[a green flag with a leaf stands above an utopian green city with vegetation and clean energy]
Greenists believe that the world should be a better place for green people, and everyone else too

[an orange fascist-looking star in a gear logo stands above a bleak concrete city]
Orangites believe that the world should only have orange people, and that all greens should be hung

[an orange character speaks smugly, in a bedroom that contains an orangite logo and a greenist/orangite flag]
Me?
I’m a greenist-orangite,
why do you ask?

https://thebad.website/comic/coherent_ideology

  • Blue_Morpho
    11·
    14 hours ago

    I have looked at every single source you have provided.

    You said I used military when the link said civilian. You said, “But Bush is estimated.” when the Obama link also said estimated.

    Where did you cite, for instance, direct civilian casualties in the Gulf War?

    We only have estimates for both.

    I’m not positively asserting that Obama caused more deaths than Bush Sr, I just found that claim questionable and was curious where you got it from.

    Which I provided yet you continue to fight.

    Based on the sources you’ve provided, the total death toll of Afghanistan was probably about twice that of the Gulf War, and roughly half of Afghanistan happened under Obama.

    That isn’t true based on reported estimates.

    Estimated 29k under Obama is not roughly equal to estimated 100k under Bush Sr.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      1·
      14 hours ago

      I can’t tell if you’re confused or lying at this point. That 29k figure is direct deaths while the 100k figure includes indirect deaths, from things like losing power or access to medicine.

      Again, I don’t care if you want to include indirect deaths or not. What I do care about is if you arbitrarily include or exclude them in order to try to prove bullshit.

      • Blue_Morpho
        1·
        12 hours ago

        100k figure includes indirect deaths, from things like losing power or access to medicine.

        You keep imagining excuses to make Obama as bad as Bush:

        100k isn’t indirect. It is direct violent death.

        “Population-based studies produce estimates of the number of Iraq War casualties ranging from 151,000 violent deaths as of June 2006”

        “The Iraq Body Count project documents 186,901–210,296 violent civilian deaths in their table.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          1·
          12 hours ago

          Come on, now you’re not even talking about the right war. We were talking about the Gulf War under Bush Sr, not the Iraq War which started under Bush Jr. (can’t wait to hear how this is “another source I won’t listen to”). What does the article on the Gulf War say?

          The Iraqi government claimed that 2,300 civilians died during the air campaign. A Project on Defense Alternatives study found that 3,664 Iraqi civilians were killed in the conflict.

          During the nationwide uprisings against the Ba’athist Iraqi government that directly followed the end of the Gulf War in March and April, an estimated 25,000 to 100,000 Iraqis were killed, overwhelmingly civilians

          A Harvard University study released in June 1991 predicted that there would be tens of thousands of additional Iraqi civilian deaths by the end of 1991 due to the “public health catastrophe” caused by the destruction of the country’s electrical generating capacity. “Without electricity, hospitals cannot function, perishable medicines spoil, water cannot be purified and raw sewage cannot be processed,”. The US government refused to release its own study of the effects of the Iraqi public health crisis.

          The number of direct, confirmed civilian casualties by US forces in the air campaign was in the thousands, nowhere near 100k. However, many more civilians died due to the damage to infrastructure or in the uprisings that the bombing campaign encouraged.

          In other words, the 100k figure includes indirect deaths. This isn’t me twisting numbers around somehow, this is simply what the article says.

          • Blue_Morpho
            1·
            23 minutes ago

            Come on, now you’re not even talking about the right war.

            You are right, I referenced the wrong source. I’m remembering the links from 15years ago when I had this argument with conservatives on Reddit who were pushing the idea that Obama was the worst president ever.

            25,000 to 100,000 Iraqis were killed, overwhelmingly civilians

            In other words, the 100k figure includes indirect deaths.

            You cannot take a Harvard study about predicted deaths from lack of medical care and then say that reported civilian deaths from war were from indirect.

            If you are going with direct civilian killings from Obama then you use the column labeled “Civilians killed as a result of U.S.-led military actions” from the earlier link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001-2021)

            For example: “The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) attributed 596 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by international-led military forces in 2009, representing about a quarter of the 2,412 Afghan civilian deaths it recorded as having been caused by the war in 2009.”

            I was including indirect for Obama.