Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sinkingfeeling

(51,457 posts)
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:15 AM Apr 2015

Report Shows US Invasion, Occupation of Iraq Left 1 Million Dead

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30164-report-shows-us-invasion-occupation-of-iraq-left-1-million-dead

A recently published report has revealed that the US invasion and occupation of Iraq was responsible for the deaths of approximately 1 million Iraqis, which is 5 percent of the total population of the country. The report also tallies hundreds of thousands of casualties in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Authors of the report, titled "Body Count: Casualty Figures After 10 Years of the 'War on Terror,'" have told Truthout that other casualty reports, like the often-quoted Iraq Body Count (IBC), which has a high-end estimate at the time of this writing of 154,563, are far too low in their estimates, and that the real numbers reach "genocidal dimensions."

The report states that, in addition to the deaths in Iraq, an estimated 220,000 people have been killed in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan as a result of US foreign policy. These findings come on the heels of a UN report that finds that civilian deaths in Afghanistan in 2014 were at their highest levels since the UN began producing reports on the topic in 2009.
93 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Report Shows US Invasion, Occupation of Iraq Left 1 Million Dead (Original Post) sinkingfeeling Apr 2015 OP
Horrible cyberswede Apr 2015 #1
''We think the price is worth it.'' -- Sec. State Madeleine Albright Octafish Apr 2015 #2
pssh, that was about a DIFFERENT 500K dead MisterP Apr 2015 #74
Some of of our leaders are truly repulsive. nt PufPuf23 Apr 2015 #85
Yes, and we knew it was an invasion based on a lie. Autumn Apr 2015 #3
I seriously believe they had to have been in bed with bush. marym625 Apr 2015 #55
I think it was driven by the military industrial think tank complex dreamnightwind Apr 2015 #75
I'm sure that is the major part marym625 Apr 2015 #77
Good police violence OP, went and rec'd it dreamnightwind Apr 2015 #78
Thank you! marym625 Apr 2015 #80
Hillary must feel so proud n/t Oilwellian Apr 2015 #4
Very Helpful comment... busterbrown Apr 2015 #7
The truth is always helpful. Autumn Apr 2015 #9
Ralph Nader represented the truth.. busterbrown Apr 2015 #18
Ralph Nader is irrelevant. He had the same right to run for President as Hillary does. Autumn Apr 2015 #22
Boy that was weak... busterbrown Apr 2015 #26
Keep trying, you have a nice day Autumn Apr 2015 #27
I find that most of my day is hard because I’m a bit busterbrown Apr 2015 #36
Because Republican-Lite Hillary is our ONLY OPTION!!! nt. dirtydickcheney Apr 2015 #11
Yea...We got Bernie, Ron Wyden, O’malley ....Warren ain’t runnin busterbrown Apr 2015 #17
You trust Hillary more than Bernie? dirtydickcheney Apr 2015 #44
Let's see whether Hillary will support the teachers' unions. JDPriestly Apr 2015 #68
What you're saying is that the Dem Party is so bad they can only produce one candidate, one which sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #91
Simply stated, The cards are stacked busterbrown Apr 2015 #93
Let's hope neither one gets elected n/t Oilwellian Apr 2015 #28
so we should ignore the truth so someone that voted for this doesn't have to answer for it? marym625 Apr 2015 #56
Let's find a better candidate. JDPriestly Apr 2015 #64
This line of 'reasoning' again? blackspade Apr 2015 #71
Hillary voted for it, didn't she? One million human beings. We BEGGED Them not to do it. I will sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #90
Along with John Kerry BainsBane Apr 2015 #48
I noticed that we didn't invade Iraq when Bill Clinto was president. yardwork Apr 2015 #70
That number seems WAY too high to me. For example, the statisticians closeupready Apr 2015 #5
We bombed their hospitals Oilwellian Apr 2015 #29
Source or citation please? Telcontar Apr 2015 #89
The sanctions against Iraq were crimes also. ronnie624 Apr 2015 #50
