What a preposterous number, the war in Iraq has been going on for 1309 days, divide 655000 by this number and the daily death toil is 500.76 KIA per day, never heard this reported in the news? 501 death a day? OK who is kidding who? Who is trying to make political hay? this isn't even a attempt at being statistical, or even analytical, this is just a bald faced lie.

That's right. We all know the media in Iraq has full access to real death toll numbers:rolleyes: Only TWO people have been killed in the war on Iraq! Any other number is a librull LIE pushed by Swift Boat veterans and communist lesbians!!:eek: So America? Don't be afraid to send your kids to Iraq! There's LESS death than ever!

Genji, the number comes from your own liberal Anti War, Anti American, Left Wing Waco's, and simple math shows the answer, even al Jazeera news has never claimed these numbers, do the math it's not possible, or don't you do math? Hell you can't tell me with the hell raised over Foley by the News, that they would keep something like this under wraps!

Im sorry but your buying into Propoganda that has been put out there in order to gain support for the war. No, 655000 deaths is a preposterous number but only two is insane. At least recognize the number of people who have died and show some respect for them.

ALL NEW sugar-free Iraq! Now with 33% less death!
For a blast of excitement, try the NEW Iran! Available while supplies last.

Genji, the number comes from your own liberal Anti War, Anti American, Left Wing Waco's, and simple math shows the answer, even al Jazeera news has never claimed these numbers, do the math it's not possible, or don't you do math? Hell you can't tell me with the hell raised over Foley by the News, that they would keep something like this under wraps!So the neocons think Iraq's war deaths are no big fuckin deal! Right!? Get over it America! Only good, pure Christian Democracy is happening in Iraq. THEY have the FACTUAL death toll. Everyone else is lying and making the war seem like a War! The purple finger elections brought democracy, peace and love for American troops. Everyone else is LYING!

Iraq, the War on Iraq and the US policies that got us there are an abysmal FAILURE. A disaster on all counts. Admit your failures, like a man.

ALL NEW sugar-free Iraq! Now with 33% less death!
For a blast of excitement, try the NEW Iran! Available while supplies last.LOL!!!!!:p Very Good!!:p

More people die each day of natural causes than by any other means.

So it's not too bad that stupidity is one of the natural causes.

We've killed more Iraqis than Saddam, not even including the civil war we built.

Okay. But we haven't.

Genji, do you even know how to do simple math?

Okay. But we haven't.Conservative Perpective: There are MORE Iraqis now than there were BEFORE the War on Iraq! Saddam Murdered MILLIONS while the mighty and righteous Americans haven't killed ANY! That's a FACT!

Genji's Perspective: Iraq is a bloodbath. Dead US kids, our first responders are over there being killed & wounded, 150k Iraqis are dead since the invasion and we haven't accomplished a single thing to show for it all, other than Hussein isn't the president. The FACT is Iraqis of all stripes hate Americans more than Saddam. Another trillion for 5 more years of war? Conservatives?? Hello? Hello......:cool:

Conservative Perpective: There are MORE Iraqis now than there were BEFORE the War on Iraq! Saddam Murdered MILLIONS while the mighty and righteous Americans haven't killed ANY! That's a FACT!

Genji's Perspective: Iraq is a bloodbath. Dead US kids, our first responders are over there being killed & wounded, 150k Iraqis are dead since the invasion and we haven't accomplished a single thing to show for it all, other than Hussein isn't the president. The FACT is Iraqis of all stripes hate Americans more than Saddam. Another trillion for 5 more years of war? Conservatives?? Hello? Hello......:cool:

You can see that from your colon?

I have US trooper friends in iraq and let me tell you something, while it is not an ideal paradise the Iraqis keep syaing how much BETTER it is now, even with the sectarian violence.

You can see that from your colon?

I have US trooper friends in iraq and let me tell you something, while it is not an ideal paradise the Iraqis keep syaing how much BETTER it is now, even with the sectarian violence.Riiiiiight. Things are sooooo much better with the country ripped apart by civil war, shortages, destruction and foreign occupation! All is so well there why don't we just leave! Surely they will bloom into a Jeffersonian Democracy and convert to Christianity and Fox News! Why the purple finger elections PROVES it. It's a FACT!!:rolleyes:

Riiiiiight. Things are sooooo much better with the country ripped apart by civil war, shortages, destruction and foreign occupation! All is so well there why don't we just leave! Surely they will bloom into a Jeffersonian Democracy and convert to Christianity and Fox News! Why the purple finger elections PROVES it. It's a FACT!!:rolleyes:

You know what? What you think is not important for two reasons. #1: You are not and Iraqi or US Soldier. #2: You reject anything positive that resulted and focus on the negative.

