I was not in favor of Iraq, but these figures raise the question: assuming the 100K civilian casualty count is correct, is that more or less people than would have been killed/tortured by Saddam in the remaining years he would have stayed in power?Ad Orientem wrote: * Boko Haram 2,000 and perhaps another couple of thousand over the last few years.
* Iraq War 100,000+ civilians
Or does the answer matter to you? If 100K is less than Sadam would have killed/tortured, would it matter, since the US casualties allow many of you to endulge your preference i.e. blaming the US? Serious question.