More people died of war time disease than bullets during the Civil War. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #61
The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic. Stalin Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #6
We need to remember that it was not just the government who was pushing for revenge. We the jwirr Apr 2015 #23
Although it is our job to know what is really going on marym625 Apr 2015 #58
I to blame the media. They were the liars for the government. I honestly don't know how we could jwirr Apr 2015 #65
True marym625 Apr 2015 #67
Iraq was not responsible for September 11th. DisgustipatedinCA Apr 2015 #62
You don't have to point that out to me but at the time few even asked - it was just any one the jwirr Apr 2015 #66
Terrible! hue Apr 2015 #8
Whether it's 1 million or 154,563 Depaysement Apr 2015 #10
Don't forget to name a number of Democrats who voted for the War JDPriestly Apr 2015 #15
. Agschmid Apr 2015 #16
Seems important to me to remember that some Democrats showed good JDPriestly Apr 2015 #21
No, Hillary did not apologize for her vote; instead, she blamed others, closeupready Apr 2015 #37
She did, did you try Google before you posted that? Agschmid Apr 2015 #40
She did not. closeupready Apr 2015 #45
. Agschmid Apr 2015 #52
That's an admission, not an apology. nt MannyGoldstein Apr 2015 #76
There go those goal posts... Agschmid Apr 2015 #82
YOU set the goal posts, not me MannyGoldstein Apr 2015 #83
I said she apologized, which the Atlantic agrees she did. Agschmid Apr 2015 #84
This message was self-deleted by its author Agschmid Apr 2015 #51
I'm sorry but I completely disagree marym625 Apr 2015 #60
No, a majority of Dems in the House and Senate combined... Oilwellian Apr 2015 #31
? Agschmid Apr 2015 #41
Other sites claim it's over 1.4 million just in Iraq alone. L0oniX Apr 2015 #12
So can I say Bush was 1/6th Hitler mindwalker_i Apr 2015 #13
nice post, hitler Javaman Apr 2015 #57
Hahaha! This just made my day mindwalker_i Apr 2015 #79
"Sinkingfeeling" is right. What depressing, awful news. JDPriestly Apr 2015 #14
Who cares, we have a new whatchamacallit Apr 2015 #19
And that probably does not include any count of the disabled and displaced. jwirr Apr 2015 #20
One of the worst type of injury is brain damage marym625 Apr 2015 #53
War of aggression that was a choice. JEB Apr 2015 #24
How blithely, the US brings death and destruction to other countries. ronnie624 Apr 2015 #25
+1000 n/t Oilwellian Apr 2015 #34
Many of them are connected to Wall St. Many of them made a lot of money. raouldukelives Apr 2015 #43
No link to 9-11, No WMDs, and no threat to the Europe or the United States Botany Apr 2015 #30
repug caused deaths - bush, cheney - all of them samsingh Apr 2015 #32
Sad. It is hard to see what the combimation of greed, fear and power can do. logosoco Apr 2015 #33
Arrest and try the war criminals now or forever shut the FUCK up about how great America is IHateTheGOP Apr 2015 #35
Every single person that voted for the war marym625 Apr 2015 #49
reading the whole article is heartbreaking. niyad Apr 2015 #38
let's stop crying over spilt milk G_j Apr 2015 #39
Look Forward! Octafish Apr 2015 #42
OMD WE SUCK! marym625 Apr 2015 #46
somewhere, dick cheney is smiling spanone Apr 2015 #47
The same figure was reported -- and disputed -- several years ago... FiveGoodMen Apr 2015 #54
Right wingers will claim they were ALL terrorists. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2015 #59
Makes me sick Canoe52 Apr 2015 #63
Sickening blackspade Apr 2015 #69
This blog estimates 1.5 million. moondust Apr 2015 #72
Wow! Good for them. One Million Terrorists killed! LiberalLovinLug Apr 2015 #73
And no one has been prosecuted liberal N proud Apr 2015 #81
K&R woo me with science Apr 2015 #86
I accept the number, and it is part of the problem now with the displaced who fill the ranks of IS: freshwest Apr 2015 #87
Yea but Hillary got a chicken burrito bowl and *was not recognized* GummyBearz Apr 2015 #88
No, the politicians that voted for this do NOT get to get away with it and become president. nt Bonobo Apr 2015 #92