Yes many Iraqi civillians have died, but that number is far less that Saddam has killed in just one Mustard Gassing of the Kurds. So Unless you are going to go there and try to make it a better place, please remeber your opinions are no better than farts in the wind.

Genji, show any documentation of these numbers that you quote, or are you pulling them out of the thin air? there is no documentation to show that the death total is any were near the 655,000 mark.

You know what? What you think is not important for two reasons. #1: You are not and Iraqi or US Soldier. #2: You reject anything positive that resulted and focus on the negative.

Yes many Iraqi civillians have died, but that number is far less that Saddam has killed in just one Mustard Gassing of the Kurds. So Unless you are going to go there and try to make it a better place, please remeber your opinions are no better than farts in the wind.As long as my country is at war with Iraq and my money is being used to fight Iraqis I'll bitch and complain about it as loud and often as possible. Adapt. 18k Kurds in the mid 80's, when Hussein was a buddy of the Right does not even compare to Iraqi dead by US hands. I think more male Iraqi prisoners were raped by US troops than the silly Kurd thing, the only corner the conthervatives have left to cower in.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm

The Johns Hopkins researchers argue their "cluster sample" approach is more reliable than counting dead bodies, given the obstacles preventing more comprehensive fieldwork in the violent and insecure conditions of Iraq.

Cluster sample is more reliable then actual numbers? The actual dead bodies don't count? If you have the actual body to be counted, then how is a sample going to be more accurate?

Genji, show any documentation of these numbers that you quote, or are you pulling them out of the thin air? there is no documentation to show that the death total is any were near the 655,000 mark.Is it zero or is it 650k? You have all the facts BR, as a conservative. I've heard anywhere from 90k to 200k on CNN, BBC, the Kansas City Star, The Militant (www.themilitant.com) and dozens of other periodicals. newspapers and CSPAN. I think it's at least 100k.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm

The Johns Hopkins researchers argue their "cluster sample" approach is more reliable than counting dead bodies, given the obstacles preventing more comprehensive fieldwork in the violent and insecure conditions of Iraq.

Cluster sample is more reliable then actual numbers? The actual dead bodies don't count? If you have the actual body to be counted, then how is a sample going to be more accurate?Well we know if it isn't a number agreeable to you and the neoconmen then it's a lie, which is why I'm not going to the time & trouble of searching for links for you to dismiss. When I can afford a research assistant I might consider pelting you with links. Meanwhile, adapt.

Genji - who counted them?The widest array of world news sources say hospitals, morgues and Iraqi families. Can't trust the US to be honest about anything, especially over there. Don't tell me! YOU have the FACTS! Only Rush Limbaugh and Adolf Rumsfeld can count Iraqi dead! The number is 15!!!!!

Just to put a different slant on the figures

Tobacco kills 1,095 Americans every day.

It kills 10,000 people a day throughout the world

And no one gives a shit

Just to put a different slant on the figures

Tobacco kills 1,095 Americans every day.

It kills 10,000 people a day throughout the world

And no one gives a shitFrom another thread. How Original!! Soooo, since people die of cancer from smoking it's OK to keep on killing Iraqis? The depths the Right will go to justify their bloodbath occupation. Attend some servicemember funerals. Maybe that will open up your human side.

From another thread. How Original!! Soooo, since people die of cancer from smoking it's OK to keep on killing Iraqis? The depths the Right will go to justify their bloodbath occupation. Attend some servicemember funerals. Maybe that will open up your human side.


No its not from "another thread" - I accidently posted it in the wrong thread.

You fly off the handle too easily Genji - calm down

I wasn't making a point of killing anyone a good thing. I was one of millions of Brits who were against the Iraqi war right from the start.

But Blair didn't listen to the British public - but when Bush said jump he said "How high?"

The point I was making is that the figures of the senseless killings of the iraqi war are high - We have heard nothing else but the Iraqi War for the last 5 fucking years, Headlines on the news, on the front page of Newspapers every fricking day.

When you think about the scale of deaths caused through a substance being many times higher than a bloodbath of a senseless prelonged war, doesn't it make you think there is something wrong with this world we live in?

That was my point.

No its not from "another thread" - I accidently posted it in the wrong thread.

You fly off the handle too easily Genji - calm down

I wasn't making a point of killing anyone a good thing. I was one of millions of Brits who were against the Iraqi war right from the start.

But Blair didn't listen to the British public - but when Bush said jump he said "How high?"

The point I was making is that the figures of the senseless killings of the iraqi war are high - We have heard nothing else but the Iraqi War for the last 5 fucking years, Headlines on the news, on the front page of Newspapers every fricking day.

