In other words there is ZERO basis for such a claim in this thread or any other and you're just trolling.

Learn to read threads.  You are mixing (again as always) comments, and trying to apply a comment made on one statement to another.  Sorry, this may work on your idiot site (Smirking chimp maybe?), but not here.  if you cant follow a thread, with quotes, dont bother posting.  it just makes you look stupid, not the object of your attack.  And no, no one else here is going to rally round you like on your other site since here - every one actually thinks for themselves, they do not parrot the line fed to them by handlers.  Sorry you cant or dont realize that.

i would suggest most of them weren't. but the way the enemy operates who knows for sure you.

Sorry I dont get your point?

Maybe I've got this all wrong, but isn't the reason there's estimates in the first place because the US army refused to count the dead? http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/189877_civilians08.html Surely they haven't given up and returned to Vietnam style pointless counting?

I have had enough of this false pretenses crap that has been disproved over and over again. Just so we are clear which of the false pretenses is it that you speak of so I can slam the door on your drug induced fallacy and maybe help you to see the light? List one or as many as you wish and I will disprove them point by point on the condition that once done you will stop bringing it up once and for all. Deal? Or no deal?

The law says very clearly that if anyone is not in a uniform and takes up arms against a military force they are classified as an illegal combatant, the law also states that illegal combatants are not covered by any laws or rules of warfare. This means that the armed forces of any nation state may do with these illegal combatants what they will with no condemnation from other nation states. If an illegal combatant is caught on the field of battle they may be shot, tortured, hung, killed in any way the legal combatants deem fit. This is what the law states. It has been published for over fifty years and is accepted by all civilized nations in the world. They are called the Geneva Conventions and accords. All US military are given classes in the laws of warfare in boot camp and is refreshed every year. Violation of those rules are punishable by imprisonment or death by US law. Killing innocent non-combatants is punishable by imprisonment or death by firing squad or hanging. This makes it really hard to be a blood thirsty out of control serviceman on a killing spree. Knowing that someone broke those laws and not reporting it makes you culpable and subject to the death penalty as well. The President of the United States said in his speech that anyone that supports, aids, or gives safe harbor to a terrorist will be treated as a terrorist. Of the 19,000 terrorist killed they are all terrorist. The number is actually higher what was released was an estimate of confirmed terrorist not the exact number because the United States is not going to give exact numbers but the numbers given are accurate as to their status.

You've got to much attitude for me to bother making a deal with over anything but if you think you can; disprove that the Bush Administration took the country to war on the basis that Iraq posed an imminent danger to the United States due to their WMD program(s).

Given no WMD were ever found I'd like to know how this wouldn't be considered false pretences.

bush used the same info that the congress used when they declared war.

since then we have found out the director of the CIA was giving false info so that he could write a book later condemning bush for going to war.



the wmds are in Syria.

Given omniscience, this would be a valid argument, However, given that no one on earth posses it, it is a stupid standard that can never be met. At the time, it was "Believed" by both Bush and congress Saddam did have them. Long before Bush, the democrats under Clinton (and yes, the republicans as well - but then they are not denying they said it) were claiming he had them and they must be disposed of. He never showed evidence he had, so the assumption and the intelligence was they were there.

Therefor, to all but party line parrots with a memory span that does not predate Bush, it is not a lie, it was simply incorrect intelligence.

So again, answer Paladin's challenge with facts, not talking points.

I gotta hand it to you Tiddler, that was a pretty nice way to avoid the challenge.

Sounds to me like you are making excuses after posting as if you have no fear of anyone on this site. I guess DrGuy was right when he said you contradict yourself a lot. Have you been hanging around the real resident troll of this site? Col gene. If not I can introduce you two and you guys can form a duo. You can be the Duo Ben-gay, but it will be upt to you 2 to decide who will be Ben.

So you think Im fearless huh? You're easily impressed.



Yup guessing at it would be about right.



So if he's the troll then how come your only "contribution" to this thread is yet another personal attack on me? Do you actually have a point of view on the subject at hand Charles or are you simply too blinded by your carry over hatred to participate.

Afterall the subject is only "How many Americans have died in Iraq?". But clearly you have more important things on your agenda Charles, like name calling and other assorted nonsense.

Well bearing in mind that, as above, feeding time for you is over Dr Guy, all I will say is this. It is up to Paladin to answer me with the facts Dr Guy as it is his assertion that he can disprove any and all of my "theories".

In fact given the nature of his challenge I can in fact be as hypothetical as I like in this matter. And so yet again you attempt to hand me the wrong end of the stick. Although I suspect more out of ignorance than of cunning.

And I can only hope for Paladins' sake that his "facts" amount to something a little more substantial than your "I believe, he believed" proposition as faith alone will not be enough for him to disprove anything.

i would say that tiddler has lost and is trying to prove that he has won.

This from a guy that claims the Director of the CIA duped the President into war so he could write a book about it. Forgive me while I continue to ignore you.

Lol, I love how half of each reply is just a personal attack. (I guess even my post is, since im making fun of them )

One of the more annoying things about the reporting is that to get the information like the dead terrorist or civilians count, you can only find information about it briefly if at all on tv/radio OR on the web... where of course everyone argues (very maturely) about the actual data. I think it is almost more of a matter of them wanting to "play it safe" and not ruffle any feathers on what they actually report. However, I would like to see more reporting done on information like this instead of randomly finding it on a blog site....