Rep. Stark Apologizes

from JoeUser Forums


The comments made by Rep. Pete Stark that U.S. Troops were being killed in Iraq, “for the President’s amusement” was totally out of line and offended families of our fallen troops. As much as I condemn Bush and his Iraq War policies, I know he did not send our military into Iraq for his or anyone’s amusement. That was an outrageous statement that Congressmen Stark should NEVER have made. I was glad to see the congressman admitted his mistake and apologized for his statement.

That does not alter the fact that George W. Bush is responsible for ALL the deaths and Injuries in Iraq. First it is Bush that is responsible for invading Iraq. Before anyone reminds us that many Democrats voted to approve the Iraq War Resolution, recall that resolution did not REQUIRE the invasion of Iraq. It gave the power to Bush for an invasion “AS A LAST RESORT”. It was Bush and he alone that gave the order to invade Iraq and that order began the long line of caskets to flow into Dover Delaware and the injured to our military hospitals.

It was Bush who failed to send the troop levels that enabled the internal factions in Iraq to organize and begin attacking our troops which is the reason for the vast majority of both the deaths and injuries in Iraq. It was his decision to not listen to our most senior military leaders on the troops needed in Iraq that allowed the foreign terrorists to enter Iraq and begin attacking our troops. It is Bush who refuses to begin removing our troops from Iraq that continues the stream of dead and injured American troops.

Rep. Stark made a horrible mistake by his comments. However he has apologized for that mistake. George W. Bush has caused the death of more then 3,800 and injury of about 28,000 with no apology or even admission that he lied as to the danger posed by Iraq. The mistake of Rep. Stark created hurt for many Americans but nothing like the hurt, and death caused by the President of the United States. When do you think George W. Bush will finally admit his grievous error that killed and injured our troops? My guess is Bush will never show the courage of Rep. Stark and admit that the blood of our troops is on his hands and will NEVER apologize for sending our military to war without justification.

What Bush has done is a million times worse then what Rep. Stark did. Stark’s actions did not kill a single American military member. What Bush did has killed and injured thousands of our brave military and his stubborn nature continues to kill and injure our troops! Bush should get on his knees and ask forgiveness from EVERY Mother, Father and Spouse of the military his actions have killed and injured. Bush is just as responsible for their deaths and injuries as the enemy who planted the bombs and pulled the triggers that killed and injured our troops. It was Bush and the choices he has and is making that resulted in all the dead and injured American Troops!
politics
6,874 views 20 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

That does not alter the fact that George W. Bush is responsible for ALL the deaths and Injuries in Iraq.


Especially for the victims of Arab terrorists!
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Col,

Is George Bush also responsible for the overall lower number of deaths per year on average since the invasion?
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply By: Leauki Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007

“That does not alter the fact that George W. Bush is responsible for ALL the deaths and Injuries in Iraq.



Especially for the victims of Arab terrorists!”


I am talking about AMERICAN deaths and Injuries. All the Iraqi’s and foreign terrorists our troops have killed has not reduced the danger from another attack on the U.S. Please tell me what purpose of the dead and wounded American Troops given the fact we are in just as much or more danger then before they gave their lives and limbs?


Reply By: Leauki Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Col,

“Is George Bush also responsible for the overall lower number of deaths per year on average since the invasion? “


WHAT Lower Number? The number of Iraqi deaths is far greater then under Saddam. The number of deaths in 2007 was far greater then 2006, 2005, 2004 or 2003.My concern is with AMRERICAN deaths and Injuries. They are the result of the choices Bush made pure and simple! He and he alone is responsible.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
So if Bush made a public apology would you give him a pass too?
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Tom Grey answers David Crow's request the empirical basis for his statement on the number of dead under Saddam Hussein. "See http://www.gbn.org/ArticleDisplayServlet.srv?aid=2400&msp=1242 Here is an excerpt:":Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"

But such facts are not enough -- because for him the true question is whether civilians killed by the war are "unnecessary". I need to ask whether he thinks the civilian deaths were necessary or not. I clearly believe they were necessary to oust Saddam and save the lives he would have murdered, to free the children from prison, etc. -- in fact more necessary than the atomic bombs to force Japan's surrender If Mr. Crow is willing to accept Muslim fanatic terrorists with WMDs, or Muslim theocracy, rather than fight for Western/ Christian/ Capitalist/ Freedom, then indeed comparing death rates doesn't mean much".

Ronald Hilton - 4/25/03



WWW Link
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Military deaths
U.S. 3,098
U.K. 131
Italy 33
Other forces 88
Iraq 4,900 to 6,375*
*estimated, prior to May 1, 2003
Civilian deaths
Iraqi civilians 55664 to 61369 (1)
International:
Military contractors 647 (2)
Journalists 93 (3)
Media support 37 (4)
Aid workers 82 (5)
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Documented civilian deaths from violence
75,598 – 82,369
.

WWW Link


doesn't look as high as when sadam was around.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply By: Adventure-Dude
Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007
So if Bush made a public apology would you give him a pass too?