When you think about the scale of deaths caused through a substance being many times higher than a bloodbath of a senseless prelonged war, doesn't it make you think there is something wrong with this world we live in?

That was my point.Oops!:rolleyes: Sorry. I see your point.

Genji, never said it was zero, did I, you should use a little logic which seems in short supply in liberal land, when you break down the numbers on a day to day basis, the 655,000 number is preposterous, on the hardest fighting day of the war there weren't 500 KIA, and what would be more accurate? the counts from the morgues, or a sample? one counts actual bodies, the other is a guess. But I guess you want to believe in your bed time fairy tails, did you find a quarter under your pillow?

Genji, never said it was zero, did I, you should use a little logic which seems in short supply in liberal land, when you break down the numbers on a day to day basis, the 655,000 number is preposterous, on the hardest fighting day of the war there weren't 500 KIA

Unless the study is true. In which case there were 500 deaths a day.

If you'd read the article you'd see that the study attempts to measure the increase in deaths per hundred since the iraq invasion (this includes some 50000 non-violent deaths). On the other hand, the KIA measures people that were directly killed in fighting. Were the morgue body counts entirely accurate it would not invalidate the study's findings.
If you have some actual problem with the study's methodology we'd love to hear it.

Voodoo Child,

(this includes some 50000 non-violent deaths).

You have just shown one of the problems with the study, the addition of death from natural causes, and that is the problem with the study is how many deaths from other then combat causalities have been added to the study with no proof that they are directly related to the war? and the Morgue is the exact place to get the body count as all death are recorded there, or the hospital, so you have a source of actual numbers of the dead, and that will still be far more accurate than a sample that can be biased to a political agenda.

....the Morgue is the exact place to get the body count as all death are recorded there,...LOL Remember you are speaking of a rural land. - Where most live, there is not even a Morgue! Where there is one, few would trust the government with the body of their loved one. The idea that some stranger would be looking at the private areas etc.

That is why stripping nude was so widely used to get information from captives.

Billy T, the tax man must be satisfied, death's are recorded, even in Iraq.

Some logical points to consider?

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines06/0625-03.htm

The morgue records show a predominantly civilian toll; the hospital records gathered by the Health Ministry do not distinguish between civilians, combatants and security forces.

But Health Ministry records do differentiate causes of death. Almost 75% of those who died violently were killed in "terrorist acts," typically bombings, the records show. The other 25% were killed in what were classified as military clashes. A health official described the victims as "innocent bystanders," many shot by Iraqi or American troops, in crossfire or accidentally at checkpoints.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/10/600000_iraqis_killed_by_war_cr.html

But back to that U.N. number, 100 deaths a day in August. The Hopkins study suggests that the number of deaths not just this August, but every month since March 2003, is five times larger. Given that the level of violence we are witnessing today is at or near its peak, and given that for periods of time between May 2003 and April 2004, the violence had not yet gotten out of control, in order to get to the Hopkins numbers, one would have to see even significantly higher numbers in recent months than 500 daily deaths to "average" out to 500 deaths overall.

The Hopkins team calculated Iraq's mortality rate in the year before the invasion at 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people, comparing it with their post-invasion average of 13.3 deaths per 1,000 people a year. The difference between these two rates is the rate of "excess deaths;" the deaths occurring from violence is how they get to the 600,000 number.

The entire "context" then, hinges on the validity of the pre-war mortality rate. If you accept this number, then I'm told you accept that pre-war Iraq had a better mortality rate than any other country in the Middle East, even Israel.

Iraqi Body Count estimates that 38,475 to 42,889 Iraqis have been killed since the invasion. The estimate does not include deaths among the Iraqi security forces.

Billy T, the tax man must be satisfied, death's are recorded, even in Iraq.I would be surprised to lean that there is much of a tax system already set up - certainly not the highest priority of the local government with US tax payer paying salaries etc. - Perhaps the government just sends all its bills to US etc. Perhaps businesses are taxed on store sale or square feet of store.

I do not know how tax system works in Iraq - If you do please describe.
If you don't know, your are again just speaking from solid base of ignorance.

I am still laughing at your statement that the non-existent "morgues have the good death records." At least nine out 10 people killed are put in box after some private cleansing ceremony, then box is taken to their worship place and then transported to the grave area on shoulders of their friends (some may be paid to show up) and buried - no morgue or tax man involved, especially not if the dead person has any government pension, gas, food or rent privileges.

Some logical points to consider?