Autumn

(45,106 posts)
3. Yes, and we knew it was an invasion based on a lie.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:31 AM
Apr 2015

Yet we were ignored and our democrats went right along with it.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
55. I seriously believe they had to have been in bed with bush.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:23 PM
Apr 2015

No doubt in my mind. Money was exchanged or offered. Absolutely believe it to my soul

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
75. I think it was driven by the military industrial think tank complex
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 02:10 PM
Apr 2015

War money flows on both sides of the aisle. More to Republicans than Democrats, but enough of it goes to Democrats to allow the MIC to call the shots.

Some relevant things in this article. I like their term the Military Industrial Think Tank Complex (I think it's theirs, I hadn't heard it before). The focus of the article is on the weapons industry, but IMO could just as well have been on the extraction industries (oil, gas, and mining interests), and though there is some dispute about it, AIPAC was also apparently lobbying for the war behind the scenes.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Military-industrial_complex#Weapons_Procurement_1998-2003

Weapons Procurement 1998-2003

In 1999, according to Foreign Policy in Focus, "the military-industrial complex did not fade away with the end of the cold war. It has simply reorganized itself."

"As a result of a rash of military-industry mergers encouraged and subsidized by the Clinton administration," it continues, "the Big Three weapons makers--Lockheed Martin Corporation, Boeing Corporation, and Raytheon Corporation--now receive among themselves over $30 billion per year in Pentagon contracts. This represents more than one out of every four dollars that the Defense Department doles out for everything from rifles to rockets." [8]

When this article was posted in 1999, the Clinton Administration five-year budget plan for the Pentagon called for a 50% increase in weapons procurement, which would be an increase from $44 billion per year to over $63 billion per year by 2003. Additionally, the arms industry launched "a concerted lobbying campaign aimed at increasing military spending and arms exports. These initiatives are driven by profit and pork barrel politics, not by an objective assessment of how best to defend the United States in the post-cold war period."


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Military-industrial_complex#The_Military-Industrial-Think_Tank_Complex
The Military-Industrial-Think Tank Complex
According to the January/February 2003 Multinational Monitor:

Each major element of the George Walker Bush administration's national security strategy -- from the doctrines of preemptive strikes and "regime change" in Iraq, to its aggressive nuclear posture and commitment to deploying a Star Wars-style missile defense system -- was developed and refined before the Bush administration took office, at corporate-backed conservative think tanks like the Center for Security Policy, the National Institute for Public Policy and the Project for a New American Century.

Unilateralist ideologues formerly affiliated with these think tanks, along with the 32 major administration appointees who are former executives with, consultants for, or significant shareholders of top Defense contractors, are driving U.S. foreign and military policy.

The arms lobby is exerting more influence over policymaking than at any time since President Dwight D. Eisenhower first warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex over 40 years ago.

It is not just industry-backed think tanks that have infiltrated the administration. Former executives, consultants or shareholders of top U.S. defense companies pervade the Bush national security team.

Exploiting the fears following 9/11, and impervious to budgetary constraints imposed on virtually every other form of federal spending, the ideologue-industry nexus is driving the United States to war in Iraq and a permanently aggressive war-fighting posture that will simultaneously starve other government programs and make the world a much more dangerous place.

The overarching concern of the ideologues and the arms industry is to increase military spending. On this score, they have been tremendously successful. In its two years in office, the Bush administration has sought more than $150 billion in new military spending, the vast majority of which has been approved by Congress with few questions asked. Spending on national defense is nearing $400 billion for fiscal year (FY) 2003, up from $329 billion when Bush took office.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
77. I'm sure that is the major part
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 02:17 PM
Apr 2015

I also think it is part of a plan to keep control of the masses. I know people think that is too out there but considering what is going on, I honestly believe it.

