Israeli Air Force Gears up to Strike Iran.

[AUSTERLITZ]

Might makes right,it is the oldest law of nature.Those who forget this and are blinded by civilization delude themselves.

 

[pak-yes]

I very much doubt that. Several organizations are working on this one, it is still considered something of a hot potato. The Iraq Body Count project came up with a figure of 9,270 for the years 2003-2005. (After 2004 civilian casualties due to U.S.-led forces rapidly declined.) IMO their methodology probably undercounted bodies and overestimated the proportion of civilian dead.

Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.

In 2007 American historian Bruce Thornton came up with a combined figure of 8,000 civilian dead since 1947. link

That's all for today, folks!

Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.8k Palestinian Civilians killed in 2007.Hmmm seems quite less.

 

[Nima]

Might makes right,it is the oldest law of nature.Those who forget this and are blinded by civilization delude themselves.

wooooooooooord

what pisses me off is that Americans don't have a sense of nationalism like that. They consider themselves god's gift to humanity when they're nothing but the opposite.

 

[below_freezing]

Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.



Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.8k Palestinian Civilians killed in 2007.Hmmm seems quite less.

in Vietnam, the US originally claimed 0 civilian dead.

anyone that died was labeled a communist rebel.

 

[rohailmalhi]

Yes actually Americans are pathetic .They think they have license to kill anyone..
They dont damn care if people die ,they label thm all as terrorists ..

@Solomon_2 Oh man go get a life U r justifing tht killing done by americans is right coz they have not reached the limit for 250000 killing done by Sadam.....
and btw Saddam has been punished for his crimes ................thn y not Ur political people who actually decided to attack on fake WMD report. and y not those secret agency ppl who gave this fake WMD report.Now dont tell me tht ur agency are little kids who dont know tht if there is sum WMD or not..
One more thing ur sole purpose in iraq to go in there was to capture the soo called WMD whn u found none wht is ur business there now.except killing more and more people..............
How does u feel whn sum one cumes to ur house and kill ur family just tell how will u feel.

 

[Solomon2]

Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.

Different war, very different methods. No "free-fire zones", no "carpet bombings", etc.

Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.

No, 8,000 civilian casualties is the figure for the whole sixty years.

 

[Solomon2]

who gives a fudge how many saddam killed!

Is that the hardness of your heart you've exposed, or are you criticizing rohailmalhi and I for our digression?

You guys killed 4 times more in less than a decade. How many Cambodians and Vietnamese did you guys massacred?

Way too far off-topic to address here.

 

[Solomon2]

what pisses me off is that Americans don't have a sense of nationalism like that. They consider themselves god's gift to humanity when they're nothing but the opposite.

Spoken like a true Canadian!

 

[Solomon2]

Yes actually Americans are pathetic .They think they have license to kill anyone..
They dont damn care if people die ,they label thm all as terrorists ..

Get real! You obviously know little or nothing about this stuff. Why don't you try going to Iraq and talk to the people there?

@Solomon_2 [/B]Oh man go get a life U r justifing tht killing done by americans is right coz they have not reached the limit for 250000 killing done by Sadam.....

You're right, that is an absurd justification - yours, not mine. But characterizing all deaths of civilians killed by the coalition as "crimes" is too much of a stretch. Removing Saddam from power was pretty clean, dealing with the terrorism was messy. Civilians were killed by coaltion forces inadvertently, or because they were employed as human shields and it was deemed more of a risk to civilians and U.S. troops to let the targets go than attack. Why not ask the Iraqis themselves if they think their liberation was worth the cost?

thn y not Ur political people who actually decided to attack on fake WMD report.

Congress listed over twenty reasons to remove Saddam and nuclear weapons were just one of them.

Now dont tell me tht ur agency are little kids who dont know tht if there is sum WMD or not.

Are you implying that Americans are so smart that we know everything?

How does u feel whn -

You can appreciate that the main reason why the Israelis feel Iran must be attacked is so this never happens to them. They have a responsibility to protect their own populace. The current Iranian leadership, on the other hand, has very different notions of responsibility.

 

[Patriot]

Is NPT legally binding and did Iran sign this treaty?

 

[Thomas]

Is NPT legally binding and did Iran sign this treaty?

NPT legally binding: Yes

Did Iran sign this treaty? Yes

 

[Cyrus the Great]

We're going OT here, but -

I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".

A big joke. who are you? even if Saddam killed 1000000 (not 250000) but nobody asked US for help? why do you american think you are police of the world(but bad police).

 

[Solomon2]

A big joke. who are you?

Who do I have to be?

why do you american think you are police of the world(but bad police).

Nobody else steps up to the plate to do the job, yes? Nevertheless, most Americans would deny that the U.S. is the world's policeman. Perhaps the best explanation of U.S. policy under the G.W. Bush Administration was given by newspaper columnist Charles Krauthammer, who termed it "Democratic Realism":

We will support democracy everywhere, but we will commit blood and treasure only in places where there is a strategic necessity--meaning, places central to the larger war against the existential enemy, the enemy that poses a global mortal threat to freedom.

 

[Patriot]

NPT legally binding: Yes

Did Iran sign this treaty? Yes

Then i think US Should be punished for proliferating weapons to NATO STATES under Nuclear Sharing Agreement - No?and Iran can withdraw just as North Korea did.

 

[Solomon2]

So, guys, after fifty pages think hard: is there any good outcome possible to the Islamic Republic of Iran possessing nuclear weapons?