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines06/0625-03.htm


http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/10/600000_iraqis_killed_by_war_cr.html





Iraqi Body Count estimates that 38,475 to 42,889 Iraqis have been killed since the invasion. The estimate does not include deaths among the Iraqi security forces.

It's funny how the rednecks criticized the body count number of 40.000. that is untill the new study came out with a higher number.

Now they all love the body count data.

Buffalo, you might as well admit your working delusion:

The truth is a liberal lie.
(wash brain, rinse, repeat if necessary)

Voodoo Child,



You have just shown one of the problems with the study, the addition of death from natural causes, and that is the problem with the study is how many deaths from other then combat causalities have been added to the study with no proof that they are directly related to the war? and the Morgue is the exact place to get the body count as all death are recorded there, or the hospital, so you have a source of actual numbers of the dead, and that will still be far more accurate than a sample that can be biased to a political agenda.


You cannot just measure "combat" deaths. When the infastructure of a community gets destroyed, it is responsible for more than the direct deaths. If a bomb blows up a hospital and kills 100 people in it, do you count 100 deaths or do you also count the deaths of the people who died in the next week or so because they needed that hospital? etc, etc...

And please stop talking about official counts from morgues and hospital in one of the most unlikely places in the world to be able to do that. You know it does not work.

I have US trooper friends in iraq and let me tell you something, while it is not an ideal paradise the Iraqis keep syaing how much BETTER it is now, even with the sectarian violence.

Think about what you actually said there for a second. This is 100% BS. Your friend is either pushing propaganda or has some mental illness.

I don't remember criticizing the 40,000 number, and I don't seem to be able to find anyone else who has, unless it is people like you who want it to be much higher for your own political reasons, and if there is no accurate recording system, then how can you prove the estimate of 655,000, as the inclusions of unrelated deaths can already be shown to have been added to the death count. The second factor of why the study is flawed is that to have a average of 500 death a day average you would have to have days were the death totals would have to have been in the thousands, and that would have been a very news worthy item.

You have just shown one of the problems with the study, the addition of death from natural causes, and that is the problem with the study is how many deaths from other then combat causalities have been added to the study with no proof that they are directly related to the war?

If you'd read the article, you'd see that was accounted for by subtracting the pre-war death rate.

I don't remember criticizing the 40,000 number, and I don't seem to be able to find anyone else who has, unless it is people like you who want it to be much higher for your own political reasons, and if there is no accurate recording system, then how can you prove the estimate of 655,000, as the inclusions of unrelated deaths can already be shown to have been added to the death count. The second factor of why the study is flawed is that to have a average of 500 death a day average you would have to have days were the death totals would have to have been in the thousands, and that would have been a very news worthy item.

Why would it be news worthy? Civilian deaths have not been news worthy since we invaded Afghanistan. Civilian casualties have been utterly ignored. They only have ever been mentioned in reports like these, never as it is happening.

Either way, I assume you are once again thinking for a 500 death day it has to be directly combat related. Even in your hypothetical of the media caring about 500+ deaths that is not the way the media focuses. If they were to report high deaths they would likely be focusing on one area.. like a specific battle. There is a whole country in tatters causing a higher death rate, do you think they would make a story that counts all these areas? Like... "today 300 people in this part of Iraq died of dehydration...25 were killed by a bomb in this part of Iraq...six Iraqi police volunteers were killed by terrorists, etc".

That would be a media first. It is weak enough to pin your argument on media trust, and even more so when it depends on the media doing two things they never do: care about civilian causalties and report on it in a method never seen before.

Voodoo Child,



You have just shown one of the problems with the study, the addition of death from natural causes, and that is the problem with the study is how many deaths from other then combat causalities have been added to the study with no proof that they are directly related to the war? and the Morgue is the exact place to get the body count as all death are recorded there, or the hospital, so you have a source of actual numbers of the dead, and that will still be far more accurate than a sample that can be biased to a political agenda.

Would you consider death from exposure, famine, exhaustion and disease caused by the war as just the run of the mill sort of stuff?

Like, if a Jew died in a concentration camp from starvation, it doesn't count, right?

Would you consider death from exposure, famine, exhaustion and disease caused by the war as just the run of the mill sort of stuff?

Like, if a Jew died in a concentration camp from starvation, it doesn't count, right?EXCELLENT point Roman. The Great BR dispenses his version of what death is and who shall be counted and who is not counted. Doesn't work that way BR. Sorry, we know how you feel about Arabs & Muslims in general but they count as human beings too.

Think about what you actually said there for a second. This is 100% BS. Your friend is either pushing propaganda or has some mental illness.

This from a person who thinks going to a hospital or morgue is a bad idea for getting a death count.