Exactly why I posted this yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026500854

Great articles. Thanks for the information

Autumn

(45,106 posts)
22. Ralph Nader is irrelevant. He had the same right to run for President as Hillary does.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:12 AM
Apr 2015

Nader represented nothing else. he has no vote or say on the IWR. Bone up on the truth of the 2000 election and don't be bringing that weak Nader shit. That's all you got? You got nothing. You have a nice day cause I won't play that silly game.

busterbrown

(8,515 posts)
26. Boy that was weak...
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:19 AM
Apr 2015

Not even worth responding to... “Nader Shit” Put egotistical in front of your “shit” and you got the mess we’re in today..

busterbrown

(8,515 posts)
36. I find that most of my day is hard because I’m a bit
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:46 AM
Apr 2015

of a political junkie and all we’re getting lately is nothing but insanity..
The Right Wing our country isn’t even a good joke anymore.

busterbrown

(8,515 posts)
17. Yea...We got Bernie, Ron Wyden, O’malley ....Warren ain’t runnin
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:03 AM
Apr 2015

Great choices to prevent the Lunatics from controlling all of the big three..

Just Brilliant...

Hillary might not be my favorite but dems. like you are asking for some serious shit to happen if one of their clowns get in..

 

dirtydickcheney

(242 posts)
44. You trust Hillary more than Bernie?
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:12 PM
Apr 2015

Bernie has a history of helping workers - Hillary has a history of helping Big Money.

That's all.

Vote accordingly.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
68. Let's see whether Hillary will support the teachers' unions.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:54 PM
Apr 2015

I wonder whether she will come out against the constant testing in the schools. That testing is evil.

My mother was a great mother. She studied child development way back in the 1930s. When I was a little girl and beginning my baby-sitting career (my second of a number of "careers&quot , she told me, "There's positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement, and positive reinforcement works best."

I have never forgotten that advice when I deal with children. This constant testing is the worst form of negative reinforcement I can think of. Children are constantly being told that they have to measure up on absurd tests that do not and cannot test what is really important: how they apply what they have learned, the facts and methods they have learned, in real life.

I am hoping that Hillary will propose legislation that will drastically change the testing culture in our schools. At the very least, if they are going to require testing of public school children, they should also require it of home-schooled and private-schooled and charter-schooled children. There is no point in only requiring it of public school children. And I understand that it is only required in public schools. If tests are to be required or if the giving of tests is to be rewarded, then the tests should be national and required of all school-aged children. The tests are meaningless if only given in public schools. They do not reflect the academic progress or standards in our education in general. They only reflect the standards and progress in public schools. That is pointless.

So I am waiting to see whether Hillary will prove to be a champion of children and propose and end to the frequent testing. That will be a test for her.

I also want to see whether she supports teachers' unions. That will tell us just how far to the right she will go.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
91. What you're saying is that the Dem Party is so bad they can only produce one candidate, one which
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 02:23 AM
Apr 2015

isn't your favorite to run for the WH?

That is a sad state affairs. If it was true.

But it isn't. There are some GREAT Democrats who would make great presidents, but those in power do not want anyone in power who will do things like Prosecute Wall St criminals, or War Criminals, or who will not go along with their forever wars.

Or who might restore Glass Steagal, or end the takeover of the Public School funds for Private use.

The rich don't give money away. The WANT something for their money.

