Civilian Casualties
I'm sure this site will anger most of the right wingers around here. But how do you justify this?

Spiff... I took a quick run through ... I saw hundreds from small arms, mortar fire, car bombs... etc... I have quite enough familiarity with the US military to tell you most of those deaths were NOT caused by us.

I know it's a weak retort, but if we weren't there in the first place....

Perhaps not directly. How many car bombs, and mortar fire were killing people before we invaded? The number is still astounding. Over 11,000. Who do you think the Iraqis blame?

You have a point... Then the 100,000 women (ok... mostly girls) that were being raped and many killed, could continue for a few more years...

Another question noone will answer... Who here would have sent his sister or daughter to Iraq under Hussein ?

I was going to edit my post above to include this:

So this begs the question: Has the situation we brought upon the Iraqi poeple resulted in more civilian deaths than Saddam Hussein would have caused in the same time period?

You know that arguement simply doesn't fly. Unless you plan on police forcing the entire world that won't cut it with me. Why are we not in Sudan? There are LOT's of places where bad things are going on, are we going to globetrot around the world and "install" new government everywhere? Besides, that's NOT why we went. We went because we were told they had WMD, and were an iminent threat. Remember the "smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud" speach? Stop trying to switch the story. Liberating the Iraqi people WAS NOT why we went. That's what the story became after we got there, and found no WMD's.

To be terrible cold about it that's the story all the war supporters are trying to tell themselves so they don't feel so bad about the over 11,000 civilians dead. George and Co. got us shitting our pants over WMD's - THAT'S why we went. In George's speach last night, he suggested "Was I to trust the word of a madman?". No George, you weren't. You could have trusted the weapons inspectors that said they hadn't found anything.

Spiff... WMD's were a part of the equation. There was also a lot of talk about the crimes against humanity... Harboring terrorists, you name it. I do like your position though... If we cannot save ALL people, screw em... we won't save any.

By the way... another question you never answered... Which democrats were saying "no wmd's" before the Iraq war.

Hey Spiff... Why don't you do this one, too... When did President Bush say Iraq "was an imminent threat"?

Who here would have sent his sister or daughter to Iraq under Hussein ?
--------------------
I ‘ll choose Irak(under Saddam) over Saudi Arabia any day.

I found this on the "body count" website. It gives some info on how they came up with their totals. 7300+ is still a hell of a count.

This database includes up to 7,350 deaths which resulted from coalition military action during the "major-combat" phase prior to May 1st 2003. In the current occupation phase the database includes all deaths which the Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under the Geneva Conventions and Hague Regulations. This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order, and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.