No my firends hate Bush, and at first were against the war, but after a month there they started telling me in emails and chat how much the Iraqi love American soldier and all the good we have done for them.

This from a person who thinks going to a hospital or morgue is a bad idea for getting a death count.

No my firends hate Bush, and at first were against the war, but after a month there they started telling me in emails and chat how much the Iraqi love American soldier and all the good we have done for them.:p I just have to laugh. Maybe the Iraqi servants and sexworkers on base are happy their country is in the midst of civil war, that thousands and thousands of their countrymen/women and children are dead, that electricity and water are scarce and that they are under foreign occupation, but no Iraqi is "happy" the USA rolled in and demolished their sovereign nation and drew in terrorists from around the globe to USE Iraq as a battlefield against Islam. No fuckin way TW.

Genji

I just have to laugh. Maybe the Iraqi servants and sexworkers on base are happy their country is in the midst of civil war, that thousands and thousands of their countrymen/women and children are dead, that electricity and water are scarce and that they are under foreign occupation, but no Iraqi is "happy" the USA rolled in and demolished their sovereign nation and drew in terrorists from around the globe to USE Iraq as a battlefield against Islam. No fuckin way TW.

I'm afraid that you don't know shit about what is going on in Iraq, there is no Happy Jack, and you don't get ring your ding-a-ling, mess with a Iraqi woman and it a good way to get your ball stuffed in your mouth.

Genji



I'm afraid that you don't know shit about what is going on in Iraq, there is no Happy Jack, and you don't get ring your ding-a-ling, mess with a Iraqi woman and it a good way to get your ball stuffed in your mouth.And how would you know, from an armchair?? I beg to differ. There was a special on local news a year or more ago about Iraqi War Brides. So US troops ARE doing what they always have; Fuckin' the locals and using them as servants. (Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Japan, The Philippines, Europe, etc.

War brides are far different than sex girls, and remember that I'm ex-military many of my friends are still in the military, we still keep in contact, and they do keep me informed on the fun thing in life in Iraq, and for the troopies, that means , no sex, no hand jobs, from the locals, and no alcohol. Now this is from the Horse's Mouth, from people who have been in country, with a big bitch about no booze, and having to wait for over a year to get them some, so if you haven't been there, what the fuck do you really know? do you even know anyone who has served there? I make that a great big no, or you would know different, that is why you are talking out of your ass about something you don't know jack shit about.

War brides are far different than sex girls, and remember that I'm ex-military many of my friends are still in the military, we still keep in contact, and they do keep me informed on the fun thing in life in Iraq, and for the troopies, that means , no sex, no hand jobs, from the locals, and no alcohol. Now this is from the Horse's Mouth, from people who have been in country, with a big bitch about no booze, and having to wait for over a year to get them some, so if you haven't been there, what the fuck do you really know? do you even know anyone who has served there? I make that a great big no, or you would know different, that is why you are talking out of your ass about something you don't know jack shit about.I don't have to be in Iraq to know the US has fucked up in every category. I read. Iraq is not Saudi Arabia or Iran. Under Hussein there was no ban on alcohol or bars or sex. Now with the US installation of Islamic radicals the laws may have changed, but I doubt anything you say and will stick with the notion that Iraq has no booze bans.
Have you been on the space shuttle? Then how do you know there really IS a space shuttle.:rolleyes: Been to North Korea? You HAVEN'T!:eek: Then how the fuck do you know what's going on there? See how stupid your childish approach is about your Iraq remark? "Ifya ain't bin thar you cain't have any nalledge of it.":rolleyes: I know alot of things, it comes from books.

Genji, 20 years in the military, friend from 20 years in the military, and please provide proof of your statements, just a few site would be nice, and yes I read to, and no where do I read of U.S. GI engaging in sex with the women of Iraq as hooker's, or any other way, and having been to Iraq back in the 70ty's I can tell you that there were no bars, or liquor allowed, now if you knew a friend of a friend, and had the money anything could be arranged, but that was only for the Upper Crust of Iraqi Society.

Genji, 20 years in the military, friend from 20 years in the military, and please provide proof of your statements, just a few site would be nice, and yes I read to, and no where do I read of U.S. GI engaging in sex with the women of Iraq as hooker's, or any other way, and having been to Iraq back in the 70ty's I can tell you that there were no bars, or liquor allowed, now if you knew a friend of a friend, and had the money anything could be arranged, but that was only for the Upper Crust of Iraqi Society.

Good Morning Buffalo,

this is odd, I have read repros that the Bathist secular party allowed drink, casions and night-clubs and that baghdad in 1970's had a "great" night life... This is one of the reasons why the bin-liner calls Saddam an infedel. If you stayed out of politics you were usually alright....

