150,000:
By on Nov 9th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
150,000:
Number of Iraqi civilians who have been killed in the war — “about three times previously accepted estimates” — according to Iraq’s health minister.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Green party members: would Al Gore have had 150,000 Iraqis killed? Would he have eviscerated the Environmental Protection Agency? How’s that “lesser of two evils” working out for you?
November 9th, 2006 at 7:44 pmDidn’t al-Maliki announce a few weeks ago that they would no longer issue reports about people killed in the war? Did the memo not get to someone because the messenger was killed?
November 9th, 2006 at 7:48 pmi thought there was a 600,000 number… what was that about?
November 9th, 2006 at 7:51 pmBluedog49,
Good point. I am perplexed seeing people throw their vote away.
November 9th, 2006 at 7:52 pmThe figure of 650,000 was in The Lancet. It was not a body count but an extrapolation based on interviews. From what I have read, it seems there is widespread agreement that it was way off the mark.
November 9th, 2006 at 7:59 pmThree times the accepted numbers, but 450,000 less than the report that Think Progress hailed as absolute truth.
Just a little perspective.
November 9th, 2006 at 8:18 pmI remember the “comma” statement.
November 9th, 2006 at 8:23 pmwhy does the Iraqi health hate our freedom?
November 9th, 2006 at 8:25 pmWere there that many abortions, really?
November 9th, 2006 at 8:25 pmI meant to say “Why does the Iraqi Health Minister hate our freedom?”
November 9th, 2006 at 8:30 pmWhether it is 50k, 150k or 650k – it is still a lot of blood. On who’s hands does it lie?
November 9th, 2006 at 8:38 pmAnybody say that the 650,00 number and this don’t match don’t know anything about Muslim and Iraqi culture. This is the number of civilian casualties that made it to the morgue. Most of the people killed in Iraq are buried without going to the morgue.
Because it is Muslim tradition to bury your dead before sun down.
That is exactly why we are losing this friggin’ war. Nobody wants to take the time to learn about another culture.
November 9th, 2006 at 8:41 pm“about three times previously accepted estimatesâ€
I seem to vaguely remember a time when statements like these used to embolden the terrorists.
I also seem to remember that Bush cultists would get up and arms and argue that the good news were being overlooked.
Maybe reality is beginning to sink in, even with the die-hards. My only regret is that so many innocent Iraqis had to die before the cultists opened their eyes to reality.
November 9th, 2006 at 8:43 pmNice sentence structure there Spudge. : )
November 9th, 2006 at 8:45 pm100000, 150000, 600000, I don’t care. Its too damn many.
November 9th, 2006 at 8:52 pmBush: It’s 150,000. Still only just one comma. Hehehehe
November 9th, 2006 at 8:55 pmWhat happened to the original estimate of 650,000 dead? How many died during the American civil war? If liberals were around then, we’d still be two nations divided. Oh, thats right, we still are.
November 9th, 2006 at 9:07 pmIf liberals weren’t around during the civil war the blacks would still be slaves.
November 9th, 2006 at 9:14 pmComment by wallaby
Youre from Australia, right?
November 9th, 2006 at 9:24 pmReprehensible, senseless, amoral are three words which come to mind….and we need to hold this administration totally “accountable” for bring this about.
November 9th, 2006 at 9:38 pmJuan,
How did you guess? hehehe
November 9th, 2006 at 9:47 pmYoure from Australia, right?
Comment by Juan C
You’re so good, Juan. :)
November 9th, 2006 at 10:03 pmbush the war-criminal ordered the stoppage way back in ‘the good ol’ days’ when the number was only in the thousands…
12/10/2003
November 9th, 2006 at 10:09 pm
greetings, z!
November 9th, 2006 at 10:18 pmHi, j!
November 9th, 2006 at 10:41 pmHow did you guess? hehehe
Comment by wallaby
Ha! What an ass! I really thought that for the rugby national team. No idea of anything else.
November 9th, 2006 at 10:46 pmWhat happened to the original estimate of 650,000 dead? Comment by Randy
Sorry for what I am about to say. But people like Randy should imagine what if only ONE civilian was killed directly or indirectly by an invading army? Would that be “good enough”?
Randy, imagine that one is your kid, mom, dad or brother. Murderer supporters like you deserve to live the same hell that iraqi families.
November 9th, 2006 at 10:52 pmSaddam is bad and will be hung for killing 148 Iraqis. (Better to hang him before any inconvenient evidence comes out about who was complicit in the other deaths.)
