Sorta Breaking: MSNBC reports 30,000 Iraqi civilians killed in

[Catchawave]

Bush's war so far? These stats are WRONG, right? 30K is about 30k too many for me, but this is Bush's politics too, and I fear, totally underestimated numbers :shrug:

[Skidmore]

1. Multiply by 3 and you probably be closer to accurate.

[Catchawave]

15. Don't shoot the messenger.....

...it was as reported on MSNBC. I faked right, and went left, and posted it here :hi:

[Lerkfish]

2. that's much much lower than even conservative estimates a year ago

so, yes, its wrong. the last year has been brutal on the civilians.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Surely 30K dead Civilian Iraqis

in a three year period must be a terrible disappointment to christian conservatives and various and asundry chickenshit chickenhawks which comprise bush's base. The more dead "ragheads" the happier our christian conservative neighbors are, especially when no one from their family has to involve themselves in the messy details. bush's base is the number one domestic threat to our constititution today.

[spanone]

4. Is that just today?

[doublethink]

6. Even if it was ......

Cheney would just attribute it to more evidence of the 'last throes of the insurgency' and I think he will stick to that line until we are all dead. Bastard. Peace. :)

[Junkdrawer]

5. About as accurate as 100,000 Jews killed during the Holocaust...

but I guess Iraqis don't count...

[Hissyspit]

7. It is assuredly too low. I hope they gave it a caveat:

such as "these numbers are probably the minimum, but we just don't know, because no one in the media or the administration has given enough of a shit to try to keep track; plus it is such a huge mess over there, it is very difficult to find out."

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. It wouldn't exactly serve the interests of the USA to have an accurate

count, so, we don't have an accurate count.

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. Look, we've got to stay the course. The chimp said so. It's his war.

30k, 60k, 90k, who cares. We've got to kill 'em so they will understand how democracy works.

[Trevelyan]

10. Try to get your conservative friends and relatives to look at the photos

of the human cost of bushler's war on Iraq "The March For Justice Picture Gallery of the War Victims" pictures of civilian victims of Iraqi war:

http://www.robert-fisk.com/weapons_of_terrorism.htm
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2444
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/iraqis_tortured/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6316.htm
http://www.albasrah.net/images/iraqi-pow/iraqi-pow1.htm
http://www.einswine.com/atrocities
http://www.arabnews.com/WebExclusives.htm
http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20Photos/Photos%20of%20Iraq%20war%20victims.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/photo_gallery/2888307.stm
http://www.iraqpeaceteam.org/pages/al_kindi_hospital.html
http://www.ccmep.org/iraq.html
http://www.iraqvictims.com

The Evidence File Iraq Peace Team Report

Photo Gallery: www.theage.com.au
http://www.thenausea.com/usa-iraq.html
http://www.marchforjustice.com/shock&awe.php
http://www.regulareverydaypeople.com/

[NNN0LHI]

11. I hope none of these people had families or they are going to be pissed nt

[fooj]

12. Considering that the # has been thrown out there for months now...

I'd challenge its accuracy...FOR CERTAIN!!!!

Peace.

[specimenfred1984]

13. Here's a Good Article

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=9502

-- A little over a year ago, a group of Johns Hopkins researchers reported that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a result of the Iraq war during its first 14 months, with about 60,000 of the deaths directly attributable to military violence by the U.S. and its allies. The study, published in The Lancet, the highly respected British medical journal, applied the same rigorous, scientifically validated methods that the Hopkins researchers had used in estimating that 1.7 million people had died in the Congo in 2000. Though the Congo study had won the praise of the Bush and Blair administrations and had become the foundation for UN Security Council and State Department actions, this study was quickly declared invalid by the U.S. government and by supporters of the war.

This dismissal was hardly surprising, but after a brief flurry of protest, even the antiwar movement (with a number of notable exceptions) has largely ignored the ongoing carnage that the study identified.

One reason the Hopkins study did not generate sustained outrage is that the researchers did not explain how the occupation had managed to kill so many people so quickly -- about 1,000 each week in the first 14 months of the war. This may reflect our sense that carnage at such elevated levels requires a series of barbaric acts of mass slaughter and/or huge battles that would account for staggering numbers of Iraqis killed. With the exception of the battle of Falluja, these sorts of high-profile events have simply not occurred in Iraq. ---

[Catchawave]

16. Johns Hopkins is a good source, so we should

forward the article on to:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/

...and demand they report the facts NOT the spin :)

I just did, anyone with me?

[linazelle]

14. Breaking? Bush himself said this two months ago

Problem is, the estimates are thrice that--and if he said that two months ago, well the numbers are higher now even with his lowballing.

PS: If he is willing to admit to 30,000, then you know it has to be worse.

[Earth_First]

18. My thoughts exactly. nt

[leftchick]

17. Over 100.000 and probably closer to 200,000

makes you proud doesn't it? :puke:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA13Ak01.html

<snip>

Precision killing in Iraq
By Michael Schwartz

A little more than a year ago, a group of Johns Hopkins University researchers reported that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a result of the Iraq war during its first 14 months, with about 60,000 of the deaths directly attributable to military violence by the US and its allies.

The study, published in The Lancet, the highly respected British medical journal, applied the same rigorous, scientifically validated methods that the Hopkins researchers had used in estimating that 1.7 million people had died in Congo in 2000. Though the Congo study had won the praise of the Bush and Blair administrations and had become the foundation for UN Security



Council and State Department actions, this study was quickly declared invalid by the US government and supporters of the war.

This dismissal was hardly surprising, but after a brief flurry of protest, even the anti-war movement (with a number of notable exceptions) has largely ignored the ongoing carnage that the study identified.

One reason the Hopkins study did not generate sustained outrage is that the researchers did not explain how the occupation had managed to kill so many people so quickly - about 1,000 each week in the first 14 months of the war. This may reflect our sense that carnage at such elevated levels requires a series of barbaric acts of mass slaughter and/or huge battles that would account for staggering numbers of Iraqis killed. With the exception of the battle of Fallujah, these sorts of high-profile events have simply not occurred in Iraq.