Tim (excuse me, Grima Wormtongue) discussed this last night in depth, and Glenn Greenwald has more today, but this story certainly will be the topic of much discussion:
A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.
The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq’s government.
It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group.
Rather than debate the idea that we have lost Iraq, that we have no real plan other than ‘staying the course,’ and various other issues of importance (despite the ‘seriousness’ of the GOP), you can bet that all that will be done is an attack on the procedures of this study. As we all know the instinctive Republican response when confronted with things they don’t like is to blame the media, Democrats, or both, it is just a matter of time before the assault on this data begins (and to be fair, I know I did my best to ‘debunk’ the first study). Who knows- maybe by the time Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly are done dissecting the stats in this study, we will find out that it actually proves global warming isn’t happening.
At any rate, rather than sit back and wait for the inevitable bullshit to fly, let’s help them out. With that in mind, here are the top ten GOP excuses for an estimate of a half million+ dead Iraqi’s:
10. At least when we kill civilians, it is an accident. Saddam intentionally killed civilians.
9. No one could have predicted there would be civilian casualties.
8. We tried to come up with a plan to win this war without killing civilians, but obstructionist Democrats made it too hard.
7. How many innocent civilians did FDR and Truman kill? (Excuse used partially used with a reference to Nagasaki and Hiroshima.)
6. Why all the fuss? The Iraqi people can ‘tolerate’ a few dead. (Excuse actually used by Bush in his presser.)
5. Freedom isn’t Free. Freedom is messy.
4. Better to have collateral damage over there than to have it over here.
3. The terrorists don’t care if they kill innocent civilians.
2. Brian Ross and the media have known people are dying in Iraq for a long while. Why did they wait until right before an election to tell us? (Excuse actually used here at Red State)
1. Epidemiologists?!? What the hell do skin doctors know about waging war? (Excuse partially used here: “So somewhere between 8 and 194 thousand, good lord I hope I never get treated by one of these quacks.”)
Feel free to add your own in the comments (and if you have links to these made-up excuses being actually used, please forward them).
*** Update ***
Majikthese compiles the list of reactions so I don’t have to.
Mike S
“It’s Clinton’s fault.”
The Other Steve
At least Bush hasn’t bombed the Chinese embassy in Baghdad!
Thousands of people die in America every day, and you don’t hear the media making a fuss about that.
Look, this is the first we’ve heard about this. I think if someone had told me about it sooner we would have done something.
These civilian deaths were caused by foreign countries attempting to make the United States look bad.
John S.
That is really funny.
I guess that makes you Saruman, John? Just remember, Orthanc (West Virginia) is an impenetrable stronghold as long as you don’t fuck with the trees (conservatives?). If you do, the Ents (GOP bloggers) will come and dismantle your fortress.
Boy, those LOTR references can get out of control.
Pb
John Cole, corrupted by
Sauron’s influence through the Palantír of Orthancviewing liberal blogs on his Dell–how tragic.Pb
Oh, and while we’re at it… Detroit is *way* more deadly–invade Detroit!
neil
US OUT OF DETROIT!
ThymeZone
“The methodology of the study has been, you know, pretty well, you know, dis … you know, credited ….. and that’s why I am taking a minimum of several years to come up with our own estimates on this, you know, figure, which will be something to be dealt with, you know, by a future, you know, president.”
Pb
Ok. Dumbest (real!) one I’ve seen yet:
ThymeZone
5.
Freedom isn’t Free. Freedom is messy.5a. Freedom is hard.
The Other Steve
Just curious…
It seems the US state department has been able to track the number of people killed in the Sudan.
Anybody know why they are having such a hard time with Iraq? Is it possible the State Dept would be embarassed if people started calling for UN intervention?
Tsulagi
Yep, our fart leader of the free world was dead on in marveling at the level of violence Iraqis tolerate for his vision of freedom. But, don’t forget about democracy!