Bush, Blair and Howard are good. They’ve had Iraqis killed for the right reason. ( Whatever that reason might be this month.)
November 9th, 2006 at 11:19 pmJuan,
I was rather hopeless at rugby, I would not have made the cut to be water boy for the Wallabies.
November 9th, 2006 at 11:24 pmif anyone is curious whether the bush crime family ought to count the civilian dead in iraq, the answer is ‘yes’. they are obliged under statute to “seek to identify families of non-combatant Iraqis who were killed or injured or whose homes were damaged during recent military operations, and to provide appropriate assistance.”
however, since bush is a lying evil murdering war-criminal, he has decided to ignore this law, as well as dozens and dozens of others…
November 9th, 2006 at 11:31 pmI would not have made the cut to be water boy for the Wallabies.
November 9th, 2006 at 11:35 pmComment by wallaby
Im not Jonah Lomu either.
Given the information from James Risser entered above, I’d say that the purpose of the Health Minister’s quote is to muddy the water. That’s about what we should expect at this point. We can hardly accept these figures as reliable. Given the timing, I wonder if this is somehow related to the sentencing of Saddam Hussein?
November 9th, 2006 at 11:45 pmseek to identify families of non-combatant Iraqis who were killed or injured or whose homes were damaged during recent military operations, and to provide appropriate assistance.â€
however, since bush is a lying evil murdering war-criminal, he has decided to ignore this law, as well as dozens and dozens of others…
—- james risser
No, Bush just interpreted appropriate assistance as looking for them and putting them out of their misery, After a water board bath of course. =P
November 9th, 2006 at 11:52 pmSad about Lomu. He is possibly the best winger in recent times.
I’d have wanted an M1-Abrams to tackle him.
November 9th, 2006 at 11:56 pm#33
the quote i mention above is from a december 2003 source. it has nothing to do with the article linked by tp to forbes.
simply stating that someone would wants to ‘muddy the water’ and any link to saddam’s sentence does not mean much unless you attempt to explain your comments more clearly. i have no idea what you are talking about…
November 10th, 2006 at 12:01 amWayne,
Or drop some more bombs and get rid of the evidence.
November 10th, 2006 at 12:01 amWayne,
Or drop some more bombs and get rid of the evidence.
Comment by wallaby
Thats what they use the white phospherous for. Thats usually reserved for whole villages, with women and children.
November 10th, 2006 at 12:38 amReminds me of the stories my grandfather told me of Wounded Knee.
Republicans did that too.
600,000 number
was the total including the likes of waterborn diseases casualities and lack of drugs in hospitals for treatment and many other misecellanious deaths
that number is the amount of deaths BECAUSE of the American invasion and would be still alive if America had NOT invaded
Malikis 150,000 is and underestimate of actuall killing by Militias and insurgents
November 10th, 2006 at 4:47 amI thought it was 8,000,000 civilians killed.
November 10th, 2006 at 8:00 am150,000 dead Iraqis not worth it?
WWII cost 200,000 civilian Japanese, 20,000,000 Soviets, 6,000,000 Jews, and 300,000 American troops (and many, many others). 30,000,000. Was that effort 200 times not worth it?
Some things are more important than living. I’m not talking about God. Efforts like gaining revolutionary freedom, emancipation of the slaves, freedom from facism, and yes, freedom for terror, are worth it. Ask yourself a simple question.
If you lived under Saddams rule, would you accept the rapes of the women, the torture (real torture – not waterboarding), the killing of dissidents, the tyranny; or would you be willing to die to protect your liberty? Could that change have happened peacefully?
November 10th, 2006 at 8:35 am#40 – how is it worth it if we ended up killing more people than saddam did? You can’t possibly compare an INVASION of another country unprovoked to WWII. It shows the mentality of the right wing wrapped up right there. Saddam wasn’t Hitler. The Iraqis didn’t ask us to help them overthrow Saddam. When America had its revolutionary war we initiated it ourselves, not by the invasion of our new territories by another country that hated Britain.
Besides that, the whole thing was based on the premise of LIES. How can that be worth it??? On top of that, killing so many of Iraq’s citizens has only made terrorism WORSE! Yeah, very noble accomplishment for the price of a few hundred thousand lives.
November 10th, 2006 at 9:41 amSimilar methods are used in the international community when attempting to determine the extent of a genocide when “official” numbers just don’t reflect the reality of tens of thousands of missing persons. The “general agreement” that the Lancet figure was too high was merely the “official” position which saw the Lancet study as too damaging politically.
