Actually, according to this article from Slate magazine by Fred Kaplan (no supporter of the war), what the study really says is that the U.S. invasion has led to somewhere between 8,000 and 194,000 additional civilian deaths in Iraq. As Kaplan points out, the actual numbers are bad enough, given the total lack of justification for this “damn fool war”; but the Lancet study seems to be pretty useless.
Well, that’s good news, ME. I hate the fact that its good news.
furt, I can’t say that I am impressed by commentary that begins with the words, “First, even without reading the study…”
Do you have any reliable academic criticism that has not already been acknowledged in the report itself? Anything from a non-biased source?
I am not familiar with the university in Baghdad, but Johns Hopkins and Columbia are quite reputable – and honest enough to admit that the findings are preliminary.
I hope with all of my heart that you and “the Chicago Boys” are right. But if this report is anywhere near accurate, it is just unthinkable that we have done this. Aren’t you going to wait to find out if it is true or not?
Someone asked about the Pentagon’s responsibility for keeping records. I think I read something at the Amnesty International website that said that an occupying force is responsible for keeping these statistics. I could be mistaken though.
Well, hot damn, if you haven’t managed to outdo 'luc, whom I’ve always thought of as the paragon of modesty on the SDMB.
Live and learn. Emphasis on live somehow seems pertinent in this particular thread.
Would that I could say I disagree, but if I did, we’d only be fooling our own selves.
Not sure of the (implied) meaning in your first sentence. But if I am parsing correctly, you appear to suggest that Iraq might have become a much larger problem down the road. Given said parsing, does that not apply to any number of nations with even greater urgency? After all, even within the MENA region, I can think of countries that are way beyond “WMDs program related activities.” Because if “preventive war” translates into nipping any potential thread in the bud, I foresee great investment opportunities in the military-industrial complex.
Then again, I am more than likely behind the curve. Should have invested in Halliburton and/or the Betchel or Carlyle Group sometime ago.
So much for idealism.
As for your ensuing comment, “Liberty is more valuable than Life,” I couldn’t agree more. Just not sure how it applies to the Iraq invasion in any meaningful way from the American standpoint – much less from the Iraqis. In essence, their country’s been **partitioned and sold**, with little to no input from the natives. Or so goes the pipedream:
**
Anyway…
Fair enough. Although I find arguments to the future quite lacking. For one, unless we reach an amazing breakthrough, dead is dead, and secondly, it’ll always leave open the question of “what if.” As in ‘what if the US hadn’t invaded.’ Meanwhile, all we can do is wait and hope for the best. But allow me to go out on a limb and say that such quandary wasn’t necessary to begin with.
Furthermore, I’ll also venture to say that if the dead could speak they’d agree with me as well – never mind their survivors. I think it fair to say that I take most of their replies for granted. Something called “empathy.”
At any rate, appreciate your reply, much obliged.
A bit too cryptic for moi. I blame my parents for not having enrolled me in English classes sooner.
Might you expound, por favor?
BTW, trust you didn’t mind my bringing your timeworn quote to the fore w/out your permission. If you did, my apologies. Profuse even.
Pardon me if I take Johns Hopkins a little more seriously than “chicagoboyz.net” a site so partisan I had to go take a shower after looking at it.
I think it only fair to issue a reminder that the current Iraqi body count includes civilians killed by insurgents, rebels, terrorists, and/or members of Saddam’s holdout army, which is a significant number (untrained conscripts using 40 year old Soviet surplus equipment tend to be less accurate with their mortar fire than GPS-guided American bombs, not to mention the bombings and street fighting… or the civilians trapped inside fighting zones, or those dying from lack of medical care.
On the other hand, it should be noted that none of that would have happened without the invasion in the first place, and Saddam’s personal body count post-GW1 was much lower than his pre-GW1 count, suggesting that most of hte people now dead would still be alive with Saddam in power (minus a few thousand Kurds and such. Not to sound insensitive to their plight or anything, but we’re talking 100,000 people here).
Por nada, companero.
I am glad to hear that the figure of 100,000 civilian deaths is exaggerated. “Collateral damage” is a military euphemism for “massacre”, designed to allow men who advance an agenda of death and horror to think themselves reasonable, to protect us from the dark glare of truth. If it were “only” a thousand, I would not be happy, merely less miserable.
I hate the circumstances that make such morbid distinctions inevitable. I hate the parades, the banners, the anthems. I hate the burden we put on the conscience of brave men and women sworn to protect us, who are made murderers in our name. For every innocent life squandered, at least one new mortal enemy is born: their father, brother, son, daughter. I am relieved, yes, but it is like fearing a diagnosis of terminal cancer and hearing it is merely leprosy.
I pray God will show us more mercy than we deserve.
Well, he is getting sorta long in the tooth these days…
I wasn’t addressing this invasion of Iraq, just generalities about war.
Well, the answer to your question about many people had to die in order for this invasion “unacceptable” may be zero; however, my answer may increase by quite a few percentage point depending on the outcomes.
Thanks for giving me a rat’s ass.
Odd, isn’t it, how much regard we have for youth, as though ignorance and callow judgement were virtues to strive for?
I don’t believe in god, but if he exists, he shouldn’t show us any mercy. Especially if * wins on Tuesday (or Wednesday, or next week, or next month, or next year).
Prayer: To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy.
- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary
For you and John Mace and eventually oyther who go on and on about “this is war therefore people die because it is war and therefore Bush is not a murderer”
When was it again that Iraq
a) Declared war on the USA
b) attacked the USA ?
I must have missed somehow these interesting events.
If I decide tomorrow
That I want to invade your property to occupy it in order to get control over what is there that I find interesting because it serves my interests
and then come up with a for me very good excuse that
somehow
you maybe
could have
been thinking
about getting yourself a weapon
that maybe in some far future
could be used for targetting me
and maybe could be used for damaging my property
and maybe could be used for doing harm at people living on my property
then I can come over, flatten your house, kill whatever and whomever gets in my way, take possession of your property and go on killing whomever comes in my way or resists me…
I am not a murderer because I say that I fight a war with you?
OK. Nice to know. When can I come over?
Another question that you may have overlooked as insignificant because you’re not from around here is this:
“When did the US Congress declare war on Iraq or grant letters of marque and reprisal to the private military companies operating in Iraq, or make rules concerning captures in Iraq?”
When was the last time, Kuwait declared war on Iraq? Attacked Iraq?
They weren’t saying they didn’t read it; they were just saying that, on its face, a claim of 100,000 deaths is dubious. It’s an exceptional claim, demanding exceptional proof, and interviewing 33 households doesn’t cut it.
For heaven’s sake, the study itself says that 2/3 of the deaths they recorded were in Fallujah; are to surmise that 67,000 people have died there? That would be a large chunk of the total population.
I repeat, Lancet itself all but admits its being published for political ends. Find me someone who is not already opposed to the war who thinks their methodology isn’t bogus and I’ll take it seriously.
Ah, yes. Professors are unbiased beacons of truth, unless they’re writing on the internet.
So everything’s OK if it’s only 20,000 extra dead civilians?
Without having read the study, I can say that this is not what the study is purported to have said.
2/3 of the recorded deaths may have been in Fallujah, but that does not mean that 2/3 of the extrapolated deaths would have come from Falujah.
That’s just a stupid conlsuion.
Second, to arrive at the 100,000 figure, they’re puported to have not included the Falujah numbers becasuie they were such outliers.
Would you care to say what those ends were, or should I?
Does slant-drilling count?