Bush vs. Kerry? - Page 3

**Tank101** · 07-10-2004, 10:14 AM

I think a real debate would be Bush or Saddam Hussein.

Now that's a tough one.

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 12:49 PM

Firstly, I was replying to guido about the deaths of US soldiers. It was obvious. Stop twisting my words.

Secondly, were these 10000 people being killed or just dying?

The death rate in 2003 for Iraq was around 12,000 per month.

The death rate in 2002 for the US was about 198000 per month.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_13.pdf

DracIV · 07-10-2004, 02:56 PM

Being killed; non-natural death directly attributed to Saddam

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 03:00 PM

Can you provide a source that supports that claim? Because if that is true, then only 2000 people or so died of natural causes in Iraq per month.

TheAppleEater · 07-10-2004, 04:19 PM

Well out of the 10,000 that were killed 4,000 of them were probably going to die of natural causes soon, the more they kill the less there are to die naturally. So I believe that 10,000 would be killed and 2,000 die naturally.

I just guessed on those numbers, I dont know for sure what they are.

1 death is terrible, 10 deaths is a tragity, 1000 deaths is a statistic.

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 04:25 PM

My point is that I'm calling bullshit on any fact that can't be backed up.

Looking at the numbers from the links I posted earlier, every month about .04% of the population died in Iraq in 2003. In 2002 in the US, about .07% of the population died per month. How many of those who die per month are killed by the US government? It doesn't make sense that such a large portion of the deaths per month could be attributed to one man in the case of Iraq.

Of course, I would like to find some statistics from the mid-nineties on Iraq's demographics. Perhaps those statistics might show that indeed Saddam did kill that many people at that rate.

ddrking133 · 07-10-2004, 04:43 PM

good job talisman

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 04:49 PM

Also, to go back to what Drac said earlier...

What do you mean, "the same people"? It's simply ludicrous to suggest that what the Kerry administration will do in the future will be similar to what the Clinton administration did in the past. That's akin to saying Lincoln and Bush are the "same people" because they both belonged to the Republican party.

ddrking133 · 07-10-2004, 04:50 PM

mmhhmm

DracIV · 07-10-2004, 09:29 PM

Lincoln is too far back. It's akin to saying Bush Jr. was going to do exactly what Bush Sr. did. And people said that.

About the 10k- it also includes the multiple millions he slaughtered in the genocide executions of a bit ago.

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 09:55 PM

I was hyperbolizing a little bit...

But you have to admit that it is highly unlikely that Kerry, if elected, would cut back military spending (he'd be in the middle of an occupation) or encourage the CIA to be lax (why make the same mistakes Clinton did--although Clinton I doubt suspected the magnitude to which terrorism would become an issue).

shortnsweet77 · 07-10-2004, 10:20 PM

bush...i dont really know why...but i mean come on: if you were trying to calm down the whole freaking country when thousands of people died, wouldnt you be under some stress too?? but honestly and truely, i dont know...it doesnt matter to me anyway

shortnsweet77 · 07-10-2004, 10:22 PM

bush...i dont really know why...but i mean come on: if you were trying to calm down the whole freaking country when thousands of people died, wouldnt you be under some stress too?? but honestly and truely, i dont know...it doesnt matter to me anyway

flypie743 · 07-10-2004, 10:31 PM

Yea, Bush is probably under a lot of stress...

shortnsweet77 · 07-10-2004, 10:31 PM

** sorry about the double post ...i seriously cant get this right...**

**talisman** · 07-10-2004, 11:00 PM

I imagine most presidents are under alot of stress while in office....

DracIV · 07-11-2004, 08:14 AM

Because they both believe in the same philosophies and Kerry has begun following the *exact* same path as Clinton in his political strategy. Oh yeah, and one of the 5 or so military occupations will be over soon.

**talisman** · 07-11-2004, 08:27 AM

But put yourself in Kerry's shoes. You've just been elected President. Now are you going to announce that you are cutting military spending? There would be an uproar. I'm sorry, but I really don't see that happening.

GuidoHunter · 07-11-2004, 09:06 AM

I agree that Kerry weakening the military and/or intelligence probably wouldn't happen too soon because of the horrible political implications of doing so, but when this Iraq war calms down, I think his agenda would start to kick in, and he'd weaken us for any future attempt on our country.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

ddragon55 · 07-12-2004, 03:46 AM

07-10-2004, 04:43 PM	#47
ddrking133 FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: dirty south Age: 35 Posts: 584	good job talisman __________________ [/center]

07-10-2004, 04:50 PM	#49
ddrking133 FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: dirty south Age: 35 Posts: 584	mmhhmm __________________ [/center]

07-10-2004, 10:31 PM	#54
flypie743 FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: fairyland Posts: 3,210	Yea, Bush is probably under a lot of stress... __________________ IF YOU ARE THE BOMB YOU WILL CLICK THIS and if you dont, you suck.

