Comments by "Bell UH1H Huey" (@belluh-1huey102) on "GDF"
channel.
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@lolsilesia "Yea better for iraq, been at war for 20 years which in total has lead to hundreds of thousands dying and is now under iranian/russian control" this sentence is worded to seem that Russia and Iran started the war in Iraq and now owns it. This comment lacks context simply, and is way to vague which thus leads to more misinterpretation. I thought your nation's education system would be better telling their kids to have better context. As lack of context in messages like these, leads to unintended and unnecessary hatred. Back on topic, "My main point was that your whole operation in iraq went to the dumpster because in the end it gave more power to your adversaries." this is inherently false as cited by "russia probably have access to a lot of iraqi oil," not to mention the U.S. does not care about OPEC anymore soon, OPEC is becoming more and more irrelevant to the U.S. as the U.S. is making more oil domestically and trades a lot with Canada, why would you think many oil exporting countries in OPEC started to support China? Oh right because they lost their buyer America. Look at how much OPEC countries export to America, I used the U.S. Energy Information Administration for data on U.S. oil imports. "My main point was that your whole operation in iraq went to the dumpster because in the end it gave more power to your adversaries." This my friend is not a good argument as Russia for some reason, has the need to heavily intervene in Syria, not to mention Russia tried to occupy some oil fields in northern Syria and got obliterated. It's on the news during 2018, it's called the Battle of Khasham. U.S. not only occupied the oil fields there, but it also shows the lack of such access to oil fields in the middle east. The Operation in Iraq did not go into a dumpster fire as shown in a graph from 2003 to 2008 of U.S. and civilian casualties in Iraq cited by Statistica's "Number of documented civilian deaths in the Iraq war from 2003 to February 2023," as shown on the graph, number of documented civilian deaths went down significantly from 2007 to 2008. Want to know why there was an increase in the first place? Was because a thing called the Iraqi Civil War happened from 2006-2008. Corroborate the beginning, middle, and end of the Iraqi Civil War to other events and statistics to the Iraq war. Such as the amount of Civilians dying, or the amount of U.S. troops dying. Which leads to my main point, the reason why the war in Iraq went bad INITIALLY from the Iraqi Civil War, and to counter your part, was not from supporting U.S. adversaries. Then afterwards, it got better after the Civil War ended during U.S. occupation, casualties went down for both military and civilians, economy stabilizes, national army is somewhat functioning, and much more. Notice how much combat in Iraq happened compared in 2003-2007, to 2008-2011.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Zeerak 141 the MRSC source developed when the U.S. was fighting both in Iraq and in Afghanistan mainly. Fun fact, the peak amount of troops was in 2008 with 166k, a very small invasion force. It's a wonder how the U.S. was able to invade and occupy this land, considering Russia was struggling a lot in Chechnya, starting 2 wars in a small time frame because the 1st one was a failure. If I took GDR's words at face value, the U.S. is fighting a heavily armed force with significantly fewer numbers than colonization occupation numbers. Combat died down in Iraq in 2008 as it marked the end of the Iraq Civil War. U.S. casualties from 2006 to 2008 during the Iraq Civil War declined heavily, the period where most troops died was from 2003 to 2005, yet the yearly suicide rate has a downward trend from 2005 to 2006 till the Iraqi Civil War happened which reached peak of around 6k in 2008. Only 314 soldiers died in 2008. Peak deathcount in Iraq was 2007, but on average, a lot of troops died in 2003 to 2005, yet the suicide rate went down till after 2006. Source: Statistica, also the source cites other sources. So, why did the suicide rate go down where, on average, a lot of troops were dying? Tours last a year, which leaves post deployment suicide a hard graph to corroborate.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@SefirothPH Since you say devastation, probably in terms of city damage and not like casualties, then Russia is doing worse. There's millions of crater holes in the fields and cities in Ukraine, meanwhile in Iraq from 2003-2011 aka the period the U.S. was in Iraq, the cities were minorly damaged and mostly intact. If you go look at some Bakhmut before and after videos to Fallujah or Ramadi before and after videos, one looks more intact than the other. You cannot bring in Mosul 2017 as the U.S. was checked out of Iraq in 2011 and let the national armies fight ISIS over there. Now, for civilian casualties, according to Statistica, February 24, 2022 to June 4, 2023, 8983 civilians died in Ukraine, compared to around 12k civilians dying in Iraq. Yet here is the difference between Iraq and Ukraine, Iraq is suffering from sectarian violence which means many of the Iraqis dying in Iraq are because of Iraqis themselves. This sectarian conflict has been going on for a long time, long before the U.S. came into Iraq, yet the cities that saw the most fighting under American occupation didn't come close to the amount of damage seen in Ukraine. For one, some of the cities in Ukraine look unrecognizable from their prewar status, meanwhile Iraqi cities look very recognizable to their pre-war look. We have yet to see Russia go into the counter insurgency phase, which usually and always sees more civilian casualties and damage, making it a great accomplishment to see how few bombs and artillery shells the U.S. used in Iraq. OH WAIT, an estimate of 306,887 civilians killed, as said by the United Nations in the Syrian Civil War that lasted 5 years that saw heavy Russian intervention. Now according to the Iraq Body Count which documented civilian deaths from 2003 – 14 December 2011 estimated that 103,160–113,728 civilian deaths recorded. U.S. caused less casualties and infrastructure damage in their intervention that lasted 8 years than the Russian intervention that lasted 5.
2
-
2
-
@ObrnenyDrevokocur dude acting like the Arab Spring never happened. Iraq was going to be screwed by a form of ISIS in one way or another. Also, cite evidence of the U.S. directly killing civilians. If you give me a source that does not specify coalition caused deaths, then I am inclined to not believe you. Also, look at a graph of civilian deaths from violence in Iraq by the Iraq War Body Count Project and account for when the Iraq Civil War happened. The Iraq Civil War was from 2006 to 2008 which also saw a lot of civilians dying as seen in the graph, but after the Civil War ended, casualty rates among civilians dramatically went down and the U.S. leaves Iraq by 2011. Around the early 2010s, the Arab spring happened, destabilizing a lot of countries in Africa and heck, it even gaining traction in the Philippines. This allowed ISIS to grow stronger, yet that ISIS part I mentioned was more of corroboration, the U.S. itself through their intervention cannot cause a very global uprising even in countries they barely touched when the spring took place. The other stuff I mentioned about the Arab Spring was Islamic uprisings in many countries, Iraq included.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2