Of course saddam was mass murdering evil doer but at least he wasn't a religious nut.

##################

take care

Zak

Well, Buffalo just uses his imagination to make up facts. And then uses his 20 years of digging latrines as an authority argument.

I don't have to be in Iraq to know the US has fucked up in every category. I read. Iraq is not Saudi Arabia or Iran. Under Hussein there was no ban on alcohol or bars or sex. Now with the US installation of Islamic radicals the laws may have changed, but I doubt anything you say and will stick with the notion that Iraq has no booze bans.
Have you been on the space shuttle? Then how do you know there really IS a space shuttle. Been to North Korea? You HAVEN'T! Then how the fuck do you know what's going on there? See how stupid your childish approach is about your Iraq remark? "Ifya ain't bin thar you cain't have any nalledge of it." I know alot of things, it comes from books.

Your understanding of the situation in Iraq is ramarkably unsophisticated, yet you keep commenting on something you know so little about.

It is not in U.S interest to have civil war in Iraq. To quote a post here "Of course saddam was mass murdering evil doer but at least he wasn't a religious nut." Do you even have a clue as to which group of people are perpetrating the violence in Iraq? Think dummy, you wear your vendetta on your sleeve.

Your understanding of the situation in Iraq is ramarkably unsophisticated, yet you keep commenting on something you know so little about.

It is not in U.S interest to have civil war in Iraq. To quote a post here "Of course saddam was mass murdering evil doer but at least he wasn't a religious nut." Do you even have a clue as to which group of people are perpetrating the violence in Iraq? Think dummy, you wear your vendetta on your sleeve.

Enlighten us.

am i the moron here?

thats the best i could come up with in 12 seconds.

Isn't it the same people blowing up American soldiers and Iraqi citizen's....or am i the moron here?

thats the best i could come up with in 12 seconds.

Is this your sophisticated opinion?

I think I asked two questions there, didn't I?

I asked you to enlighten us with your sophistated opinion first. Surely that can't be too difficult. Why all this wiggling? Just tell us.

Author's update on Lancet study:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6045112.stm

Update: I put these points to author Les Roberts who replied: "There have to be ~300 deaths per day from natural cause even if Iraq was the healthiest 26 million people in the world. Where are those bodies? When the MOH [ministry of health] in Iraq is perhaps recording 10% of them, why should they be doing better with politically charged violent deaths. Yes, I think almost nothing is getting reported outside of Baghdad where things are worse."

And he suggested that a way existed of checking his results.

"There has rarely been a scientific report so easily verified or discarded. If someone went to 4 or 6 places picked at random in Iraq, and went to the grave yards for those villages, they could easily see if there are 3 or 4 times more bodies being brought in per week compared to 2002. Or, if someone could go to a couple villages or places, if we are correct, on average ~70 percent of the deaths occurring will be from violence.

"This would take 2 reporters one day to decide if we are basically correct or in error!"

The difficulty of course is that the international media is incapable of getting around safely to do something like that easily. The local media is a source but cannot be relied on by itself.

We are left then with the estimate from this report and the various counts by other groups.

Isn't it the same people blowing up American soldiers and Iraqi citizen's?

Who's doing the wiggling?

You are doing the wiggling. I am merely asking for your sophisticated opinion that you claim you have, and you are just asking me questions as if I have the sophisticated opinion, which I never claimed to have.

You claim to have the sophisticated opinion. You share it. If you don't have one retract your claim.

I am merely asking for your sophisticated opinion that you claim you have

I never claimed to have a sophisticated opinion, did I?

As a matter of fact the only real talent i have is spotting people talking out of their ass.

oh, and thinking of new way's to piss Genji off.

I never claimed to have a sophisticated opinion, did I?

Your understanding of the situation in Iraq is ramarkably unsophisticated, yet you keep commenting on something you know so little about.

If you label someone's opinion as unsophisticated you suggest your own is more sophisticated.


As a matter of fact the only real talent i have is spotting people talking out of their ass.

oh, and thinking of new way's to piss Genji off.

And so you admit you are a troll.

-----------
Why not just write down your views on the matter? Are you ashamed of your own views?

I just have to laugh. Maybe the Iraqi servants and sexworkers on base are happy their country is in the midst of civil war, that thousands and thousands of their countrymen/women and children are dead, that electricity and water are scarce and that they are under foreign occupation, but no Iraqi is "happy" the USA rolled in and demolished their sovereign nation and drew in terrorists from around the globe to USE Iraq as a battlefield against Islam. No fuckin way TW.

Tell me this is not a dumb statement?