07-12-2004, 03:46 AM	#60
ddragon55 FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 2	__________________ \'\'Life is like a box of chocolates...you never know what you\'re gonna get\'\'-Forrest Gump

View Poll Results: Who do you want to win the Election?
Bush	22	41.51%
Kerry	31	58.49%
Voters: 53. You may not vote on this poll

07-10-2004, 10:14 AM	#41
Tank101 I V vi iii IV I IV V Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: The Tent Age: 34 Posts: 2,082	I think a real debate would be Bush or Saddam Hussein. Now that's a tough one.

07-10-2004, 12:49 PM	#42
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	Firstly, I was replying to guido about the deaths of US soldiers. It was obvious. Stop twisting my words. Secondly, were these 10000 people being killed or just dying? The death rate in 2003 for Iraq was around 12,000 per month. The death rate in 2002 for the US was about 198000 per month. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_13.pdf

07-10-2004, 02:56 PM	#43
DracIV FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 298	Being killed; non-natural death directly attributed to Saddam

07-10-2004, 03:00 PM	#44
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	Can you provide a source that supports that claim? Because if that is true, then only 2000 people or so died of natural causes in Iraq per month.

07-10-2004, 04:19 PM	#45
TheAppleEater FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 51	Well out of the 10,000 that were killed 4,000 of them were probably going to die of natural causes soon, the more they kill the less there are to die naturally. So I believe that 10,000 would be killed and 2,000 die naturally. I just guessed on those numbers, I dont know for sure what they are. 1 death is terrible, 10 deaths is a tragity, 1000 deaths is a statistic.

07-10-2004, 04:25 PM	#46
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	My point is that I'm calling bullshit on any fact that can't be backed up. Looking at the numbers from the links I posted earlier, every month about .04% of the population died in Iraq in 2003. In 2002 in the US, about .07% of the population died per month. How many of those who die per month are killed by the US government? It doesn't make sense that such a large portion of the deaths per month could be attributed to one man in the case of Iraq. Of course, I would like to find some statistics from the mid-nineties on Iraq's demographics. Perhaps those statistics might show that indeed Saddam did kill that many people at that rate.

07-10-2004, 04:49 PM	#48
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	Also, to go back to what Drac said earlier... What do you mean, "the same people"? It's simply ludicrous to suggest that what the Kerry administration will do in the future will be similar to what the Clinton administration did in the past. That's akin to saying Lincoln and Bush are the "same people" because they both belonged to the Republican party.

07-10-2004, 09:29 PM	#50
DracIV FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 298	Lincoln is too far back. It's akin to saying Bush Jr. was going to do exactly what Bush Sr. did. And people said that. About the 10k- it also includes the multiple millions he slaughtered in the genocide executions of a bit ago.

07-10-2004, 09:55 PM	#51
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	I was hyperbolizing a little bit... But you have to admit that it is highly unlikely that Kerry, if elected, would cut back military spending (he'd be in the middle of an occupation) or encourage the CIA to be lax (why make the same mistakes Clinton did--although Clinton I doubt suspected the magnitude to which terrorism would become an issue).

07-10-2004, 10:20 PM	#52
shortnsweet77 FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 6	bush...i dont really know why...but i mean come on: if you were trying to calm down the whole freaking country when thousands of people died, wouldnt you be under some stress too?? but honestly and truely, i dont know...it doesnt matter to me anyway

07-10-2004, 10:22 PM	#53
shortnsweet77 FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 6	bush...i dont really know why...but i mean come on: if you were trying to calm down the whole freaking country when thousands of people died, wouldnt you be under some stress too?? but honestly and truely, i dont know...it doesnt matter to me anyway

07-10-2004, 11:00 PM	#56
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	I imagine most presidents are under alot of stress while in office....

07-11-2004, 08:14 AM	#57
DracIV FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 298	Because they both believe in the same philosophies and Kerry has begun following the exact same path as Clinton in his political strategy. Oh yeah, and one of the 5 or so military occupations will be over soon.

07-11-2004, 08:27 AM	#58
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	But put yourself in Kerry's shoes. You've just been elected President. Now are you going to announce that you are cutting military spending? There would be an uproar. I'm sorry, but I really don't see that happening.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)