Iraqi Deaths approach 1 million (study)

[tkhayes 348]

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

Before everyone starts taking ahots at it as liberal bunk - the study was conducted at John Hopkins U., I think a pretty reputable school.

Scary numbers,

but at least they all died 'free' right?

TK

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

Before everyone starts taking ahots at it as liberal bunk - the study was conducted at John Hopkins U., I think a pretty reputable school.

Scary numbers,

but at least they all died 'free' right?

TK

The Lancet study (where those bogus numbers came from) has been debunked several times.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Gawain 0]

I'm not going to take a "shot" yet, per se, but just because a study was conducted "at" Johns Hopkins, doesn't mean it was conducted "by" Johns Hopkins.

On one page, they state, "independent and non-partisan mass membership organization" ...then on the next, it says, "Begin organizing in your community by hosting or attending a showing of the new documentary narrated by Sean Penn and ..."

Nowhere in that site, have I found a reference to John Hopkins.

In fact, they are quite a politically active position organization, seeking donations and the like.

So, now, I will take a shot: It's "liberal bunk". There is no organization that claims to have anything like accurate numbers of non-military casualties.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,009]

>There is no organization that claims to have anything like accurate
>numbers of non-military casualties.

iraqbodycount.org does, and backs up each number with a report. There are at _least_ 68,000 innocent fatalities listed there; those are, of course, only the ones they could document.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>There is no organization that claims to have anything like accurate
>numbers of non-military casualties.

iraqbodycount.org does, and backs up each number with a report. There are at _least_ 68,000 innocent fatalities listed there; those are, of course, only the ones they could document.

The question I have is not how many individuals have been killed but who is responsible for the individuals who have been killed.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>There is no organization that claims to have anything like accurate
>numbers of non-military casualties.

iraqbodycount.org does, and backs up each number with a report. There are at _least_ 68,000 innocent fatalities listed there; those are, of course, only the ones they could document.

Of course.

68,000 ... one million

The difference is negligible...

really...

it is.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

The question I have is not how many individuals have been killed but who is responsible for the individuals who have been killed.

The elephant in the corner does seem to get consistently overlooked.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Of course.

68,000 ... one million

The difference is negligible...

really...

it is.

You could always go over, get some first hand experiences to talk about and bring back a report for the class.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Of course.

68,000 ... one million

The difference is negligible...

really...

it is.

You could always go over, get some first hand experiences to talk about and bring back a report for the class.

Why?

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

The Lancet study (where those bogus numbers came from) has been debunked several times.

debunked by whom, when and where.....

[shropshire 0]

With you on this one.

It's sad that some quarters seem to want this to be a competition of some kind... the loss of even 1 innocent life is too much.... enough already.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 3,009]

>68,000 ... one million
>The difference is negligible...

Making stuff up again, my friend? I never claimed it was negligible - merely that they report on the ones they can document. Believe it or not, during (say) an invasion of a country, people generally have better things to do than to document innocent deaths. Indeed, the US military refuses to do so.

Have you ever seen a skydiver drink beer? Now, how many instances of skydivers drinking beer can you document, today? I suspect the number is small. Does that mean:

a) very few skydivers drink beer, and anyone who claims they do is a liar with an agenda
b) very few people document skydivers drinking beer

[Royd 0]

>There is no organization that claims to have anything like accurate
>numbers of non-military casualties.

Quote

iraqbodycount.org does, and backs up each number with a report. There are at _least_ 68,000 innocent fatalities listed there; those are, of course, only the ones they could document.

Then, by deduction, we can say that the other 932,000 are enemy dead. I'd say that that's probably the best ratio in the history of the world.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>68,000 ... one million
>The difference is negligible...

Making stuff up again, my friend?

What did I make up? Again?

Quote

Have you ever seen a skydiver drink beer? Now, how many instances of skydivers drinking beer can you document, today? I suspect the number is small. Does that mean:

a) very few skydivers drink beer, and anyone who claims they do is a liar with an agenda
b) very few people document skydivers drinking beer

Hey, how about we use the number of speeding tickets given out to determine how many people speed in a given day? Yeah, that ratio ought to be in line with documented deaths versus overall deaths.

Outstanding comparison.

Really.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

The question I have is not how many individuals have been killed but who is responsible for the individuals who have been killed.

Um, in no particular order:
1) American & Allied fighters
2)shiite/sunni Iraqi sectarian fighters 3) al Quaeda in Iraq/Islamist fighters, foreign & Iraqi
4)Iraqi Baathist fighters 5) random criminals

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

The question I have is not how many individuals have been killed but who is responsible for the individuals who have been killed.

Um, in no particular order:
1) American & Allied fighters
2)shiite/sunni Iraqi sectarian fighters 3) al Quaeda in Iraq/Islamist fighters, foreign & Iraqi
4)Iraqi Baathist fighters 5) random criminals

How many fatalities is each responsible for?

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[SpeedRacer 1]

who the fuck knows.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The question I have is not how many individuals have been killed but who is responsible for the individuals who have been killed.

Um, in no particular order:
1) American & Allied fighters
2)shiite/sunni Iraqi sectarian fighters 3) al Quaeda in Iraq/Islamist fighters, foreign & Iraqi
4)Iraqi Baathist fighters 5) random criminals

How many fatalities is each responsible for?

and, please cross correlation the relationship to sun spot strength as well to include interactions......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Have you ever seen a skydiver drink beer? Now, how many instances of skydivers drinking beer can you document, today? I suspect the number is small. Does that mean:

a) very few skydivers drink beer, and anyone who claims they do is a liar with an agenda
b) very few people document skydivers drinking beer

No Bill we would need video proof of the skydivers actually drinking beer, and then we would need our independent lap to verify that it was beer they were drinking. Also we would need their ID, SS card and their grandmother to verify that these so-called “Skydivers” are really who they say they are.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

we would need our independent lap to verify that it was beer they were drinking.

"Independent lapping" is a well known method for verifying the reality of beer. Also, it's a great way to get free beer. A small bit at a time.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Thanatos340 1]

It is NOT the Skydivers Fault!! The Problem is the Beer!!

If we could just Nuke the breweries, All would be cured.

[Butters 0]

Quote

It is NOT the Skydivers Fault!! The Problem is the Beer!!

If we could just Nuke the breweries, All would be cured.

Nuking is a bad way to cure beer!

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 3,009]

>Hey, how about we use the number of speeding tickets given out to
>determine how many people speed in a given day? Yeah, that ratio ought
>to be in line with documented deaths versus overall deaths.

I have a better idea.

Put as many people on as many roads as you can with radar guns. Say you can cover .01% of the roads in the US (i.e. you are covering 1/10,000 of the roads in the US) and have them coordinate so they don't get the same guy twice. See how many people speed in one day near your observers. Say it's 45.

Now, which conclusion can you draw from this?

1) It is likely that around 450,000 people speed in the US every day.

2) 45 people (or a few more) speed in the US every day, and if you don't believe that, you obviously have an anti-US agenda.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I have a better idea.

If you say so.

BTW The better of two crappy theories is still a crappy theory.

[billvon 3,009]

>BTW The better of two crappy theories is still a crappy theory.

I did not propose a theory, good or crappy. Statistics is pretty basic math.

If you really want to refute something but no one is posting it, perhaps you could just post it yourself and then refute it. It would save on a lot of misunderstandings (intentional or otherwise.)