VTXDave
Well-Known Member
Does it matter? War is war no matter how you slice it. You're not saying that it's only war if Americans die, are you? I believe the folks who died in those attacks/bombings we perpetrated would beg to differ.
Obama is the man
- Thread starter Garden Knowm
- Start date
Doctor Pot
Well-Known Member
I'm sure the 100,000 or so Iraqis the US has killed since 2003 far outnumber any casualties under Clinton.
Titania
Well-Known Member
I've never encountered such frivolous, racist remarks on riu. Clearly you are a soulless cunt. I would love to run into you in person so I could concave your face. People like you are the reason America is hated the world over. good night.
Titania
Well-Known Member
Imposed "No-Fly" zones upon Iraq (1991-2002), cruise missile strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan (199, The bombing campaign of Bosnia where sorties were flown from the USS Theodore Roosevelt and USS America (1995), the bombing campaign of Iraq (199
Thanks man, you saved me a lot of typing. The Sudan bombing is an example I was going to use; the destruction of the only pharmecuitical factory in the country led to an estimated 100, 000 deaths - mainly amongst children. Not to mention Clinton clearly used the attack to avoid impeachment.
Titania
Well-Known Member
And Hitler killed 6 million Jews, does that make Bush's crimes less relevant?! This support for Clinton amongst liberals is frankly disgusting. If you get your information from main stream media, than you won't know the crimes that he, and every other U.S president has committed.
If you wish, continue to live in ignorance.
BTW, the death toll in Iraq is now over 1 million. I think they got to 100, 000 back in 2006.
Doctor Pot
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying he was perfect, but the military interventions under Clinton were mostly to stop killing that was already taking place.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
You seem to be pulling numbers out of your ass. The deaths in Sudan as well.
Titania
Well-Known Member
laughable, his 'interventions' as you so kindly call them were a continuation of American imperialist aggression. His doctrine was that the U.S has the right to preemptive force to secure markets and resources!
The death toll in Iraq is disputable because the U.S does not count civilian deaths - not after Vietnam. But the figure is between 100 ,000 and 1 000, 000. The death toll in Sudan is accurate: "A year after the attack without the lifesaving medicine [the destroyed facilities] produced, Sudan's death toll from the bombing has continued, quietly, to rise... Thus, tens of thousands of people -- many of them children -- have suffered and died from malaria, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases... [The factory] provided affordable medicine for humans and all the locally available veterinary medicine in Sudan. It produced 90 percent of Sudan's major pharmaceutical products... Sanctions against Sudan make it impossible to import adequate amounts of medicines required to cover the serious gap left by the plant's destruction.... [T]he action taken by Washington on Aug. 20, 1998, continues to deprive the people of Sudan of needed medicine. Millions must wonder how the International Court of Justice in The Hague will celebrate this anniversary" [Jonathan Belke, Boston Globe, Aug. 22, 1999].
tipsgnob
New Member
sissy........I've never encountered such frivolous, racist remarks on riu. Clearly you are a soulless cunt. I would love to run into you in person so I could concave your face. People like you are the reason America is hated the world over. good night.
VTXDave
Well-Known Member
That makes it OK then.
medicineman
New Member
It's never OK, but I believe if you look back on past US administrations, you'd find there was always some killing going on somewhere, mostly in the name of commerce. US corporations have been responsible for more deaths since WWII than any other factor, well maybe Pol Pot could come close, but the corporations kill with many assassinators, chemicals, remember Bhopal India, 1984 during the Reagan administration and how he covered their ass and patched that up, up to 40,000 deaths from that one disaster. But mainly the deaths come from some kind of US intervention, CIA, Military, errant bomb as in the Sudan thing, but mostly orchestrated by corporations. Viet nam (In the name of oil deposits in the Mekong Delta), Iraq, Oil, Oil, Oil, plus a foothold in the middle east lo lock up oil supplies accross the area. You all know if Iraq was a success, (We have secured the oil contracts for the reserves), Iran was going to be next, and Maybe Obama will slow that scenario down, but again, being surrounded day-in-day-out by billionaire oil barrons may tend to sway your judgement. Yes, one death is too many, but when the most powerful government is controlled by the most powerful corporations, death for poor people that are in the way of "progress" is inevitable.
bl33b
Well-Known Member
just one question, should we have let Saddam continue to kill his people?
if you think so then i guess you would think that we should have let Hitler continue to kill the Jews.
by the way Obama is only one man, and without the consent of the congress he cant to anything
and the statement by Garden Knowm about how anything he doesnt agree with or thinks is false will be deleted is just commie fascist liberal crap
just cause u dont agree doesnt make it false
nickfury510
Well-Known Member
tipsgnob
New Member
just one question, should we have let Saddam continue to kill his people?
the answer is yes...it is none of our business...most of the people that saddam killed had committed treason. what do you think would happen in the US if a group people were committing treason?? or forming an army?
the answer is yes...it is none of our business...most of the people that saddam killed had committed treason. what do you think would happen in the US if a group people were committing treason?? or forming an army?
Doctor Pot
Well-Known Member
Not to mention that all happened in 1991, and he hadn't done anything like that since then. Hey Saddam, remember that shit you did 12 years ago? Yeah, we're gonna invade you because of that now.
Bush allowed 152 prisoners to be executed in Texas during his tenure as governor. Does this mean he's also guilty of killing his own people? Not to mention the US killed far more Iraqi civilians than Saddam ever did.
medicineman
New Member
just one question, should we have let Saddam continue to kill his people?
if you think so then i guess you would think that we should have let Hitler continue to kill the Jews.
Typical right wing thinking, equate Sadam with Hitler, then anything we do to Sadam is OK. I think if you were an Iraqi, you'd be more inclined to equate Bush with Hitler, maybe Stalin, but for sure you'd think him to be the biggest asshole in the world. That may be the only thing that Myself and the Iraqi's have in common, but in common it is.
if you think so then i guess you would think that we should have let Hitler continue to kill the Jews.
Typical right wing thinking, equate Sadam with Hitler, then anything we do to Sadam is OK. I think if you were an Iraqi, you'd be more inclined to equate Bush with Hitler, maybe Stalin, but for sure you'd think him to be the biggest asshole in the world. That may be the only thing that Myself and the Iraqi's have in common, but in common it is.
Typical, black family gets free housing.
Pol Pot's forte didn't come from killing a lot of people, it came from killing such a high proportion of his own people. Shows what happens when a revolutionary party abandons socialism altogether (Pol Pot took out all occasions of the word "socialism" or "socialist" in the Constitution of "Democratic Kampuchea" as it was called.
ViRedd
New Member
It seems to have repeated itself all though out history, Ray. Socialistic/communistic/fascistic systems can't sustain themselves beyond a certain point. They eventually go broke. We see that happening right here in the U.S. at the moment. What happens when the millions of government workers can no longer get their coveted pensions and the few government pigs at the top continue living the high life at the expense of the bled dry populous? Will blood run red in the streets?
Vi