If you label someone's opinion as unsophisticated you suggest your own is more sophisticated.

Really?

If I said the Apple II was unsophisticated that would mean I could concieve a more sophisticated one?

And so you admit you are a troll.

Who gives a ****?

Face it, were all trolls and you know it.

If I said the Apple II was unsophisticated that would mean I could concieve a more sophisticated one?


You cannot label AppleII unsophisticated if you do not know of a more sophisticated computer. In fact the AppleII was once extremely sophisticated.

If you label Genji's opinion as unsophisticated you must know a more sophisticated one.

Enlighten us.

Now your a troll, a hoity toity Euro Torll.

I have said on many ocassion's,

"there has to be a more sophisticated way to do this, find it"

This was crucial to my success.

Zakariya04

this is odd, I have read repros that the Bathist secular party allowed drink, casions and night-clubs and that baghdad in 1970's had a "great" night life... This is one of the reasons why the bin-liner calls Saddam an infedel. If you stayed out of politics you were usually alright....

Of course saddam was mass murdering evil doer but at least he wasn't a religious nut.

Yes, I agree that if you belonged to the Bath party there were thing that were availably to you that were not allowed to the common Iraqi, as I said if you knew a friend of a friend things could be made available.

We are not the cause of most of those deaths, they died because of the civil war. Unfortunatly, we triggered the start of the civil war by choosing to ignore the existing tensions when planning the invation.

Their blood is on our hands, if you held a gun or not. 40,000, 100,000, 655,000; none of the justifications from day 1 have been valid or worthwhile.

Live with it. Don't make the mistake again (you'd think we would have learned after Vietnam, wouldn't you?)

65555555555555555555555555
dead

hell that seems like a helluva lot in the name of religon, the IRA seem like amateurs in comparison, i take my hat off to them, does that mean they will get in the guiness book of records this year?

65555555555555555555555555
dead

hell that seems like a helluva lot in the name of religon, the IRA seem like amateurs in comparison, i take my hat off to them, does that mean they will get in the guiness book of records this year?

The american christians helped.

The american christians helped.

As i recall there where only 2000+ american killed, 600k plus are muslims, & u must give credit where it is due, bin lid, iran, syria have all played there part in this guiness book record, without there help the figure would only be in the hundreds.

Bin lid & his merry men seem more interested in killing muslims, than brits or yanks.

The brit death total is 200+, so muslims are the target of bin lid & iran & syria why is that?

As i recall there where only 2000+ american killed, 600k plus are muslims, & u must give credit where it is due, bin lid, iran, syria have all played there part in this guiness book record, without there help the figure would only be in the hundreds.

Bin lid & his merry men seem more interested in killing muslims, than brits or yanks.

The brit death total is 200+, so muslims are the target of bin lid & iran & syria why is that?

Do you need to be killed to do the killing?

Logic is your friend, not your enemy.

What a preposterous number, the war in Iraq has been going on for 1309 days, divide 655000 by this number and the daily death toil is 500.76 KIA per day, never heard this reported in the news? 501 death a day? OK who is kidding who? Who is trying to make political hay? this isn't even a attempt at being statistical, or even analytical, this is just a bald faced lie.

Why do you object, you should be proud at the fantastic job our military is doing! That's 655,000 actual or potential terrorists dead!

Why do you object, you should be proud at the fantastic job our military is doing! That's 655,000 actual or potential terrorists dead!

Only another 26,000,000 to go, then finally there will be peace in Iraq.

Oh yeah, git 'r done!

The american christians helped.



There are approx 10,000 American Muslims currently serving in the American armed forces.

How many in Iraq at the moment?

How many in Iraq at the moment?


Write to the White House - they will be able to tell you

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20040523-115504-9907r.htm

Write to the White House - they will be able to tell you

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20040523-115504-9907r.htm

I did, but for some reason they didn't like the white powder.

I did, but for some reason they didn't like the white powder.


LOL !!!! :D

Well, Buffalo just uses his imagination to make up facts. And then uses his 20 years of digging latrines as an authority argument.LOL!!!! Exquisite!!:p

Do you need to be killed to do the killing?

No... but they need to be your bombs and bullets for the blood to be on your hands.
If two people want to kill each other, you can't pin it on a third party.

There are approx 10,000 American Muslims currently serving in the American armed forces.

Well, let us not exclude our american muslim brothers from taking the blame then.

I should of course have said that the US president is a christian. He is after all commander of the army. He is were the line ends.

No... but they need to be your bombs and bullets for the blood to be on your hands.
If two people want to kill each other, you can't pin it on a third party.