If all you can think of is a couple of people then you haven't been paying enough attention to the best members of the Dem Party and there are quite a few. But like I said, it takes, I am told lately, two and a half billion dollars just to run. And what will that money buy?

busterbrown

(8,515 posts)
93. Simply stated, The cards are stacked
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 03:05 AM
Apr 2015

against us. Of Course there are better candidates.. But for any of them to make a run at this stage w/o
“two and half billion” needed.. It ain’t gonna happen...

marym625

(17,997 posts)
56. so we should ignore the truth so someone that voted for this doesn't have to answer for it?
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:26 PM
Apr 2015

How about backing someone that didn't vote for this atrocity? Or minimally, stop trying to act like this doesn't matter

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
90. Hillary voted for it, didn't she? One million human beings. We BEGGED Them not to do it. I will
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 02:16 AM
Apr 2015

never forget the sense of utter betrayal people felt the night of that vote. I listened to Sen Byrd's incredible speech, 'I weep for my country' in which he was, airc, one of the few, maybe the only one, who mentioned the Iraqi people and what such a war would do them. Then he voted 'nay'.

That gave me hope, but not for long.

I don't know how anyone could have voted for ANYTHING those liars wanted. You didn't have to be a political genius to know they were lying.

There are also still 4 million Iraqi refugees in both Syria, now again being forced out by the violence there, and in Jordan.

It is a crime of massive proportions and history will record it that way.

yardwork

(61,650 posts)
70. I noticed that we didn't invade Iraq when Bill Clinto was president.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:56 PM
Apr 2015

We went to war with Iraq when George H W Bush was president and when George W Bush was president. I hope that Jebby doesn't get a chance. Because there is a lot of money to be made and the Bushes don't count the bodies. Too much bother for their beautiful minds.

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
5. That number seems WAY too high to me. For example, the statisticians
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:41 AM
Apr 2015

behind this new number include deaths attributable to lack of medical care.

But using that metric, the Clinton administration's embargo also led to deaths, so even something like enforcing an embargo can be characterized as warfare. It's fine to use such characterizations in some ways, but when it comes to accounting for naked facts, the data which they claim supports this number simply isn't there, IMO.

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)
50. The sanctions against Iraq were crimes also.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:19 PM
Apr 2015

Geneva Conventions protocols, forbid depriving civilians of food, medicine and supplies necessary for fresh water and sewage treatment. The sanctions amounted to attacks against civilians, in an attempt to force them to depose their own government, and hundreds of thousands died, as a result.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
6. The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic. Stalin
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:41 AM
Apr 2015

Which is how we're supposed to look at the deaths, torture, homelessness, we caused in Iraq because some Democratic politicians thought it politically expedient to support the killing.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
23. We need to remember that it was not just the government who was pushing for revenge. We the
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:17 AM
Apr 2015

people were pretty upset about 9/11 and ready to let them lead us into war. Yes we had demonstrations at the time - but there were no doubt just as many angry people calling in to demand war.

I can honestly say that I was against this war and the following ones from the beginning but I was one of the few in my community who was.

One of my favorite bumper stickers: "There they go. I had better follow them because I am their leader."

marym625

(17,997 posts)
58. Although it is our job to know what is really going on
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:36 PM
Apr 2015

I blame the government and the media more than I blame the population. So many just read the talking points. Heard the bs the media threw at us night and day. I had so many discussions with intelligent people that had no clue what the reality was, it was mind boggling.

My whole family knew what was really happening. My mom was even on the news in Chicago at a protest she helped put together.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
65. I to blame the media. They were the liars for the government. I honestly don't know how we could
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:47 PM
Apr 2015

have convinced those who bought into it.

For myself I will tell you that my understanding that it was wrong started with the Vietnam war where I was very against it unless someone could tell me why. They never could. That feeling carried over to the time of 9/11 and made me distrust W's liars. I often wonder if it had been a Democratic president if I would have been smart enough to be critical. I also have always thought since it was a group not a nation that this was a law enforcement issue not a military one.

When panic sets in very few ask for documentation before running.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
67. True
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:51 PM
Apr 2015

However, we did know they were lying. So many of us knew. The documentation was out there. Which is why I have no doubt that those in office knew. And they knew very well.

