Twenty-one fucking Hundred!How Many Dead Iraqi CHILDREN will it take??

[Monkie]

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2023.shtml

Life in ‘liberated’ Iraq a disaster, UN report says

"The report estimates the number of Iraqi civilians who have died since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003 as between 18,000 and 30,000. Other reports put civilian deaths much higher. Some 1,600 Americans have died in combat. Of the civilian deaths, 12 percent were children under 18 years of age, meaning that between 2,100 and 3,500 children have been killed in the U.S.-led war thus far, according to ILCS data"

the UN report:http://www.iq.undp.org/ILCS/overview.htm
http://www.iq.undp.org/ILCS/population.htm

"War-related Death

The number of deaths of civilians and military personnel in Iraq in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion is another set of figures that has raised controversy. The Living Conditions Survey data indicates 24,000 deaths, with a 95 percent confidence interval from 18,000 to 29,000 deaths. According to the survey data, children aged below 18 years comprise 12% percent of the deaths due to warfare."

my question is,how long exactly do we support our baby-killers?
i know we are not talking real babies here,American babies..
but how many dead Iraqi babies will it take before YOU cant sleep at night??
think about it..

[LightningFlash]

1. Just more of this pathetic display.....

I believe we need to purge this whole party of DINOs, every last one of them. Force them out as Zell Miller was. :banghead:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. "Unfortunate incidents", "Regrettable mistakes", "We will investigate".

Don't worry. Be happy. Put a nice "Support Our Troops" decal on your SUV and continue shopping.

[SmokingJacket]

3. That's about one blown-up child for every person who died on

9-11.

Okay, so now that we have exacted our revenge, can we stop????

[tuckessee]

4. Pre-war sanctions killed aprox. 500,000 Iraqi children

according to Madame Albright, who thought that was a perfectly acceptable number of people to kill in order to enforce UN edicts.

Americans only care about their "heroes" who "fall" while "serving".

They don't give a rat's a** about Iraqi punks and street urchins who get wasted by their "heroes".

[LightningFlash]

5. Where did you hear that propaganda Americans don't care?

I'd really like to know who doesn't care about thousands and millions of deaths in other countries. Clinton didn't do a neocon war but his sanctions were still wrong.

[tuckessee]

7. I see it everyday everywhere

with just about everyone and everything I deal with in the real world.

I see it manifested in the lack of mainstream national or local media coverage about the issue.

I see it in the complete absence of any significant political or social action concerning these deaths and the general injustice of the Iraq War.

I see in the fact that "Support the Troops" magnets outnumber anti-war bumper stickers by 5,000 to 1 in my hometown.

I see it in the fact the average American has absolutely no idea how many Iraqi children we have killed since Gulf War 1.

Of course, there are SOME Americans who care - just not a lot.

If there were, it would be showing itself in some form of popular anti-war movement and the politicans and media would have to at least pay token lip service to their cause.

It's not like killing Iraqi children is a new thing. It's been going on since 1991 and it's been several years since Albright's comments. If they haven't caught on by now when will they?

Instead of me telling you who doesn't care about the carnage, it might be easier for you to list all the American politicans, religious leaders and mainstream media personalities who have made the fifteen long year Iraq parade of death an issue.

[oblivious]

6. Thanks for posting this Monkie. Three strange things I noticed.

1. Children under 18 make up about 50% of the population, but only 12% of war dead? That's a bit surprising.

2. The report seems to cover child illness, but I can't find anything about injuries. I just skimmed through it though, so perhaps I'll find that later. It would be very strange to leave that out.

3. This is crazy. Page 26 lists orphanhood:

http://www.iq.undp.org/ILCS/PDF/Tabulation%20Report%20-%20Englilsh.pdf

Look at the columns 'mother alive only' and 'father alive only'. In ALL cases in ALL areas, where one parent is dead it is far more likely that the mother is dead. In Baghdad, the most populous region, 3% of children have father alive only, while .5% have mother alive only. How can this be with the masses of soldiers that must have been slaughtered? Have I misunderstood something here?

[Monkie]

8. yeah i noticed that about the orphans too..

the only reason i could think of for the father being more likely to be the surviving relative is that while many civilians might be dying due to the suicide bombings and the general mayhem on the streets it could be that more iraqi civilians are dying from raids on homes and/or arial bombing of homes than are from violence outside the home.
i think its safe to assume that women are more likely to be at home more of the time than men?