Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Godbert · 08-09-2003, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by debater10
and countless civilians were dying every day.

Assuming you are refering to civilians that were killed for unjustifiable reasons by Saddam, could you provide any numbers on that?
And no, I am not interested how many thousand civilians Saddam killed daily in the 80s when the US was helping him do it with money and means to build WMDs or when suppressing US-triggered uprisings in the early 90s.
Let's make it a really easy question:
Approximately how many innocent people did Saddam kill this millenium?
I assume since you are repeatedly talking about countless civilians killed every day you have some data on this.
Since according to your previous posts you are unable to count to this number a link to the source will suffice.

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ion
You didn't.

I went over the previous page, and all questions remain unanswered by you.

For example:

.) where are the 'imminent' threat WMDs, worth breaking up with U.N. and war?

To say that he lied about the knowledge of WMD's is an exaggeration. Not even the head weapons inspector is willing to say that. Is there suspicion that he may have exaggerated the evidence? Yes. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003...5220629273.html

Quote:

.) where are the 'enthusiastic' photos of 'liberated' Iraqis, that are not fake?

The population of Iraq is celbrating their new-found promise of freedom. http://www.lastsuperpower.net/Membe...folder_contents

*And the pictures are not fake. The author who wrote as much was a crackpot*

Quote:

.) why is there a guerilla war?

Quote:

.) like Daggah asked, why U.S. defended the Ministry of Oil and not museums?

I would say that the US, as officials have stated, ensured the safety of the oil fields to provide the new government with a source of funds. There are many in Iraq who resent US involvement.

Quote:

.) why newspapers speak about Exxon's contracts?

The war was not done for oil. Of the six companies that got the Iraqi oil contracts, only 1 of them was a US company. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/Business/story_47793.asp

Quote:

.) how come Bush gets away with lies with you and people like you?

People like me? Wow. I've seen some ignorance in my time, but that has to be on the top ten list. Tell me, how come the liberal left gets away with the lies they push on people like you? Notice that this argument makes no more sense than your own.

Please note that all of my responses are copied directly from the board... apparently you need to work on your reading skills.

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Godbert
Assuming you are refering to civilians that were killed for unjustifiable reasons by Saddam, could you provide any numbers on that?
And no, I am not interested how many thousand civilians Saddam killed daily in the 80s when the US was helping him do it with money and means to build WMDs or when suppressing US-triggered uprisings in the early 90s.
Let's make it a really easy question:
Approximately how many innocent people did Saddam kill this millenium?
I assume since you are repeatedly talking about countless civilians killed every day you have some data on this.
Since according to your previous posts you are unable to count to this number a link to the source will suffice.

About 750 per month, recently.
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea...nrightsrpt.htm

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ion
You know how good that would have been?

.) 7,000 Iraqi civilians saved;

.) thousands of Iraqi army saved;

.) thousands prevented from being maimed;

.) 200 U.S. soldiers saved;

.) $74 billion of taxpayer money saved;

.) U.S. maintaining credibility in the world;

.) U.N. monitoring like in the past ten years and better than that (with U.S.' candid input), Hussein.

Moral:

do respect U.N., as the will of the international community.

Not if the will of the international community is based on ignoring human rights abuses for the sake of maintaining oil lines. i.e. France, Germany, and russia. The UN can go screw itself if it is harboring the leader of a totalitarian regime.

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:08 PM

And the 750 per month are just those innocent civilians executed at random. This does not account for the raping, beating, and torture of hundreds of others.

Daggah · 08-09-2003, 08:09 PM

Quote:

I would say that the US, as officials have stated, ensured the safety of the oil fields to provide the new government with a source of funds.

If their motives were as altruistic as you say they were, why did the US neglect to defend Iraqi hospitals from looting as well?

Quote:

There are many in Iraq who resent US involvement.

But I thought Iraq was happy we "liberated" them (from a dictator we helped prop up in the first place)!

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daggah
If their motives were as altruistic as you say they were, why did the US neglect to defend Iraqi hospitals from looting as well?

This is what we call begging the question. Feel freee to make an actual argument at any time, now.

Quote:

But I thought Iraq was happy we "liberated" them (from a dictator we helped prop up in the first place)!

This is so stupid, I'm doubting whether or not it deserves a reply. Obviously, when I made the comment that the civilians supported the US action, I could not have been making a blanket statement.

Daggah · 08-09-2003, 08:22 PM

Instead of posting red herrings, why not answer the question?

The adminstration and you claim that its motives were noble. Yet it did not even bother to ATTEMPT to defend vital centers like hospitals from looting. Why?

I say: because the adminstration's motives were far from noble.

As far as the other, it really bothers you that you are being forced to realize that Iraq does NOT herald us as the great liberator you so blindly envision us being, doesn't it?

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daggah
Instead of posting red herrings, why not answer the question?

The adminstration and you claim that its motives were noble. Yet it did not even bother to ATTEMPT to defend vital centers like hospitals from looting. Why?

I say: because the adminstration's motives were far from noble.

As far as the other, it really bothers you that you are being forced to realize that Iraq does NOT herald us as the great liberator you so blindly envision us being, doesn't it?

And you are acussing me of the red herring. *sigh*. Look, the reason they would defend the oil fields is because they knew that they would be the most significant targets. Also, they recognized that the new regime's ownership of them would be a critical source of funding to help the new government get on its feet. It would allow them to rebuild the hospitals. Also, the US was setting up hospitals because most others were in the cenetrs of cities where the conflict was heated. It's common sense.
And no. It does not bother me. There are always going to be those who disagree with what you may be doing. A few dissenters should not arrest action. This discussion is a prime example.

debater10 · 08-09-2003, 08:27 PM

By the way, "begging the question" is a logical fallacy itself. To accuse me of committing the red herring fallacy when I was pointing to the flaw in your argumentation is nothing short of hypocracy.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-09-2003, 08:08 PM	#85
debater10 Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Lynchburg, VA, USA Posts: 106	And the 750 per month are just those innocent civilians executed at random. This does not account for the raping, beating, and torture of hundreds of others.

08-09-2003, 08:22 PM	#88
Daggah Banned Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Deployed to Kosovo Posts: 4,314	Instead of posting red herrings, why not answer the question? The adminstration and you claim that its motives were noble. Yet it did not even bother to ATTEMPT to defend vital centers like hospitals from looting. Why? I say: because the adminstration's motives were far from noble. As far as the other, it really bothers you that you are being forced to realize that Iraq does NOT herald us as the great liberator you so blindly envision us being, doesn't it?

08-09-2003, 08:27 PM	#90
debater10 Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Lynchburg, VA, USA Posts: 106	By the way, "begging the question" is a logical fallacy itself. To accuse me of committing the red herring fallacy when I was pointing to the flaw in your argumentation is nothing short of hypocracy.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.