I am sure you would have questioned a democratic president. It's your knowledge that war is wrong that caused you doubt. That wouldn't have changed

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
66. You don't have to point that out to me but at the time few even asked - it was just any one the
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:50 PM
Apr 2015

bush administration wanted to blame. I actually have always wondered why we blamed any nation for what a group of terrorists were doing. It was a police issue. That may be one of the problems that we are going to face regarding ISIS. It is not state supported. At least so far.

Depaysement

(1,835 posts)
10. Whether it's 1 million or 154,563
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:50 AM
Apr 2015

That's a lot of dead people.

These people have a lot of blood on their hands: Bush, Cheney, Feith, Wolfkowitz, Kristol, Kagan, Woolsey, Perle and so on.

And they pay no price for their blood-letting. And to what end exactly?

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
15. Don't forget to name a number of Democrats who voted for the War
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:00 AM
Apr 2015

Resolution including two names that come to my mind and who have, I believe acknowledged their error: John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. I'm certain that many, even most of the Democrats in Congress at the time voted for that war.

If I recall correctly, Feingold did not support the war. There were others who did not support it. We should honor them on DU.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
16. .
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:01 AM
Apr 2015

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting for the resolution are:
Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

42% of Democratic senators (21 of 50) voted against the resolution. Those voting against the resolution are:
Sens. Boxer (D-CA), Graham (D-FL), Akaka (D-HI), Inouye (D-HI), Durbin (D-IL), Mikulski (D-MD), Sarbanes (D-MD), Kennedy (D-MA), Stabenow (D-MI), Levin (D-MI), Dayton (D-MN), Wellstone (D-MN), Corzine (D-NJ), Bingaman (D-NM), Conrad (D-ND), Wyden (D-OR), Reed (D-RI), Leahy (D-VT), Murray (D-WA), Byrd (D-WV), and Feingold (D-WI).

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
21. Seems important to me to remember that some Democrats showed good
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:10 AM
Apr 2015

judgment and did their homework while others did not.

I remember that Edwards apologized for his mistake in the 2008 election cycle. I understand that Hillary has apologized also. Does anyone have a date on her apology.

I think that a vote for the War Resolution demonstrated poor judgment and group-thinking as opposed to responsible, independent analysis, research and thought.

Those who voted for the resolution did not ask the right questions before their vote. We all make mistakes like that, but this mistake cost a lot of lives and set up the situation that has led to a lot of problems in the Middle East -- like refugees from Iraq flooding Syria, like our weapons that ISIS is now using to terrorize those with beliefs other than theirs, and a part of our economic problems.

I do not want the poor judgment that led to votes for the Iraq War to be forgotten. We should never forget that horrible Bush war and the mistakes and crimes of those who fed us lies to get us into it.

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
37. No, Hillary did not apologize for her vote; instead, she blamed others,
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:50 AM
Apr 2015

and then later pouted, "I have nothing to be sorry for."

And you know what, she will never apologize for that vote.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
40. She did, did you try Google before you posted that?
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:58 AM
Apr 2015

Let me guess the next goal post... "That wasn't an apology!"

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
52. .
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:20 PM
Apr 2015
http://m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/whats-missing-from-hillary-clintons-iraq-war-apology/372427/

Among the biggest news from Hillary Clinton’s largely newsless new book is her blunt apology for voting to authorize war in Iraq. “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had,” she writes “And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong.”

This represents a change. In 2008, her advisors feared that if she called her Iraq vote a mistake, Republicans would savage her for flip-flopping, as they had done to John Kerry four years earlier. So even after John Edwards apologized for his Iraq vote, she refused to. In their book, Her Way, Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr. quote Clinton’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, as insisting that, “It’s important for all Democrats to keep the word ‘mistake’ firmly on the Republicans.”
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
83. YOU set the goal posts, not me
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 03:24 PM
Apr 2015

Then YOU missed the kick.

If you wanted a better target, you should have selected a better target.