And remember, when we see a properly conducted survey at home of random households, we accept those numbers as being accurate to =/- 3%.
November 10th, 2006 at 9:50 amPaul – please be more informed before you post. American soldiers are committing rapes and murders. Waterboarding is real torture. The conditions under the occupying armies is worse than under Hussein, both in terms of human rights violations and overall standard of living.
And, could regime change have happened internally and peacefully? yes. There is an historical precedent: South Africa.
Why aren’t you as concerned over the dictatorial powers handed over to Bush? You may feel you are secure from being watched by Bush, but would you feel so secure if, say, a Marxist President were elected and had all the same authorities as have been granted Bush? Imagine, such a President, with those powers, could declare the entire Oil Industry “enemy combatants” for their ties to countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, countries from which terrorists have eminated. The entire industry’s wealth could be confiscated by the government and used to pay off the national debt, thus improving the enconomic life of the poor and downtrodden. Such a President would be immensely popular among the poor and working class, while feared and hated by the wealthy elite. War Profiteers would be shut down. Progressive taxes would leave the wealthy well-off, but redistribute vast sums to raise the standard of living for the poor and working classes.
The dream of obtaining wealth beyond avarice would disappear, but so too would the reality of American citizens starving to death, freezing to death on the streets, or even dying too young for lack of health care.
November 10th, 2006 at 10:09 am#44. Briseadh na Faire. Have you seen the video of the prewar Iraqis forced to jump off the 3 story building with the hoods on and their hands tied behind their backs? Do you not believe the accounts of Saddam’s son raping the hundreds of women? Using chemical weapons on the Kurds; was that some made up propaganda from the right? Did Saddam invade Kuwait? Did Iraq have free elections like you have? Do you believe the prewar Iraqis felt as comfortable speaking out against their government as you do? Do you believe that Saddam was using all the Iraqi oil money to improve the lives of the Iraqis or have you seen the palaces? Do you believe the accounts of Iraqi family members being taken by Saddam’s regime, never to be seen again. Have you seen the video of the day Saddam took power? He calls out members of the governing body present, then has them taken outside to be executed. Are the hundreds of mass graves a Republican ploy to justify the war? Someone here said, ‘Saddam is not Hitler’. Really?
November 10th, 2006 at 11:20 am#45; Have you seen the videos from Abu Grahib? Do you not believe the accounts of US soldiers raping girls and then killing their entire families? Using cluster munitions and chemical weapons in places like Fallujah? Levelling ENTIRE cities? The point is that the USA did not do any better. The “democratic” process is highly suspect, the “free” elections are a sham dominated by religious zealots and US-planted politicos permanently hiding in the Green Zone, armed gangs roam the streets murdering and torturing anyone they please, the occupation soldiers rape, torture and pillage and kill entire families claiming them to be “collateral damage”, Iraqi citizens are afraid to go outside to attend to most mundane things for fear of being murdered and/or tortured by either the “insurgents” or the US forces, the economy is non-existant to the point that one of the largest exporters of oil has 1 mile long lineups at gas stations etc etc. Do you believe that the occupiers and the “democratic” government are using the money and resources they pillaged out of Iraq AND out of US taxpayers to improve the lives of average Iraqis? (and if you do you are too daft for words) Have you seen the video of the day that Bush took power in Iraq — complete with little children with their hands and legs torn off? Are the mass piles of bodies discovered in rivers EVERY DAY now a ploy by those who predicted that this would happen before the war? Are you THAT stupid?
November 10th, 2006 at 11:46 amPaul,
we all know Iraq under Saddam was under dictatorial rule. That’s not the reason we attacked Iraq, and that’s not the reason we are still there.
If we invaded Iraq to oust a horrible dictator, then why have we not done the same to all horrible dictators worldwide?
If you want to know why we invaded Iraq, follow the money. Watch “Iraq for Sale.”
Perhaps, someday, you’ll understand why Bush is feared as the world’s #1 Terrorist by most of the civilized world.
November 10th, 2006 at 12:14 pmThese numbers are off, well, they’re skewed horribly, according to Juan Cole:
juancole.com
these don’t count the numbers of sunnis killed by Shiite militas (and that’s thousands) or the number killed by US troops.
This is only the number of Iraqis killed by Criminals and Sunnis.
