Thank your for backing up your statements, although next time don’t make me recite stupid formulas in order to get you to cough up a cite. I’m opposed to this war, but I’m unsure if the responsible thing to do is to leave immediately and let the country fall into anarchy that will inevitably require humanitarian aid or stay in the face of rising unrest and rebuild the joint.
I am glad you finally offered a cite, if you had been clear that what you were refering to was deaths during the war, I wouldn’t even have questioned it. You sounded, however, like you were claiming there had been “thousands of innocent Iraqis” killed during the occupation by US forces, and that simply isn’t true.
Regarding the latest killings of American “civilians” I do not quite accept the reasoning of those who say civilians brought in under the authority of the American occupation forces should be immune from attack. Those who go to Iraq know it is a war zone and know they are going under authority and protection of the occupying forces and they are, in fact, furthering the aims of the occupation forces. They have no permission or assurances from any Iraqi authority. It is war and cooperating with the enemy can get you killed whether you are Iraqi or foreigner. American forces would have no qualms killing those civilians of any nationality who cooperate with their enemy. Also, it has been determined that the “civilians” killed in Iraq were actually highly trained ex-military who were providing security services. In other words, they were combatants. The kind of combatants the US government says are not entitled to the protection of the Geneva conventions.
Just to head off this cite? cite? cite? bullshit:
“Civilian contractors” = “mercenaries”.
You nor your cite say what were the actual jobs they were performing. The fact that they were employees of that company does not mean they were not providing armed security for them as I said. I heard on the radio they were ex-military and were armed and provising security services. Can you say for certain this is false? If they were not doing that, then what exactly were they doing?
(1) Provides security
(2) for coalition personnel.
Don’t sound like Mother Theresa to me.
You called them “armed combatants”. I called them “mercenaries”.
Save your arguments for people that are arguing with you.
I wasn’t aware you and I were arguing. 
So all this has been your way of saying, “I’m against this war. President Bush has not made his case with sufficient reason for me to support his decision to invade Iraq.”
Wow. Earth-shattering revelation there, sailor. Seems an inordinate number of words for rather simple declaration of opinion.
There were a number of issues being discussed and I was responding to several posters. They seemed to understand my posts and they seemed to think my posts were adequate responses to their questions and their points. So, for the rest of us the exchange seems to have been fruitful. Just because you did not understand it does not mean it was empty. Feel free to skip my posts if you find them not interesting. Others here seem to have no trouble understanding my points.