Response to Agschmid (Reply #40)

marym625

(17,997 posts)
60. I'm sorry but I completely disagree
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:40 PM
Apr 2015

Absolutely no way they didn't know the truth. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
14. "Sinkingfeeling" is right. What depressing, awful news.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 10:57 AM
Apr 2015

But thanks for posting it. We need the reminder.

War is horror. Americans don't realize that, but it is -- horror.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
53. One of the worst type of injury is brain damage
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:21 PM
Apr 2015

There are more veterans with brain damage than ever before. The fact that the US did not have proper equipment, including shocks on the humvees, caused so very many to suffer permanent brain damage. The ride on the rough terrain caused what is akin to shaken baby syndrome.

The military knew this pretty much immediately and did nothing for years

 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
24. War of aggression that was a choice.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:17 AM
Apr 2015

Some decided it was the lesser of two evils. Boy were they wrong. This bloody stain will not wash out of our national conscience.

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)
25. How blithely, the US brings death and destruction to other countries.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:18 AM
Apr 2015

And US Americans, simply do not care. They think it is all just part of the normal course of world events, and that we bear no responsibility. Even liberals think this way, as many of the posts about Clinton and Kissinger clearly show. The Invasion of Iraq was cooked up through a campaign of lies and conspiracies, yet most do not see it for the violation of international law and crime against humanity that it is. The double standard by which we function is glaring, yet invisible to most. Such is the illogical nature of fending off the cognitive discomfort produced by holding radically conflicting beliefs.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
43. Many of them are connected to Wall St. Many of them made a lot of money.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:10 PM
Apr 2015

For some, the ends justify the means.

Botany

(70,516 posts)
30. No link to 9-11, No WMDs, and no threat to the Europe or the United States
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:24 AM
Apr 2015

Last edited Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:04 PM - Edit history (1)

And nobody is going to be held accountable for all the deaths, bloodshed, injuries,
and the creation of ISIS.

************

One of the most credible, effective proponents of war in 2002 was Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the former Vietnam prisoner of war who lost to President George W. Bush in the 2000 Republican primaries.

McCain argued that continuing a policy of deterrence against Iraq “would condemn Saddam's neighbors to perpetual instability. And once Iraq's nuclear ambitions are realized, no serious person could expect the Iraqi threat to diminish.”

He also confidently predicted: “I am very certain that this military engagement will not be very difficult.”

McCain’s longtime ally, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), then a member of the House, declared that attacking Iraq was “long overdue” and that “when the smoke clears, the Iraqi people will taste freedom for the first time in decades.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/13/iran-nuclear-talks_n_7044180.html

logosoco

(3,208 posts)
33. Sad. It is hard to see what the combimation of greed, fear and power can do.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:29 AM
Apr 2015

It seems to me that the people most at fault for this don't have a conscience.
I would not want to spend my time as a human knowing I got rich off of death.

 

IHateTheGOP

(1,059 posts)
35. Arrest and try the war criminals now or forever shut the FUCK up about how great America is
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:39 AM
Apr 2015

Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld should be in prison awaiting execution for war crimes, treason, torture, violations of international law, and violations of the U. S. Constitution. Oh, and by the way, if we need anyone to "pull the switch" I volunteer.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
49. Every single person that voted for the war
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:17 PM
Apr 2015

Should be prosecuted. Minimally, they should be thrown out of office and none should ever be allowed to serve again

niyad

(113,336 posts)
38. reading the whole article is heartbreaking.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:52 AM
Apr 2015

The report notes, however, that its numbers are a conservative estimate, and that the total number of people killed in the three countries "could also be in excess of 2 million, whereas a figure below 1 million is extremely unlikely."

. . . . .


This is why IBC became the go-to source for casualty counts: Its lowball figures fit the mainstream narrative of the war's impacts, and the organization accordingly garnered an extraordinary amount of media coverage. This long-time reliance on IBC makes the recent report's figures all the more important.