Juancole.com
November 10th, 2006 at 12:35 pm#46. Nice try. The change that planted freedom in America, freedom for the slaves, freedom for the Jews and now freedom from Islamic terrorism, takes bloodletting. Contrary to popular opinion here, we didn’t bring down the towers, bring down the embassies, attack the Cole, etc, etc, etc. Now that Democrats have assumed leadership, I guess you are going to show us a bloodless withdrawl, followed by a new era; bloodless and free with no terrorism or oppression (and no, not just free from American terror and oppression). This will be very interesting to watch. I hope you can deliver 10% of what you believe is possible.
November 10th, 2006 at 1:05 pmBriseadh na Faire. yours is more reasonable. I missed it if you replied, but what was that ‘Eden’ book you recommended about a week ago and what was it about? I am very interested in history and religion. Thanks.
November 10th, 2006 at 1:26 pmYes we did. All of it.
Until you digest that reality, the rest of what you say here is simply the ravings of a misinformed lunatic.
November 10th, 2006 at 3:47 pmstonehinge. are you talking about veterans for 9/11 movie? I watched it. I’d like you to convince me how the incompetent Bush administration brought down the towers and then covered it up.
November 10th, 2006 at 3:59 pm#49, Except that the bloodletting in Iraq has nowhere near the same moral clarity as, say, WWII, and has instead PRODUCED lack of freedom, terror and pain for the Iraqi populace, with no end in sight. The self-righteous warmongers who got their wish did so ONLY because they love the bloodletting you mentioned, NOT because they are interested in any of the outcomes you mentioned. Those are mere excuses. If it were not so, they would have considered the political/ethnic state of affairs in Iraq carefully and opted for much less bloody solutions as in, say, South Africa. Instead they MANUFACTURED reasons for war, this “democracy bringing” being not even the latest, which today is “oil prices” — as per the President himself. You should update your talking points, it appears your list is out of date. Also Iraq had no role in the fall of the towers, attack on the Cole or the embassies etc, and so this pathetic attempt of yours at changing the topic and moving the goal posts is just that – pathetic.
Democrats never promised any “bloodless withdrawal” (which would be akin to you shooting someone then handing a Democrat a bandaid and demanding that he “fix the man on the floor”, bloodlessly and with no pain).
As to end of opression and the like, that will occur IF and WHEN the Iraqis themselves decide that they are willing and ready to work towards that end. Which taking the current state of affairs into account will probably take a few decades longer then it would have taken without the war.
As to the “War on Terror” .. it isn’t. Only a Heir to the Kingdom of Idiots would declare a war on an adjective and expect to win it. Terror as a tactic existed throughout history and will remain with humanity as long as there is warfare of any kind. What CAN be done is localised defense against individual terrorists based on police work and an attempt at reduction of the terrorists’ influence in various social groups and thus at cutting them off from their sources of recruitment and supplies. That includes religious wackos of ALL sorts, not just Islamic ones, lest you forget that little oops in Oklahoma with Mr. McVeigh. But individual acts of terrorism will be with us as long as we have a free society and can possibly be only eliminated via converting to a complete totalitarianism on a scale which would render Orwell’s 1984 a description of a pleasant vacation spot.
November 10th, 2006 at 4:39 pmFactOnly. localised defense against individual terrorists based on police work and an attempt at reduction of the terrorists’ influence
Your talking points may be a little out of date. Your strategy was for pre 9/11. The fact that there is a black market for nukes and a proven delivery system by much more capable terrorist element, leads many to understand that we don’t have the luxury to reactively wait to respond to terrorism. This new information is what prompted the pre-emptive war in Iraq. People are disappointed with the war. I am afraid it will take one or two more devastating attacks before we understand that things really have changed.
November 10th, 2006 at 7:32 pm#54, paul
There is no such thing as “pre 9/11″ unless you refer to that piss soaked, panic-stricken, insane hysteria of “Terrorists are coming! They are under every bed already! Hide! Run! Give up all freedoms! Big Brother will keep us safe! Big Brother will kill em all abroad! We gotta help Big Brother start wars with all of them Unamerican Furriners! That will learn them!” and similar nonsense. While 9/11 was a spectacular TV event, it was miniscule in proportion to acts of warfare past event. 47,000 people die every year due to car accidents and by that fear mongering logic of yours we should have declared war on cars, destroyed everything with four wheels and an engine, leveled 1/2 of Detroit and publically executed all of the car company executives.
