"ALL CAPS IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE."

Sunday, June 25, 2006

WHO KILLED MORE IRAQIS: SADDAM AND AL QAEDA; U.N. SANCTIONS; OR THE PENTAGON?

ANSWER: #1 = SADDAM; #2 = UN SANCTIONS; #3 = AL QAEDA; #4 (LAST) THE US MILITARY.

Saddam murdered and tortured more than one million Iraqis. Sanctions might have caused 100,000 Iraqis to die prematurely. Al Qaeda has murdered TENS OF THOUSANDS in Iraq since 2004 - mostly Shias and Kurds. And since 2005, thousands of Sunnis have been murdered in retribution - something which did not happen under Saddam, when all the murdering was Sunni and Kurd/Shia.

BONUS FACT: Except for Baghdad, Iraq is NOT now experiencing murder at a rate higher than most major US cities. Baghdad is the central front in the war against al Qaeda; (Afghanistan is now the second major front). [Subtract Baghdad from the murder rate and you can see that OVERALL the murder rate/terrorism rate in the geographic nation of Iraq is largely under control. REPEAT: the war is centered in and around - if not limited to - Baghdad and parts of the Sunni provinces]

BOTTOM-LINE: Sadam and al Qaeda in Iraq have murdered 33 TIMES more Iraqis than the US and its coalition have killed - and the OVERWHELMING majoprity oif thiose killed by the US and our allies have been enemy fighters, and NOT CIVILIANS.

SO... besides liberating the Iraqis and helping them establish a constitutional democracy by mutual consent of the governed (and thus allowing Kurds and Shias in Iraq to have self-determination), the US led war has also actually LOWERED the death rate in Iraq; IOW: the war has increased freedom, prosperity and saved LIVES.


AND WE HAVE KILLED A LOT OF JIHADOTERRORISTS TO BOOT!

All-IN-ALL: the Iraq War - though it has been VERY tough, and rife with setbacks, (many as a result of imperfect strategies which had to be continuously revamped) - has been a great triumph for humanity: 25 MILLION PEOPLE liberated from tyranny and a murderous regime.

Details at POWERLINE. (Disinformation at the LATIMES.)

[NOTE: most of the Saddam statistics are based on a NYTIMES article which was written and filed/published BEFORE the war.]

5 comments:

reliapundit said...

THIS IS AN EDITED VERSION OF "THE ERLANGER DEFEATIST/ANTI-SEMITE"'S COMMENT:

1 - Erlanger first thanks ex-CIA Michael Scheuer - who is an ANTI-SEMITE who was ON DUTY and DERELICT during 9/11. Scheuer was IN CHARGE of the BINALDEN desk at thetime and KNEW NOTHIMNG of 9/11 for the 3-4 YEARs it was in planning. Scheuer BLAMES ISRAEL for the Iraq War. Like Chomsky and Sheehan and Moore and Moran and other ANTI-SEMITES.

2 - Then ERLANGER writes: "Specifically, no American whom has supported inteventionist policy in the Mideast can use the million figure, for as the author outlines, 500,000 of the deaths puportedly caused by Hussein were as a result of the Iraq-Iran War which Rumsfeld and the US helped instigate and aided at the time. The US aided Iraq with intellgence against Iran. The US even provided Saddam with anthrax to fight Iran."

THIS IS UTTER BULLSHIT. Does he remeber a little scandla called IRAN-CONTRA!? Reagin sold MISSILES to IRAN during the war, not Saddam. Saddam's mitltary was a CLIENT OF THE USSR at the time; Saddam's miltary ran on MIG and Soviet AK47's and Soviet tanks. NOT US MATERIEL.

AS KISSINGER SAID - AT THE TIME, ABOUT THE IRAN-IARQ WAR - (which was for all intents and purposes the US policy): "TOO BAD THEY BOITH CAN'T LOSE!"