Here’s one Iraqi mother’s take in July in her blog on what Bush’s vision of freedom and democracy means for her and her family…
She continues her story saying the police sat in the car watching her being shot, excuse me, peppered. They continued watching while the gunmen stuck around threatening anyone who came near her while she died.
She writes that typically families don’t retrieve bodies from morgues as gunmen wait there to kill them too. Funerals too, which is why the dead woman’s relatives and friends didn’t attend. They left the country.
neil
More interesting than the question of why Democrats are inclined to believe it, I think, is why Republicans are inclined to _not_ believe it. It seems to fall into a pattern of things that Republicans have been inclined not to believe until long past they were obvious.
Pixie
Hmm ok I’ll try my hand at this:
1. They all want to kill us anyway!!!
2. This would have never happened if Clinton hadn’t left Saddam in power!
3. 600,000+ dead only means less terrorists who want to kill you and me!
4. We don’t have enough secret prisons to detain them all!
5. That’s what Iraq gets for causing 9/11!
Shall I go on? =P
The Other Steve
Pb – wizbangblog is the gift that keeps on giving.
neil
TOS: That Sudan study uses the same methodology as that used in the Lancet study. Except probably with a smaller sample size.
Why isn’t Wizbang posting about the Darfur lie?
The Other Steve
It wasn’t reported by Fox News.
ThymeZone
Best line of the day so far.
The Other Steve
Interesting, isn’t it?
And those Sudan numbers came right from the State Departments website.
Tony J
Since US forces in Iraq only target terrorists, many of these dead folks will be bad-guys, so the rest will be either victims of terrorism (if the Liberal Media’s hatchet job on news from Iraq is to be believed) or natural wastage. So the numbers say we’re winning.
or
(Solemn face)
New information reveals that Iraqis are sacrificing their lives in the hundreds of thousands for the cause of freedom.
(Stern pause)
The enemies of freedom think we don’t understand this.
(Shake of the head)
They’re wrong.
(Smirk)
Iraq is the front-line in the War on Terror.
(Rapid nodding)
Our Iraqi allies understand this.
(Pleased expression)
The Democrats want us to abandon the Iraqi People to the terrorists.
(Shake of the head)
But they don’t understand the American People anymore than the terrorists do.
(Assume meaningful stance)
This Administration won’t cut-and-run.
(Smirk)
We won’t let them make this sacrifice alone.
(Wait for applause)
RSA
I love this, Pb. Posthumous headline writing.
On the top ten excuses, I think Pixie hit the nail on the head with “600K dead Iraqis = 600K fewer terrorists.” I’ll add:
That’s 600K fewer Iraqis to be on America’s welfare rolls.
Given birth rates in the Third World, 600K is a drop in the bucket.
Those 600K died as free men, women, or children, rather than in Saddam’s chains.
RSA
Off topic, but did anyone else get a chuckle reading the front page of the LA Times online today? Top headline: Bush Unwilling to Live With a Nuclear North Korea. If only.
Germ
“If they don’t like it, they should get off our oil.”
Steven Donegal
Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose.
that about sums up the situation
Punchy
Excuse actually used by Sean Hannity at least 100 times over…
jaime
Uhhhh…Chappaquiddick
Pb
Indeed.
Paul L.
How about the study is BS. Mr strawman.
A MOST GHOULISH DEBATE
Vladi G
My favorite was from Rick Moran:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing there wouldn’t be insurgents if there was not a foreign army present. The point of the study is to identify excess deaths.
Also good:
Right, if we blow up all of your hospitals and places to get food, and places of employment so that you can’t work, eat, or get medical care, those deaths don’t count as excess, because, hell, I don’t know, aliens might have come along and done the same thing. Maybe the domestic violence bit is stretching it, but otherwise, sheesh, what an idiot.
Dave
Thank you John for reading Redstate so I don’t have to.
Steve
Oh, here’s Paul, the guy who thinks women enjoy getting abortions. What’s up, asshole?