Of course there is also no black market on any “nukes” that any terrorist has access to. The Veritable Apex of Al Queda Technology, used to such a great effect on 9/11, involved 19 pairs of box cutters.
States such as Pakistan, Iran and North Korea have nukes EXCLUSIVELY for self defense and know that their use against US, Israel or Russia would constitute simply a very spectacular form of suicide. As to a possibility of those nukes appearing in the hands of terrorists after a collapse of one of those states, the highest probability is that of Pakistan, where the US’s best buddy, one dictator Musharriff, is hanging by his finger nails to power. Taking your fruitcake reasoning to its fruity conclusion, US should be busy staging troops on the border of Pakistan as we speak, no? And after that North Korea, Iran, some former Soviet republics, those damn French, Russians and so on. Right? Since the “terrists” can conceivably steal a bomb from any of them. Or even from the very US forces themselves. Never you mind that probability of such an event anywhere is less then that of you finding a winning $100 million lottery ticket in your own turds.
Delivery system? You mean two burly dudes with a REALLY large suitcase arriving at the airport, no? Or are you confusing missiles of the STATE of North Korea with a “terrorist delivery system” in this delirious state of mind of yours?
As to “reactive response”: police and intelligence work are PROACTIVE. You attempt to locate the terrorists before they strike and ARREST them. Then try them and pass sentences. You know that old-fashioned “pre-burning-of-Reichstag” … oops … I mean “pre-9/11″ … stuff with “unalienable rights”, Habeas Corpus, Bill of Rights, judges, defense council and all that jazz that makes for the main difference between the US and the Soviet Union.
You speak of “pre-emptive wars”, like a rather big one which was waged by a certain fellow with a silly moustache and a cow-lick hairdo. Something about the Poles looking funny at him and conspiring against the right of Germans to their “breathing space”. Then there was that “pre-emptive” strike by a certain empire at a place called Pearl Harbor. Something about pre-empting the cutting oil supplies by the US to the said empire. You will do well to heed the lessons of history: ALL “pre-emptive” wars EVER waged were started by those who sought to do evil. ALL of them. Every single last one of them, despite the flowery speeches and rationalizations of the tyrants at the time. Never you forget that.
And do you know why is that? It is because unless one’s knowledge of the other side’s 100% certainty of attack is trully infallable (a near impossiblity), the attacking side becomes the villain by definition. For practical example: see Iraq.
As to devastating attacks, if that truly depressing, incoherent brew of hate, hysteria, fear, panic, bigotry, supermacist attitudes, desire to harm others — ostensibly to “help” them — so that you can feel superior to them, which the likes of you exhibit so freely, is what has “really changed”, then the Al Queda crew has truly and completely won. At a cost of 19 men and 19 pairs of box cutters — and thanks to people such as you — they have utterly and completely destroyed the “Great American Experiment”. Nothing remains which the Founding Fathers, men full of courage and resolve, would have recognized in this pitiful cesspool of cowards you so desperately want to turn the USA into, cowards who would destroy whole other nations based merely on phantoms of their fearful minds, so that they might keep themselves fat and comfortable, as long, of course, as it was someone else who did the fighting for them and their contribution was limited to placing magnets on their cars and making drunk, beligerent, “nuke-em-all-and-let-God-sort-em-out!”, macho talk in bars and on the Internet.
November 10th, 2006 at 11:05 pmFactsOnly. This in from the New Yorker magazine, but it is also common knowledge: On February 4th, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who is revered in Pakistan as the father of the country’s nuclear bomb, appeared on a state-run television network in Islamabad and confessed that he had been solely responsible for operating an international black market in nuclear-weapons materials.
Also if you believe that there was no terrorism against westerners by Islamic fundamentalist prior to 9/11, 2001, let me know and I can quickly give you dozens of examples.
Also the 9/11 attack did more than kill 3,000 people. It crippled the airline industry, affected world economies for years, and caused millions to live in fear.
When you trivialize 9/11 by comparing it to the 47,000 who die in car crashes every year don’t you also trivialize the 150,000 Iraqis that have died in the past 3 years. (wow, 47,000 X 3 = approximately 150,000). By your reasoning, are the 150,000 Iraqi dead no more serious that common every day American automobile fatalities. (Please don’t accuse me of hate; this is your logic).
FactsOnly: you might want to give some more thought to your moniker.