3 - ERLANGER writes:

"The second "fact" is disingenuous: the only reason al Qaida can be claimed to be the "second front"
is the US bringing it there by the invasion. To use another's country as a "magnet" (we doubt this was the original intent of course)to attact a third adversary and fight that adversary on the non-offending country's soil is itself
immoral.

THIS IS UTTER NONSENSE. Would ERLANGER rather we fought them in the mountainous Hindu Lush, or haver them ALL in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, destabilizing the Middle East!? The flypaper startegy is good. BESIDES: AL WAEDA chose to makie it a front in the GWOT, not Bush.

4 - ERLANGER WROTE:

"Worse, it is self-defeating as leaked CIA Reports have told us Al Qaida has increased its recruiting as a result with enough left over to eventually come to the US and attack us here,jihadists who would otherwise not even have been recruited."

THIS IS UTTER NONSENSE: THERE IS NO RELIABLE RECRUITING DATAA. IN FACT, POLLS SHOW THE USA GAINING IN POPULARITY IN MUSLIM NATIONS.

5 - ERLANGER WROTE:

"There is a reason for war support declining to the low 30s."

The reason the war is unpopular at home is because the MSM wants it to be unpopular. The FACTS are INDISPUTABLE - in afct, ERLANGER doesn;t mention ANY of the facts I posted. HE CAN'T: THEY UUTERLY REFUTE HIS POSITION.

The MSM is Leftist and "anti-war" and anti-Bush. The MSM supported lib BJ CLINTON';s UNAUTHORIZED WAR AGAINST SERBIA. NO UN MANDATE - NOT EVEN A CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION! Even the NYTIMES supported WARRANTLESS search and seizure and warrantless DATA-MINING done by Clintoin and Carter. The MSM are partisaqn LEftists before ANYTHING else.

Erlanger is not a Leftist. He is a misguided dupe and an anti-Semite, isolationist/defeatist Bushcananite.

I like his posts - because he exposes the UTTER BANKRUPTCY of that side's policies.

I edited his idiotic personal attacks on me.

ADDENDUM: there is not one shred of evidence that the USA is an empire, or that we went to war for Big Oil or Israel. These arguments are falacious idiotic knee-jerk attemtps to buttress the position of ISOLATIONS and APPEASERS.

I ask ERLANGER to cite onbe single soliray event in all of human history whoich shows that ISOLATIONSIM and APPEASEMENT are benficial.

As CHURCHILL SAID (paraphrasing):

An appeaser is someone who feeds his neighbor to the crocodiule in the hopes that he will be eaten last."

Churchill also said (paraphrasing) - of appeasement and Chamberlain's deal with Herr Hitler -- called the Munich Pact:

Chamberlain had the chance to choose between war or dishonor and he chose DISHONOR, and soon he will also have war."

Appeasement only made Hitler stronger and the costs of defeating him worse.

Reagan was no appeaser. Thatcher was no appeaser. Neither is Bush. Thank the Lord.

Anonymous said...

Churchill is a LOSER who vowed never to lose the British Empire but lost it during WW2,ignoring Hitler's olive branch.

Leaked CIA reports show the jihad is winning ,increasing ranks worldwide in good part due to US Iraq occupation.

The US aided BOTH sides in the Iraq Iran War but more Iraq than Iran. The strategy? To keep two of Israel's enemies busy fighting each other. This does not excuse their continuing the war which neither could win.

The vast majority of historians agree Hitler was an Anglophile who wanted a free hand in the East but who wanted the British Empire left intact. This wasn't good enough
for the LOSER OF THE EMPIRE,Churchill,no hero he-and not much admired by many in the UK.

Anonymous said...

sounds like anon 350 is a nazi sympathiser to me

Anonymous said...

love this phrase:"The vast majority of historians agree " as if that meant it waws true!
ha! you fool...3 out of 4 dentists want to nuke iran

Anonymous said...

how'bout this one:

4 out of 5 oscar nominees think we should abandon Iraq!

like they know more about foreign policy then they know about the interior decor of a winebago!