5 ms·

False statements don't help public discussion. It is not true that the U.S. killed a million people in the Middle East. And this is not some sophistic semantic

False statements don't help public discussion. It is not true that the U.S. killed a million people in the Middle East. And this is not some sophistic semantic argument either, as it remains not true when you include Afghanistan. The number of civilian casualties is not even close. It is also not true that the U.S. doesn't care about civilian casualties. The U.S., U.K., and Australia are the only countries I know that put lawyers in air strike operations cells to ensure the law of armed conflict is followed. The French red card holders receive training but don't tend to be lawyers, believe similar is true for Germans and Italians. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who takes this obligation more seriously than the U.S. and closest allies.

trasz 5y ago
Some estimates indicate million killed in Iraq alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualt.... Apart from Afghanistan, you'd also need to add civilian victims of US sanctions. The fact that US uses lawyers "to ensure the law of armed conflict is followed" does not mean they care about civilians; it means they care about being sued in case they killed someone whose family can afford lawyers.
- torstenvl 5y ago
  A country cannot be sued for causing a civilian death in war. Your speculation about motivations has no basis in reality. Additionally, the link you posted about deaths in Iraq does not say what you think it says.
  - trasz 5y ago
    Individual soldiers can, and US is very protective about its war criminals (see Iran Air 655). Almost every country cares about civilians more the US: by not waging wars.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
mempko 5y ago
The U.S. also takes it seriously when whistle blowers and journalists leak a story that tells the opposite. Torturing Chelsea Manning and going after Julian Assange for example. The million excess deaths from the wars is very realistic and plausible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
- torstenvl 5y ago
  Chelsea Manning wasn't tortured. The USG even paid for her gender reassignment surgery, and she was released early from her sentence. No reasonable person can call that torture. The claim isn't "there were a million excess deaths in a multiparty conflict," the claim is that the U.S. killed a million people. The vast majority of civilian killings were by ISIS and Shia militias.
  - trasz 5y ago
    Those “excess deaths” wouldn’t happen if the US hadn’t invaded Middle East. Thus, it’s US fault. Generally speaking, calling US victims “excess deaths” tells something about American state of mind, though.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - torstenvl 5y ago
      That isn't how fault works. None of the misfortune I've suffered in my life would have happened if my father had never impregnated my mother, therefore it's all his fault and I'm his victim? No. "But for" causation has zero moral import whatsoever. Stop spewing your ax-grindy propaganda.
      - trasz 5y ago
        So essentially your claim is that invading a country is not the cause for subsequent million victims of said invasion. You still don't see it, do you? You have been brainwashed into believing that war mongering is somehow not pure evil as long as it's done by US.

trasz 5y ago

Some estimates indicate million killed in Iraq alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualt.... Apart from Afghanistan, you'd also need to add civilian victims of US sanctions. The fact that US uses lawyers "to ensure the law of armed conflict is followed" does not mean they care about civilians; it means they care about being sued in case they killed someone whose family can afford lawyers.

torstenvl 5y ago
A country cannot be sued for causing a civilian death in war. Your speculation about motivations has no basis in reality. Additionally, the link you posted about deaths in Iraq does not say what you think it says.
- trasz 5y ago
  Individual soldiers can, and US is very protective about its war criminals (see Iran Air 655). Almost every country cares about civilians more the US: by not waging wars.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

mempko 5y ago

The U.S. also takes it seriously when whistle blowers and journalists leak a story that tells the opposite. Torturing Chelsea Manning and going after Julian Assange for example. The million excess deaths from the wars is very realistic and plausible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

torstenvl 5y ago
Chelsea Manning wasn't tortured. The USG even paid for her gender reassignment surgery, and she was released early from her sentence. No reasonable person can call that torture. The claim isn't "there were a million excess deaths in a multiparty conflict," the claim is that the U.S. killed a million people. The vast majority of civilian killings were by ISIS and Shia militias.
- trasz 5y ago
  Those “excess deaths” wouldn’t happen if the US hadn’t invaded Middle East. Thus, it’s US fault. Generally speaking, calling US victims “excess deaths” tells something about American state of mind, though.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - torstenvl 5y ago
    That isn't how fault works. None of the misfortune I've suffered in my life would have happened if my father had never impregnated my mother, therefore it's all his fault and I'm his victim? No. "But for" causation has zero moral import whatsoever. Stop spewing your ax-grindy propaganda.
    - trasz 5y ago
      So essentially your claim is that invading a country is not the cause for subsequent million victims of said invasion. You still don't see it, do you? You have been brainwashed into believing that war mongering is somehow not pure evil as long as it's done by US.