First, what Bush has done has cost American Lives. Bush needs to not only admit his errors but change his policy in Iraq. That will never happen so you question is mute.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The purpose of the Invasion was to end the killing. I do not believe you or anyone else knows the exact number of people killed by Saddam nor the number that has died since we invaded Iraq. However the violence in Iraq and the destruction is significant and that was not to be the outcome of our invasion. We were told by Bush and Cheney we would be treated a liberators, like in France after WWII. That was total BS and the vast majority of Iraqi’s want us out of Iraq. Our invasion has exchanged one problem for another and do not think you can make the case we have made the security or living conditions better then under Saddam.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
I do not believe you or anyone else knows the exact number of people killed by Saddam nor the number that has died since we invaded Iraq.


OK so then why do you claim this:

The number of Iraqi deaths is far greater then under Saddam.


Hypocrite Col strikes again contradicting himself in his own article. One thing I can say about you Col, you are very consistent.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
did anyone else notice


rep stark is a democrat. gene gives him a pass.

pres. bush is a republican. gene condemns him for waking up.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: CharlesCS1 Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007
I do not believe you or anyone else knows neither the exact number of people killed by Saddam nor the number that has died since we invaded Iraq.


OK so then why do you claim this?


The number of Iraqi deaths is far greater then under Saddam.


Hypocrite Col strikes again contradicting himself in his own article. One thing I can say about you Col, you are very consistent.


There have been reports that the death rate is higher then under Saddam. He was in power longer then the five years we have been in Iraq. The point is our invasion has stopped the killing by Saddam and now the factions within Iraq are killing each other as well as our forces and we also have allowed foreign terrorists to come in to Iraq and kill both our troops and Iraqi's. How then has our invasion helped Iraq? They do not have any more water, electric or gas then when Saddam was in power. We have spent over $40 Billion dollars on reconstruction and have accomplished very little. In fact the GAO can not find about $9 billion dollars of that money. Nothing that Bush and Cheney told us about how this war would end up has proven correct. It is one think to get some things wrong but to get EVERYTHING wrong is something else. We end up after almost 5 years, 3,800 dead, 28,000 injured and a Trillion Dollars spent and have about the same level of violence in Iraq as before we lost all those lives, sustained all those injuries and spent all that money. Then to top that our Intelligence agencies tell us that the Iraq war has made us LESS safe. Show me where the return is in Iraq! You are the Hypocrite for defending such a policy.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: danielost Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007
“Did anyone else notice?


Rep stark is a democrat. Gene gives him a pass.

Pres. Bush is a republican. Gene condemns him for waking up.”


I condemn Bush for doing a lot more harm then Rep, Stark did and for not admitting that he made a mistake. I condemn Bush for continuing this war.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
did anyone else notice


rep stark is a democrat. gene gives him a pass.

pres. bush is a republican. gene condemns him for waking up.


Yep that's why I asked the question.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

I condemn Bush for doing a lot more harm then Rep, Stark did and for not admitting that he made a mistake. I condemn Bush for continuing this war.


Yes!

No pass to Bush.
Pass to Democrats.

Col's a political segregationist.

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The purpose of the Invasion was to end the killing. I do not believe you or anyone else knows the exact number of people killed by Saddam nor the number that has died since we invaded Iraq.


Let’s see, a town of 5 thousand wiped out by nerve gas. Another town of 8 thousand wiped out by mustard gas.
Many mass graves found the smallest one had 100000 thousand bodies in it. the highest number of civilian deaths in this war was 67,000 that was from the UN. So we have 67k killed on both sides since we went into Iraq and in one mass grave we have 100,000 killed by Saddam. So how do you equate the two? These are figures that have been published and you have used them yourself. oops was that another lie you got caught in?
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: Adventure-Dude Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2007

I condemn Bush for doing a lot more harm then Rep, Stark did and for not admitting that he made a mistake. I condemn Bush for continuing this war.


Yes!

No pass to Bush.
Pass to Democrats.

When Bush apologizes and admits his mistakes, he might get a pass.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
There have been reports that the death rate is higher then under Saddam.


And here I thought you just said:

I do not believe you or anyone else knows the exact number of people killed by Saddam nor the number that has died since we invaded Iraq.


You're so dumb you can't even see when you contradict yourself even when we point it out to you. Of course your response to this reply will be a repetition of the above "Bush is an idiot blah blah blah" crap you only know how to publish. I do have to wonder how you can hate a man who has actually done you some good by providing you with enough BS to fill a book and make money off of it, cause I seriously doubt you were actually concerned enough about how dangerous Bush is to this nation that you would give your book away for free in order to save the country from Bush's idiocy. Save the world and make a buck while your at it, right Col?
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Save the world and make a buck while your at it, right Col?


Maybe Col has an inherent jealousy of Bush?
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top

You're so dumb you can't even see when you contradict yourself even when we point it out to you.

You are such an ass. I said there were reports that have said the number of dead was higher now and there are reports that have said they were higher under Saddam. That just proves what I said in that NO one knows. What we do no is that we have exchanged the killing by Saddam for the Killing by Iraqi against Iraqi and the killing of OUR troops that was not then case before we invaded.

Today the CBO estimated the cost of the Iraq war could reach $2.4 Trillion Dollars. That is $8,000 for every man, women and child in the U.S. For anyone to defend this war shows just how stupid the are.