Over 3,400 Iraqi Civilians Killed in July

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Aug 15, 2006.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    nytimes

    so while our attention was distracted and outrage was leveled on hezbollah for killing 43 israeli civilians in a month's time, more iraqi civilians died in one month than people killed on 9/11.

    things don't seem to be improving much.
     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    And of course it's "our" responsibility. Letting things get to this point is in itself a breach of the Geneva Conventions.
     
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    And seeing as how Iraq is about 1/5th the population of the US, that would be the equivalent here of 17,190 Americans killed in one month.

    Yet they still don't want us there. Can't for the life of me figure out why...

    On a related note, I wonder how many civilians Saddam was having killed each month?
     
  4. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #4
    He, George and Tony should be sharing a cell.
     
  5. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #5
    I think you have hit upon a great idea for a new TV show. "The Frat Boy, his Poodle, and a Stone-Cold Killer." Now who gets to play which role?

    Given the stats listed in the OP, George would fit for all three at once.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    I'd certainly pay to see it. Would you be able to download episodes to an iPod?
     
  7. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #7
    At first I read that as American troops who were killed total. I feel kinda bad that I thought more about them first than the innocent Iraqis. At least now I know how that other ~30% feels.
     
  8. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #8
    So you think the 'outrage' is due to 43 civillians being killed rather than the circumstances? And do you imply this 'outrage' is overly effusive?

    One can only wonder why you decide to connect this story with Israeli civillians killed by Hezbollah, I would have thought it newsworthy on it's own. I suppose the point of the number 43 is that it is a relatively small number. IOW you imply only 43 as opposed to the number of Lebanese casualites. A better contrast with the 100 a day killed in Iraq would be the 1200 a day killed in the Congo with almost no coverage at all. Or even the total quantity of people killed in the month of fighting in Lebanon on both sides.

    You further imply that the there is some moral to be drawn from the raw numbers. As if for example deliberately murdering someone is somehow less of a crime that say, accidentally driving a truck into a crowd and killing 5 people.

    Although only 43 Israeli civillians were killed, that is not due to want of trying, as every single Hezbollah Katushya (about 4,000) was filled with ball bearings and was deliberately sent to bomb civillians with no military point at all. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on ones perspective, 95% of them missed.

    Maybe a better analogy than the above would be: Imagine a sniper who fires at 10 people at a petrol station or supermarket. Say he hits only one. Is this person less morally (as well as legally) culpable than a drunk driver who kills two pedestrians, just because the sniper missed?

    It is offensive that you choose to juxtapose the lack of Israeli deaths in relation to the media coverage, against the Iraqi situation.
     
  9. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #9
    I couldn't agree more. A lot of this seems to happen around here in MacRumors.
     
  10. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #10
    @ Yaba,

    Do please explain, how it is offensive for you
     
  11. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #11
    The implication of the relative news value is clear: 43 Israelis > 3,400 Iraqis.
    A better contrast, maybe, but pretty irrelevant.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/congo/story/0,12292,1370528,00.html
    In what way is it offensive?
     
  12. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #12
    see post #8 for the answer.
     
  13. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    No answer there. You just assert that it is offensive.
     
  14. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #14
    Yep, the answer in certainly there. If you don't see it then there's not much I can do about that.
     
  15. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #15
    I think you are implying that you are offended because you belive that the OP has claimed that the Israeli deaths are insignificant.

    ...which isnt what he said at all, what he was pointing out is how rediculous our total outrage at 45 deaths is insane considering that we have inflicted over 3000 deaths on Iraqis. What about the fact that Israelis have killed over a thousand innocent civillians?

    Does the fact that they were "aiming for military targets" do anything to lessen the fact that they murdered civillians? As you said is a drunk driver killing 2 people better than a sniper killing one person? Atleast the driver "made a mistake".
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    You either can't explain it or you believe that assertion makes it so.
     
  17. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #17
    You've been arguing for the past month that Hezbollah deliberately murdering Israelis is worse than Israelis accidentally killing Lebanese civilians, haven't you? :confused:

    Which is it?
     
  18. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #18
    that my original statement is somehow "offensive" or outrageous just supports my point. notice how we've yet to discuss the iraqi casualties.
     
  19. iTwitch macrumors 6502a

    iTwitch

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Location:
    East of the Mississippi
    #19
    The totals for May and June were 6000. I guess GW is going to show Saddam how it's done. :mad:
     
  20. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #20
    Hi AP, you need to read my post more carefully. I did not say that "I" was offended. I said "it" was offensive. "It" was referring to the "juxtaposition". It is offensive that the OP seeks to bring in an editorial opinion about his view of the Israel/Hezbollah conflict, into what purports to be a completely different topic. Namely, that 'things aren't improving much' in Iraq.

    If you read the OP's post again you will also see that in fact very very little at all was said. The only thing he actually said was: A lot of people died in Iraq this month and things aren't improving. That's it.

    But somehow within that very simple concept he has managed to weave a personal editorial comment about why *we* (our) are *outraged* at Hezbollah. Yes there is outrage at Hezbollah's actions, not just from the West and Israel in specific but by Lebanon's Arab neighbour states, excluding Syria.