What if the third party eliminated the order of a society and replaced it with chaos? And needless to say the third party did and does their fair share of the killing besides of having invaded another nation. You cannot invade nations and then blame the chaos on others.

de strondzaks hier weten alles, spuriousmonkey.

im surprised that you are still bothering to argue with em. :)

lenin is the coolest, anyhow....screw american democracy. give me some good old fashioned national socialism, anyday!!

The Devil Inside

lenin is the coolest

give me some good old fashioned national socialism, anyday!!


Lenin was a communist, national socialism is Hitler, so you now uncover you true soul, as a NAZI, and your lack of knowledge of the political systems, and the true value of your opinions.

Lenin was a communist, national socialism is Hitler, so you now uncover you true soul, as a NAZI, and your lack of knowledge of the political systems, and the true value of your opinions.

Indeed your lack of knowledge is like a knife in my eye. Lenin was a socialist. Communism is nothing more than a form of socialism. You could call lenin also a marxist and still not be wrong. And at one point he 'invented' leninism.

In real life he was merely a dictator. Calling him a communist doesn't really change that.

spuriousmonkey,

Indeed your lack of knowledge is like a knife in my eye. Lenin was a socialist. Communism is nothing more than a form of socialism. You could call lenin also a marxist and still not be wrong. And at one point he 'invented' leninism.

But there is a difference between Socialism and Communism, and it is well recognized in the Political Science, the biggest difference being that under fascism there is still a social class stratification and the means of production is privately owned, in communism the means of production is owned by the state, and there is suppose to be no social class's everybody is suppose to be equal, so here are the definitions, and again it is your lack of knowledge that is the knife in your eye.

communism [kämy niz΄əm, kämyəniz΄əm]
n.
Fr communisme < commun (< OFr comun) + isme: see COMMON & -ISM
1. any economic theory or system based on the ownership of all property by the community as a whole
2. [often C-]
a) a hypothetical stage of socialism, as formulated by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and others, to be characterized by a classless and stateless society and the equal distribution of economic goods, and to be achieved by revolutionary and dictatorial, rather than gradualistic, means
b) the form of government of various, esp. former, socialist states which profess to be working toward this stage by means of state planning and control of the economy, a one-party political structure, and an emphasis on the requirements of the state rather than on individual liberties: cf. SOCIALISM
3. [often C-]
a) a political movement for establishing a communist system
b) the doctrines, methods, etc. of the Communist parties
4. loosely communalism
5. loosely any political ideas or activity thought of as being leftist or subversive

fascism [faiz΄əm]
n.
It fascismo < fascio, political group < L fascis: see FASCES
1. [F-] the doctrines, methods, or movement of the Fascisti
2. [sometimes F-] a system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private economic enterprise under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc.
3.
a) a political movement based on such policies
b) fascist behavior: See also NAZI

fascism
n.
Syn. dictatorship, one-party rule, autocracy, regimentation, racism, totalitarianism, Nazism, National Socialism, Hitlerism, Third Reich, despotism, absolutism, demagogy, authoritarianism, oppression; see also GOVERNMENT 2.
Ant. democracy*, self-government, socialism.

there is also a difference between communism, communism and communism.

Communism= the guy kicking you in the ****'s wears combat boot's
Socialism= the guy kicking you in the ****'s wears business shoe's.

Is that right?:bugeye:

Do you need to be killed to do the killing?

Logic is your friend, not your enemy.


Sounds like vinnie never had a friend :) hahah lol

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7113/full/443728a.html
Nature 443, 728-729
Iraqi death toll withstands scrutiny

The authors say their estimate is so much higher because their methodology is more comprehensive. They organized detailed interviews, carried out by Iraqi researchers from the Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, in more than 1,800 households in 16 of Iraq's 18 administrative regions. Using random sampling similar to that used in political opinion polls, they documented 82 deaths in the period before the invasion, and 547 during the conflict. More than 90% of these were confirmed by death certificates. They show a 95% probability that the death toll has been between 390,000 and 940,000, most of which were due to violence such as gunshots

In the worst case scenario there could in fact have been 940,000 dead iraqis.

Data from other conflicts show that such sampling is much more accurate than media reports, which usually account for no more than 20% of deaths. "Random counts force you to go to places that aren't convenient," says Jana Asher, a researcher with the Science and Human Rights Program of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington DC. "The media don't wander off to distant locations. It's a very different type of data collection."

What do the real experts say:

But overall Guha-Sapir says the paper contains the best data yet on the mortality rate in Iraq. And none of the experts contacted by Nature said that their doubts fatally undermined the study.

The best data we have so far on mortality rate in Iraq. Not the worst, not another dataset. The best data.