The figure from the recent "Body Count" report, stunningly high as it is, still only counts deaths in Iraq up until the end of 2011. Some of the worst violence that has engulfed the country has happened since that time.

The report also does not account for deaths among the approximately 3 million Iraqi refugees who have been subjected to conflict zones, disease and health problems.

. . . .

G_j

(40,367 posts)
39. let's stop crying over spilt milk
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 11:56 AM
Apr 2015

And move along... there is no such thing as American war crimes, or crimes against peace.

FiveGoodMen

(20,018 posts)
54. The same figure was reported -- and disputed -- several years ago...
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:22 PM
Apr 2015

...and then, suddenly, all mention of the 1 million just vanished.

Canoe52

(2,948 posts)
63. Makes me sick
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 12:45 PM
Apr 2015

Essentially that's a collateral damage of 1 million just to take out one guy, Saddam.

Or 1 million to give Iraq "freedom" depending on the reason du jour.

But in reality it is 1 million deaths to try to take over Iraq's oil, and the war criminals were so inept, their only accomplishment was to kill off the 1 million.

Sick f@cking bastards all of them.

moondust

(19,993 posts)
72. This blog estimates 1.5 million.
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 01:02 PM
Apr 2015
http://warnewstoday.blogspot.com/index.html

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq

One or both of these sites have been following incidents and counting deaths on a daily basis since 2007, though I can't vouch for their methodology or accuracy.

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
87. I accept the number, and it is part of the problem now with the displaced who fill the ranks of IS:
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 01:44 AM
Apr 2015
‘Apocalyptic’ Isis beyond anything we've seen, say US defence chiefs.

By Spencer Ackerman - 22 August 2014

...(General) Dempsey, an Iraq veteran, has long been sceptical of US military involvement in the Syrian conflict, citing among other reasons the threat to US pilots from dictator Bashar al-Assad’s air defences.
He has frustrated those who advocated American involvement in the two neighbouring wars, such as hawkish Republican senator John McCain, who in June called on Obama to fire Dempsey, saying he “has done nothing but invent ways for us not to be engaged.”

Echoing the White House’s stated position, Dempsey said the US needed “a coalition in the region that takes on the task of defeating Isis over time,” something the administration this week has put effort into broadening and strengthening. But the group’s ultimate defeat, the general said, would only come “when it is rejected by the over 20 million disenfranchised Sunnis that happen to reside between Damascus and Baghdad.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/21/isis-us-military-iraq-strikes-threat-apocalyptic/print

This is no longer just about Iraq. Since Damascus is in Syria, all the way to the Mediterranean and the doorstep to Europe. Many centuries of warfare between the empires, of which the caliphate is planned to be one. And Baghdad is set near the sea on the other end of that stretch of land on the eastern side.

Those 20 million don't all support the Daesh, but that is a huge number and it's not like these people are unable to figure out how to fight to survive. Obama warned Maliki that excluding them them from his government (in revenge for Saddam's oppression of the Shia, I guess) would cause Iraq to break into pieces. So he couldn't fully support Maliki because he didn't govern with inclusion, which would be the only way to have peace.

The result of those fleeing Iraq and impacting other nations created a diasphoria for the new century. The Iraq War was a TEOTWAWKI event and shattered lives and allegiances. The Middle East will be transformed into different nations, because the original fuel for the Daesh is the need of those refugees for a homeland.

Imagine for a moment, an army of 20 million armed and angry and possibly homeless in the USA on the move. Just picture the bloody carnage in the neighboring states in a desperate fight for living space.

The Kurds were accused of being extrene in the past. They managed through the overthrow of Saddam to possess an autonomous region in northern Iraq. The legacy of Bush will hang over us for a generation or more and change the entire world as we know it, too. JMHO.

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
88. Yea but Hillary got a chicken burrito bowl and *was not recognized*
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 01:59 AM
Apr 2015

so lets not bring up the past or anything

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Report Shows US Invasion,...