 300,000.[15]

Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have just demonstrated a perfect logical fallacy: comparison of unrelated objects.

 

[Raoul_Duke]

The iraq war was about cleaning house
To start with war sux
killig sux
evil people suck

We ignored OBL and looked what it got us. Saddam gace us no choice in this matter and at the end of the day we had no choice
This was a war that had to be won. Saddam had ignored the world for years.

Dont forget there was close to 60 countries invaded with us. The UN decided not to play, we found out the real reason later

Do you allow a maniac that had a proven record that Saddam had to continue after 9-11 is the real qustion
When the UN tells the world 18 months after 9-11 that Saddam has 6500 muntions missing, that he has anthrax and nerev gas un accounted for, and later we find he has control of 550 metric tons of Yellow cake

Of course we take him out

One other item
most of the soldiers killed i Iraq were killed fighting al quidea troops, not Iraqis

Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is a popular name for the Iraqi division of the international Salafi jihadi militant organization al-Qaeda. It is recognized as a part of the greater Iraqi insurgency.

The group was founded in 2003 and first led by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who declared allegiance to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in October 2004. It was initially operating under the name Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Arabic: جماعة التوحيد والجهاد*, "Group of Monotheism and Jihad"); since 2004 its official name is Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) ("Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of the Two Rivers").[4] Foreign (non-Iraqi) fighters are widely thought to play a key role in its network.[5]
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents [hide]
1 As Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad
1.1 Origins
1.2 Goals and tactics
1.3 Activities
2 As Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn
2.1 Goals and umbrella organizations
2.2 Strength and activity
2.3 Rise and decline of al-Qaeda in Iraq
2.4 Inciting sectarian violence through mass terrorism
2.5 Operations outside Iraq and other activities
2.6 Conflicts with the other groups
2.7 Transformation and attempted resurgency
3 Some key members
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
6.1 Articles
6.2 Videos

Can you answer the question please. here it is again ;

So bearing in mind that the US has already lost vast quantities of nuclear weapons material and has replaced a terrorist-supporting government in Baghdad with a government made up of actual terrorists, do you think that if Americans knew in 2002 that they'd have to spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and tens of thousands of wounded to achieve this, would they have supported the invasion of iraq?

I did
i ignored it for a reason, With respect to so many that have a lack of understanding of how one resolves issues
That event you alleged happened had nothing to do with Saddam
I answered you question thus

Where's the answer? Can you repeat your exact answer in your reply please?

 

[NoNukes]

Just this minute watched Dick Cheney interviewed on VOA.
He admitted that there were no WMDs.

Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
Look Cheney knows that this event took place in 06 I promise you
He also knows that we did not find the piles we thought they had
It is confusing to me why you guys continue to argue a point that you know is not true. This info was presented to congress
do you have any idea how far under the prison these people would be if that was a lie?

You are lying, period. The admin would have yelled from the roof tops if they had found the stock piles of WMDs, particularly nuclear material, they had been warning the world about.

This is not about interpretation now, it is about your deliberate lies.

This is what I have been saying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JRK is the classic right wing progressive neo-con imperialist (a Cheney clone) who thinks Americans will still buy the Big Lie, No Nukes.

He has not been able to carry one argument here.