In an earlier thread people wondered how the estimates for Baghdad civilian deaths could have missed the mark by more than a factor of three. Funny story…
U.S. officials, seeking a way to measure the results of a program aimed at decreasing violence in Baghdad, aren’t counting scores of dead killed in car bombings and mortar attacks as victims of the country’s sectarian violence.
In a distinction previously undisclosed, U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Johnson said Friday that the United States is including in its tabulations of sectarian violence only deaths of individuals killed in drive-by shootings or by torture and execution.
That has allowed U.S. officials to boast that the number of deaths from sectarian violence in Baghdad declined by more than 52 percent in August over July.
But it eliminates from tabulation huge numbers of people whose deaths are certainly part of the ongoing conflict between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. Not included, for example, are scores of people who died in a highly coordinated bombing that leveled an entire apartment building in eastern Baghdad, a stronghold of rebel Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
In related news, the president has 85 percent approval ratings if you don’t count the people who disapprove. It reminds me of fifth graders playing with their first graphing calculator. Except that the little blips are dead people. But hey, whatever.
On the outrage meter this strikes me as a fairly typical Rumsfeldian decision, on par with threatening to fire any generals who persisted in asking for a postwar plan. At this point it seems naive to expect anything different.
Zifnab
Keep in mind, Iraqis are only really considered 3/5ths of a person anyway, so those numbers may be inaccurate.
Ryan S.
If you can’t win… change the rules.
Proud Liberal
I wonder how anyone can believe anything this administration says. MacBuckets, as chief apologist for this lying administration, can you help us out here? Why doesn’t it bother you that you are constantly lied to by your government? Is the fact that you are sympathetic to their ideological leanings that you are willing to overlook such repeated deception from your government officials? Will you be so forgiving when the Dems take over the White House in 2008?
Tsulagi
Don’t know why, but that sort of reminds me of the annual State Dept. Terrorism Report that came out in the ‘04 election year. Terrorism incidents were down! We’ve turned a corner! The Bush No Plan is working. Stay the course!
But then those damn Nazi appeasers started actually reading the report and asked questions about the tabulation. Everyone knew in advance that numbers from Iraq and AF are simply thrown out by the admin as that would put the numbers off the charts. But still they looked a little funny.
They were. As would be expected, global terrorism continues to spike under the No Plan. Those good ol fart lovin retardocons had screwed Powell again. He was a little pissed his State Dept. and name was on the report. Of course it hadn’t been cooked because it was an election year, right? Nah, not in the honor and integrity administration.
But Condi has solved any future embarrassments. She just did away with that silly annual Terrorism Report that has been compiled for over three decades. We don’t need it, we’re turning corners. And turning, and turning….
Zifnab
Horray for no accountability. It’s like watching Endron shred documents. “You can’t prove anything if we destroy all the evidence! That makes us innocent!”
The Other Steve
Does this mean the people killed in the WTC on 9/11 didn’t technically die from terrorism?
That revelation would take this war in a whole new direction. Technically only the people who were actually attacked personally by the terrorists boxcutters died from terrorism. Everybody else died from uhh… natural causes?
emix
Actually, if you exclude all those killed (including blastocysts) by bombs, bullets, torture, and murder by both sides, and if you add new births since the start of the war, the war is a net pluss with respect to innocent life.
emix
A question for wingnuts.
Is the life of an islamic blastocyst equal to the life of a good cristian blastocyst?
If not, why not?
If an Iraqi women who has recently had government approved missionary position sex with her lawful husband with or without her consent and is pregnant with or without her knowledge is killed accidently or intentially by American troops, should you be as outraged as when a doctor does stem cell research on said good cristian blastocyst for the purpose of curing alziemers?
Zifnab
This isn’t about abortion, emix. Islamic blastocysts want to destroy our way of life and if we don’t fight them in-vitro we’ll have to fight them over here. Conflating the issue just proves that you’re a terrorist coodling liberal. Besides, I have it on good authority that Muslims eat babies.
D. Mason
Only the innocent ones. Babies that cut their way out of their mothers womb with a boxcutter(no pun intended) get to live.
Eural
Shouldn’t that read “…we’ll have to fight them out here”?
emix
Hey Zifnab! I have never coodled and would never coodle a terrist or anyone else. EVER! How dare you suggest such a thing. You will be hearing from my lawyers soon.
emix
Why am I so upset? Coodling is a very serious charge and is against my religion. We of the faith of Anticoodlarians belive that coodling is the most grevious mortal sin one can commit. Satan himself was caught coodling with himself, on the negative 6000th anniversary of 9/11 no less, and was justly cast from the kingdom and sent to God’s Gitmo. So you can understand my ruffled feathers. Be nice people. you don’t want to be banned like Darrell or ppgas.