| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| That's the smell of freedom! American style! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Same broken Lancet methodology employed.
I think a reasonable estimate of deaths, 300,000, is pretty heinous enough. 300,000 is about 4 times what Iraq Body Count reports.
1 million?
Statistically and historically, the numbers for wounded in Iraq should be three times the estimated dead. So I'd like to see a survey done of 10,000 random Iraqis, and I'd like to see how many have wounds caused from violence. If it turns out it is 3 million, I'd like extra pepper on my crow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The figure from ORB, a British polling agency that has conducted several surveys in Iraq, followed statements this week from the U.S. military defending itself against accusations it was trying to play down Iraqi deaths to make its strategy appear successful.
The military has said civilian deaths from sectarian violence have fallen more than 55% since President Bush sent an additional 28,500 troops to Iraq this year, but it does not provide specific numbers.
According to the ORB poll, a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million.
ORB said it drew its conclusion from responses to the question about those living under one roof: "How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003?"
Based on Iraq's estimated number of households -- 4,050,597 -- it said the 1.2 million figure was reasonable.
There was no way to verify the number, because the government does not provide a full count of civilian deaths. Neither does the U.S. military. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I knew I'd see somebody defending the 1.2 million number on here.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| That's the smell of freedom! American style! |
No war crimes here folks.
It's all good, just wait & see.
Until then ... don't look, don't think 
One million, eh? Hell, what's another 2 or 3? No biggie $$$
"BRING IT ON!" as Hitler, no ... some other related guy once challenged the baddies.
All for the sake of freedom, & on the side of goodness & truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| postfundie wrote: |
| I knew I'd see somebody defending the 1.2 million number on here.... |
And we knew we'd see the usual suspects lying about the methodology of this study and the Lancet study, denying that if you start the war you are responsible for the aftermath, denying that 4 million refugees means anything, etc.
It makes me ill.
Look at the lie from Gopher about the Lancet study. It's been discussed ad nauseum already on these forums, and the methodology is sound. There are no flaws in it. The only people who have claimed otherwise are liars and murderers, i.e., fundie politicos and right wing suck-ups.
There has been statistical analysis after statistical analysis showing the death rates in Iraq are grossly above norms across the board since the invasion. There is a new one from an Australian Ph. D., but, of course, he's a whacko, too, right? And you, fundie, know statistical analysis so much better than he and the professionals at Johns Hopkins, which is why you are here teaching English?
And does it matter if it's "only" a hundred thousand, six hundred thousand or 1.2 million? Really?
Truly makes me sick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Re post: The numbers are way high
Second you charge the US for everyone the insurgents and Al Qaedia in Iraq killed. and you are charging the US for insurgents killed.
So you are comparing who Saddam killed using his own forces not only who have been killed by US forces but also who have been killed by the insurgents and Al Qaeda Iraq.
Now if you want to do it that way then I think the US ought to get credit for the Kurds and others the US saved by taking down Saddam.
Saddam intened to kill the Kurds
Re invade Kuwait
and it would not stop there either
He also planned to try to win a nuclear exchange with Israel
If you want the worst case figure of dead against Bush then I want the best case figure of lives saved. Deal or no deal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| nada |
Fine. Deduct the difference between Saddam and the war. In fact, it's been done. The numbers are STILL huge.
See if you can follow this: I get behind the wheel of a car. I am drunk. I hit a tree. The tree falls down. A car hits the tree. The people inside all die. The car flips over a railing. It hits traffic below. A prison van with murderers is there. One escapes. He rapes and kills again.
Who is at fault? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| keane wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| nada |
Fine. Deduct the difference between Saddam and the war. In fact, it's been done. The numbers are STILL huge.
See if you can follow this: I get behind the wheel of a car. I am drunk. I hit a tree. The tree falls down. A car hits the tree. The people inside all die. The car flips over a railing. It hits traffic below. A prison van with murderers is there. One escapes. He rapes and kills again.
Who is at fault? |
You mean the the difference between the insurgents and the war. Don't you?
Saddam killed 300,000 Iraqis and if you included his wars against Kuwait and Iran it goes over a million.
But more than that
Saddam intended to do another mass killing on the Kurds and to continue to persecuting the Shias Kurds and he intended to invade Kuwait and in the 80's he had plans to engage in a nuclear war with Israel. He figured that he could destroy Israel with 10 nuclear bombs and he was willing to do it even if it meant that would get hit with 20 Israel bombs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
butlerian
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
You mean the the difference between the insurgents and the war. Don't you?
Saddam killed 300,000 Iraqis and if you included his wars against Kuwait and Iran it goes over a million.
But more than that
Saddam intended to do another mass killing on the Kurds and to continue to persecuting the Shias Kurds and he intended to invade Kuwait and in the 80's he had plans to engage in a nuclear war with Israel. He figured that he could destroy Israel with 10 nuclear bombs and he was willing to do it even if it meant that would get hit with 20 Israel bombs. |
Keep believing that bullshit. Always use the preventative line. "It's ok to kill as many as we like because I know more would have been killed if we didn't kill all these people first." A sad philosophy, my friend. You think you know too much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
butlerian"][
Keep believing that *beep*. Always use the preventative line. "It's ok to kill as many as we like because I know more would have been killed if we didn't kill all these people first." A sad philosophy, my friend. You think you know too much.[/quote]
Except that there is a record of what Saddam did. It is really so difficult to guess what he would do were he to get free? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bassexpander
Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Location: Someplace you'd rather be.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wow... I'd say it's now time to do an Iraq on Iran, but just leave them alone to kill themselves off.
So far, the cost of 9/11 to the USA: About 4,000 lives, including military and those in the towers.
Loss to the muslem world: over 1 million.
Who's winning? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Keep believing that *beep*. Always use the preventative line. "It's ok to kill as many as we like because I know more would have been killed if we didn't kill all these people first." A sad philosophy, my friend. You think you know too much. |
keep believing your own beep...just always use the preventative logic that everything is Bush's fault and releeeeegious zealots who encourage people on a daily basis to blow themselves up to get virgins is not the problem.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keane
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| postfundie wrote: |
| keep believing your own beep...just always use the preventative logic that everything is Bush's fault |
In Iraq, it is. No attack, no religious zealots blowing themselves up to get virgins. Simple fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