November 11th, 2006 at 4:05 pm#56, paul. Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan did operate a market in nuclear materials BETWEEN STATES. Not between individuals or terrorist groups. He sold stuff to GOVERNMENTS OF COUNTRIES who sought to obtain a nuclear deterrent against an attack by the US. A direct result of the “with us or against us”, “axis of evil” and similiar boneheaded nonsense masquarading as US “foreign policy”. Which brings it all right back to the self-interest of those various states (all of whom are known since Khan was made to confess). This is light years apart from what you are trying to insinuate, a Bazzar somehwere in Iran where bearded and beturbaned men are gathering around a stand to haggle while buying plutonium by weight.
I am uncertain where did you figure out that I “believe there was no terrorism against westerners prior to 9/11″. Would you kindly point that out in one of my posts?
The 9/11 attack did cripple the airline idustry PRECISELY BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU. A proper response by the media to the attack was to DOWNPLAY its significance and to stop covering it 24/7 within a day or two. It truly boggles my mind that people can be so utterly stupid. The whole point of terrorism is for a small group of people to TERRORISE millions. For that, you need a bunch of self-serving, irresponsible media to MAGNIFY the effect of an attack millionfold. Without it, a bomb that kills even 3000, is still just a bomb. No different from an accidental gas explosion. What makes the diffetrence is the FEARMONGERING that insues by the media (to make a lot of money) and made possible by gleeful opportunists such as you, who see it as a chance to gain power and to redirect the nations resources towards themselves and to strike at those their bigotted hatereds urge them to hurt. Without fearmongering, there is NO TERRORISM. Al Queda destroyed a few buldings and killed 3000 people. The responsibility for all the other damage lays squarely at the feet of your kind of “citizen”.
I do not trivialize the 47,000 people who die of car accidents. I merely PUT THINGS INTO PERSPECTIVE. The number of dead Iraqis is more appaling then the 47,000 who die in car accidents in the US yearly because their deaths are the result of PURPOSEFUL activities by the power elites in the US to advance their own selfish goals. As the car manufacturers should be persecuted IF the, out of greed, produce cars that are unsafe, so should be the leaders of armies who attack other nations out of both hubris and greed. And so, of course, should the terrorists who attack others out of hate be prosecuted. Al Queda was hiding in Afghanistan, the Taliban refused to co-operate and so Afghanistan was attacked JUSTLY as it was the staging ground for a prior attack on the US — ergo the aggressor. It is all very simple really. The 150,000 dead Iraqis are the direct result of an evil act by the US government, just like the 3000 dead Americans were a direct result of an evil act of Al Queda, aided by the Taliban.
November 11th, 2006 at 5:09 pmFactsOnly. I appreciate your efforts, I just don’t see things the way you do. I’m trying to comprehend how we are responsible for the fear, when aircrew get there throats slit and airplanes are driven into our most recognizable skyscrapers and the headquarters for our department of defense (with one intended for the capitol/white house). All that on national television. I apologize for our weakness. I guess we should have just ignored it and went on with business as usual. The idea that the fear was contrived for political purposes is laughable. You can honestly say (without the benefit of hindsight) that, shortly after 9/11, you believed there was no need to be concerned?
November 11th, 2006 at 5:30 pm#58, Paul.
I guess we should have just ignored it and went on with business as usual.
What should have happened was a correction of the security deficiencies on the planes, an effort to locate and prosecute people responsible for planning and supporting the attack and YES, BUSINESS AS USUAL as far as life is concerned. No hysteric 24/7 coverage for 6 months, none of that “9/11 changed EVERYTHING” pathetic bullshit, no civil liberties destroyed, no annulment of the Constitution and the like. What will you do when some idiot chooses to bomb some random cars? Stop driving to work? Cower under you bed? Demand that the government provide armoured buses? Or use your brain and grow some balls?
The idea that the fear was contrived for political purposes is laughable.
Not only it is not laughable, it is plain to see for everyone that this is indeed what happened. How many times was 9/11 invoked to justify everything from gross abuses of civil liberties, to torture and invasion of unrelated countries?!
You can honestly say (without the benefit of hindsight) that, shortly after 9/11, you believed there was no need to be concerned?
In the slightest. The 20 men of Al-Queda were the cream of the crop of their overseas expedition, armed with the most sophisticated of their stealth weponry, purchased at some office supply store for $1.99 a piece. The probability of me becoming a victim of their efforts was an order of magnitude less then getting hit by lightning, in my bed, after winning a $1 million lottery … twice in a row.
November 12th, 2006 at 12:47 am