No, Bush didn't kill them with his own hands, just like Stalin didn't personally kill 45 million people.

Sorry, but you must know this makes no sense, for several reasons...

First, Stalin ordered the state executions of his own citizens. Since, I know of no executions ordered by President Bush, the correlation is absurd.

Second, if you wish to blame this president for each and every casualty in Iraq, you will have to blame all past presidents for war casualties accordingly (see my previous post). Is FDR really personally responsible for each and every death in WWII?

Third, according to your reasoning, why is the responsibility solely the president's, when Congress voted for the invasion of Iraq?

The premise of the war was false.

There were no WoMD.

There were no "collaborative links" to Al Qeada.

There were no links to 9/11.

There was low list of a Mushroom cloud coming from Iraq.

The Premise that this war was for some kind of imminent threat self defense was WRONG

What DO we have over 1000 US troops dead and more from the UK and others!!!!

So what "justifications" for a war in Iraq do we have left.....

A Vision of worldbuilding to create a more peaceful and democratic Middle East through the use of force. Get rid of an evil guy we don't like and while we are at it, democratize a country, secure a place for a permanent military base in the middle east, and put a more friendly government on top of the worlds 2nd largest oil supply. This is what is advocated in more subtle terms by Dick Cheney and others long before 9/11. At the Project for the New American Century before Dick Cheney became Vice President he signed off on extremely consevative policy suggestions that even themselve stated would most likely not be implemented without "a new Pearl Harbor".

You know what... That is not what I want to vote FOR.

I want to vote for a Change from this idiotic thinking being in charge.

I want to vote for a man who thinks this was the wrong war at the wrong time....

However, Being that phase one of the mission, taking over Iraq, was finished... We can not trun back now. But Kerry is not turning back, he is for finishing the job in Iraq. He is for democratizing the country. But he understands that to do that requires making an indepent country that will participate in teh world environment. And the world environment should be involved in creating their new partner. It is in everyones best interest to have a free society rise in Iraq. Kerry is not against freedom.

Okey, just the ones that died from the famine caused by communism under Stalin then.
WWII was not a war of choice, the axis (the real one) was an imminent treat to the world, they had to be crushed, Iraq was not an imminent threat.
Congress voted to give the authority, not for the war itself. You can give a policeman the authority to use his gun, doesn't mean he has to.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Thanks to bush & blair we now have 1000 years of terror to look forward to....

Money power & oil is that all the USA/UK are interested in.....

__________________
www.tonyblair.com

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

What would your estimate be? Why doesn't our government tell us the figure?
Oh, thats right, killing innocent people is just part of war!!! Remember how angry we felt after 9/11? I would imagine there are plenty of iraqi citizens that are just as angry, and are most likely laying the blame on bush&co. I do not have a source for this, it just seems like common sense.
As much as i prefer not to have bush as pres, if another country came in and took him out and tried to put their "choice" in power, i would be pretty fighting mad.

ALso, we need to remember the 5000+ disabled vets, some of who are probably pretty angry and saying "What was it all for?"

You've listed two sources whose figures range from 11,000 to 37,000. Here's another one that says 8700 to 10,000 : http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0331/p15s01-wogi.html

I don't know what you would consider a "reliable" source. Since our government either doesn't care (gen. Tommy Franks: "We don't do body counts") or is hiding their figures (more likely), we have to rely on third parties. I wouldn't necessarily discount an anti-war group's estimate - it wouldn't be in their best interest to risk losing credibility by proviiding grossly inflated figures. Furthermore, apparently a certain degree of doubt about the validity of at least THIS war is somewhat of a prerequisite for being interested in undertaking an investigation in the first place.

Obviously no single source is ever going to be 100% reliable. I just arrived at 10-13k based on everything I've read over the past few months.

__________________
"The basic problems facing the world today are not susceptible to a military solution."

- JFK

What I find remarkable is that the government can refuse to give any information about the civilian casulaties. The US based press has not done the investigation to find out. So the only people who have number are people who seem to care about how many innocent people have been killed, which are anti-war organizations or aribic news sources.

I personally think it says something that the government will not list any estimate for iraqi military or civilian casualties. I think it says something that they will not say how many were killed in fallujah.

It is the same reason they will not let any pictures of caskets be shown. Out of site, out of mind. They want people to just forget about all those killed. They seem to even want people to forget about the sacrifices of our own soldiers killed, since there seems to be little or no formal rememberences or ceramonies and few references to them other than Dick Cheney calling them "costs"