Are you referring to the number killed in Iraq? A tragedy to be certain, no argument there, but less than 1% is not bad in the history of the world. I hate to say it, but that is an acceptable loss in military terms. Families and friends and others will say that one loss is one too many, but that is not the reality of military conflict. Especially when you compare it to the million Saddam Hussein murdered or to be fair, disappeared. They could be alive and living in Timbuktu for all I know. He just hid them well I guess? 180,000 Kurdish Iraqis alone disappeared. You might find this interesting:

http://tassc.org/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=63
http://www.kurdistan.ws/kurdistan1.html
http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistan1/17-1-04-opinion-hawramany-letter-to-wallstreet.html

I do not dispute that the U.S. had a hand in bringing Saddam Husseim to power but the bulk of military hardware was purchased from the soviet union, France, and China. The Baath party learned their torture techniques from the Soviet Union and East German instructors. When the U.S. started severing ties with Iraq in 1972 the Soviets announced the Iraqi-Soviet Friendship treaty. In 1983 when the U.S. resumed diplomatic relations with Iraq it was a year after Iraq was driven out of Iran, Iraq sued for peace, and the Iranians (remember the Ayatollah Khomeini) were going to settle for nothing less than overthrowing Iraq and destroying all non-Shi'ites). The U.S. was then hoping to avoid a major middle-eastern war with Iran. The U.S. provided information on Iranian troop movements to the Iraqis. The Reagan administration never condoned the use of chemical weapons. The U.S. sold unarmed helicopters to Iraq. We delivered bacteria culture samples to Iraq for military medical research. Iraq then used them for bioweapon research. The Iraqi nuclear weapons program relied on French supplies (until the reactor was blown up by the Israelis). The U.S. blocked sales of chemical components. We are not completely innocent, but we are not alone in our guilt either. I think it is time the U.S. dropped out of any involvement in other countries politics and economics whatsoever. Then it would be what, 25-20 years until the middle-east was all one country?




>John,
>
>>Oh, only 1.1 billion. That is a 1994 figure so they are probably over 1.5 by now. Anyway, MOST of the communists in the world happen to be Chinese.
>
>Actually the 2003 estimates were about 1.3 billion. China has a birth policy where a couple can get only one child (unless they get a twin). So chinas population actually is going to decrease in the near future.
>
>Within a few years India will have the largest population in the world.
>
>>>I take, "your kind" means non american ?? You should go into politics....
>
>>That was a joke Walter. Actually our military is much more advanced than most others so the number of ground troops isn't as important.
>
>Mine was a joke too :). Your military might be advanced, but not immune. See the trouble you've got already in one country.
>
>Walter,