The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
The Terrorist U.S.A.
Front-Ranger:
The bombing of Dresden was covered in the Kurt Vonnegutt novel Slaughterhouse Five which is a classic book that most American students read.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 05:23:58 pm ---4. I believe that the 100,000 dead civilian Iraqis is just a figurative number that makes good stories for the media. I don't think anyone really knows exactly how many there are. I also don't think anyone knows for certain that all of them were killed by Americans. How many of those people were killed by IEDs built by their own countrymen? How many of them were killed when a shell slammed into a building that was fired by someone from a Jihadist organization who was there to kill Americans? I don't think its possible for anyone to know for certain.
--- End quote ---
The 100,000 figure that I've been using comes from this site:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
As of today, they're listing the count as between 112,804 and 123,437. Here's what they say are their standards:
Iraq Body Count (IBC) records the violent civilian deaths that have resulted from the 2003 military intervention in Iraq. Its public database includes deaths caused by US-led coalition forces and paramilitary or criminal attacks by others.
IBC’s documentary evidence is drawn from crosschecked media reports of violent events leading to the death of civilians, or of bodies being found, and is supplemented by the careful review and integration of hospital, morgue, NGO and official figures.
Systematically extracted details about deadly incidents and the individuals killed in them are stored with every entry in the database. The minimum details always extracted are the number killed, where, and when.
Confusion about the numbers produced by the project can be avoided by bearing in mind that:
IBC’s figures are not ‘estimates’ but a record of actual, documented deaths.
IBC records solely violent deaths.
IBC records solely civilian (strictly, ‘non-combatant’) deaths.
IBC’s figures are constantly updated and revised as new data comes in, and frequent consultation is advised.
IBC builds on innovative uses of new technologies without which this citizens’ initiative would be impossible. The project was founded in January 2003 by volunteers from the UK and USA who felt a responsibility to ensure that the human consequences of military intervention in Iraq were not neglected.
Finally, IBC could not exist without the journalists and media support workers, Iraqi and international, who labour to report war’s daily carnage at the risk, and all too often the cost, of their health or their lives.
I see now that the site explicitly states that not all of the deaths are caused by US-led coalition forces. And no doubt the circumstances in many particular cases are unclear and debatable. But this isn't just a random figurative number bandied about for the sake of good stories in the media. The site apparently makes every effort to be as accurate as possible. In many if not all cases, the circumstances, causes and type of victims are recorded in some detail. More details about their methodology are available on the site.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on June 02, 2013, 12:30:35 am ---The 100,000 figure that I've been using comes from this site:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
As of today, they're listing the count as between 112,804 and 123,437. Here's what they say are their standards:
(snip)
I see now that the site explicitly states that not all of the deaths are caused by US-led coalition forces. And no doubt the circumstances in many particular cases are unclear and debatable. But this isn't just a random figurative number bandied about for the sake of good stories in the media. The site apparently makes every effort to be as accurate as possible. In many if not all cases, the circumstances, causes and type of victims are recorded in some detail. More details about their methodology are available on the site.
--- End quote ---
I figured the actual number was higher than 100,000 which is why I suspected that it was figurative. Maybe people are just rounding off.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 06:44:23 pm ---Targeting civilians is not okay and I consider it terrorism.
--- End quote ---
Your definition of terrorism is problematic, especially when we're talking about the kind of terrorism we've been fighting since 9/11 .The biggest problem is that the terrorists themselves have been civilians. From Osama Bin Laden, to the Tsarneyev brothers, none of the terrorists were operating as part of a military body, or sanctioned to fight on behalf of a sovereign state. If we were to apply your definition, we would not have been able to go after the people responsible for 9/11, or many of the other acts of terror committed by jihadists worldwide.
oilgun:
--- Quote from: milomorris on June 02, 2013, 07:30:30 am ---Your definition of terrorism is problematic, especially when we're talking about the kind of terrorism we've been fighting since 9/11 .The biggest problem is that the terrorists themselves have been civilians. From Osama Bin Laden, to the Tsarneyev brothers, none of the terrorists were operating as part of a military body, or sanctioned to fight on behalf of a sovereign state. If we were to apply your definition, we would not have been able to go after the people responsible for 9/11, or many of the other acts of terror committed by jihadists worldwide.
--- End quote ---
Osama bin Laden and the Tsarneyev bothers have (allegedly - I for one, still believe in due process unlike the US (and yes Canadian ) government) targeted civilians, so how is my definition of terrorism problematic?
Here's a somewhat unrelated picture that is worth a thousand words, which I'm sure you'll provide, lol! It stops at 2011 btw, so some are missing.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version