    But the OP has pretended that his editorial opinion about the cause of this 'outrage' is due to the killing of [only] 45 Israelis. We are all included in this by his use of 'our'. This concept itself could be considered offensive to anyone who thinks a bit more deeply about the situation. As if intent and circumstance, does not come into the equation at all.

    My reading of the conflict is that 'we' are outraged by Hezbollah for a number of reasons. First one is their 'adventurous' actions which resulted in an *unprovoked* attack on a sovereign state, killing 8 troops and kidnapping two. Then there is the apparent hand of Iran in the timing of the event. I think most outrage however was just the simple fact of the infrastructure and quantity of missiles that Hezbollah has amassed over the 6 years since Israel pulled out of Lebanon. This was the main reason for 'outrage'. There are lots of others that although important didn't generate a lot of specific 'outrage'.

    First amongst these was the fact that Hezbollah was firing its arsenal in such a way that the only possible purpose was to target and kill civillians with ball bearing loaded missiles. Another thing that should have generated more outrage than it did was Hezbollah's 'cowardly blending' with the civillian population in order to have more civillian casualties amongst the Lebanese and therefore to help Hezbollah in their propaganda war.

    But you are also making the mistake of confusing newsworthiness with 'outrage'. As is explained in this BBC blog by their news editors, a conflict is newsworthy for other reason than internal isolated factors.


    You yourself call it a fact that they were aiming for military targets, meaning that the civillian deaths were *no* a deliberate attempt to kill civillians, yet you still call it 'murder'.
     
  21. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #21
    There is a third possiblility that you have neglected, which is that the answer is indeed in my post and you are either unwilling or unable to discern it.
     
  22. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #22
    And who exactly are "Lebanon's Arab neighbour states", if you exclude Syria? :confused:

    You have ascribed your own interpretation of an intent to both sides, but have a one-sided view of the circumstances.
    Initial reports stated that the Israelis were captured inside Lebanon, not kidnapped from Israel, so the self-defence argument seems shaky, to say the least.
    Israel was firing its arsenal in such a way that the only possible result was the death of many innocent civilians from cluster munitions. Your arguments are specious.
     
  23. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #23

    I have pleanty of outrage at hezbollah but the outrage I feel twards the Israeli reaction is no less.

    I consider hezbollahs assault on Israel to be frankly disgusting much the same way I consider the attacks of 911 to be horendous and disgusting acts of violence by cowardly terrorists.

    But I expect more from both Israelis and Americans, because you were assaulted by terrorists does not give you the right to become terrorists yourself. This means if military action is absolutely necessary it must be undertaken with the greatest care and attention to not harming innocents. It is clear the Israelis have done nothing of the short if their bombs are routinely ripping through civillian houses.

    A terrorist attack aggainst innocent civillians is morally un defendable it does not give any country the right to respond in kind.

    this means

    -No torture so what if theyre the scum of the earth we're better than them.

    -Attacks carried out with pinpoint precision and maximum care that no civillians are hurt even when it means loss of combat effiency.

    -Do not cut off supply lines, yes these lines are being used by an enemy but more importantly they are being used by civillians.
     
  24. dogbone macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #24
    @AP_piano295

    Yep, I have no argument with your above post, however regarding Lebanese casualties, I would point out two things as mitigating factors in Israeli caused deaths. First one is that we have seen pictures of dead who are very obviously non combatantant, I do not believe that all the reported 1000 civillians are in fact uninvolved non combatants, seeing as it has been reported that the 15000 odd missiles are sometimes stored in individual houses. Not all the Hezbollah fighters wear uniforms.

    Second point is that when we have Hezbollah firing thousands of missiles filled with ball bearings at civillians, and these fighters also move their very mobile arsenal thoughout the civillian population without any regard at all as to the consequences, then Israel has a difficult choices to make. And if she deems it necessary to risk harm to Lebanese civillians in order to stop the rocket attacks, then she has a right, to do so.

    Getting back on topic though (assuming that there is a topic)...

    Yep, things don't seem to be getting any better with regards to those who are trying to stir up sectarian violence in Iraq. It is amazing to me that there is such hatred and animosity with Sunnis and Shias throughout the ME. But I guess even the thousands killed in Iraqi sectarian violence, is dwarfed by the 100,000 who died on both sides during each year of the 10 year Iraq/Iran war.

    I'm also astounded that the US is blamed by some for the sectarian violence, rather than say the ourtrageous concept that the muslims themselves should take some responsibility for the deaths. Maybe things were better when Saddam could gas 5,000 in a single go, without too much fuss being made in the West.
     
  25. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    We've been trying to tell him that we're disgusted all the way around, but unless you are totally pro-Israel, you're not being "fair and balanced" it seems...

    I doubt it would even matter to Dogbone that Israeli cluster bombs are designed to produce maximum shrapnel damage -- akin to packing a Katusha with ball bearings, except cluster bomblet shrapnel is jagged.

    When you have right on your side, you can do no wrong apparently.
     

Share This Page