From what I’ve seen, “a wide variety of experts” actually means a bunch of right-wing bloggers and one liberal from Slate. And of course, to believe they “debunked” the study, you have to basically read their criticisms, say “Wow, what a zinger!” and stop paying attention at that point.
I think it’s clear that people like Paul are firmly wedded to the things they want to believe and nothing further (“Global warming is a myth. Look, I have a link that says so!”). Put enough people like that together, and you get a Republican majority. Hey, have you heard, there’s no civil war in Iraq?
cd6
Imagine the outrage on the right if it was “600,000 aborted festuses”
cd6
Or would it be “600,000 aborted feti”?
Somebody should look into this.
The Other Steve
Paul L – Would you care to comment on the Sudan study I linked to at the State department?
Is it also BS?
jaime
This is the position he starts with? That even debating the casualties is icky? I guess when you focus your energies on attempting to debunk a causalty estimate you don’t have to think about the actual dead people.
600,000 is absurd, but 100,000 is just fucking peachy?
Pb
Amazingly, this is how all surveys work. Statistics, man, it’s crazy stuff. And about that first study:
SeesThroughIt
I would like to see this adopted as a common retort to right-wing stupidity. Bravo!
Also:
“Why should I care that there are 600,000 fewer Islamofacists out there who want to come chop my head off?”
jaime
Being a Yankee fan, I couldn’t agree more.
Ryan S.
OT
Does anybody know what kind of plane crashed in NYC today? When they say small plane? how small single engine prop? or small commuter?
Fledermaus
Oh, c’mon John. Don’t you know that this study was done by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It’s just more of liberal acedemia opressing conservative thought. Where’s David Horrowitz when you need him.
And it was done at the request of the UN. The UN, John!
RSA
From the Moran post:
This kind of basic ignorance of statistics seems common on the right; for example, “Polls showing that President Bush is deeply unpopular are not to be trusted–they only ask maybe 1000 people!” And:
Someone who doesn’t understand rounding error is criticizing the study. Hoo boy. By the way, it seems obvious that some people, including Moran, haven’t read the study (thanks, neil), not even its abstract. The 600K is actually excess deaths.
RSA
Oops, Pb beat me to the punch on my first quote.
Paul L.
No, I would say Pro-choice liberal Feminists enjoy getting abortions.
Since you brought it up I have a retort to Pb that in supporting a in man’s right to choose/ men’s reproductive rights means I am against personal responsibility.
It is not taking personal responsibility if the government forced you to take responsibility.
Someone with personal responsibility would support the child without the courts being involved.
Question how many were killed in Kosavo? I can not find any studies on that.
Pixie
It looks like a very small plane…they think it could be that or a chopper
Punchy
Some idiot T-boned an apartment building in his small Cessna plane. Meanwhile, America collectively Goes Fucking Nuts over an accident.
Punchy
Damn…does that mean we lost one witty, funny, and mightly prescient B-J commenter?
ET
Mike beat me to it in the very first post no less……
jaime
It’s being reported as a fixed wing aircraft.
Perry Como
Funded by George Soros.
cd6
If God didn’t want the Iraqis to be killed, then He wouldn’t have made them so killable.
jaime
From Drudge:
Motherf***er has his priorities, don’t he?
Tsulagi
A short drive by on LGF seemed to show they’re mainly pissed at The Lancet for publishing the study. One comment…
Yeah that’s it. They hate us for our gun rights. Be afraid, be very very afraid, it’s a conspiracy to take your gun.
jaime
Are they aware that Saddam Hussein allowed every house in Iraq to have a gun?
Krista
Christ, you’re beyond retarded. You based that opinion on two things:
1. One woman on a blog who’s getting an abortion (and will be glad to have it done and over with) because she was given the runaround on the morning-after pill,
2. One magazine encouraging women who’ve had abortions to stop being ashamed of it (not being ashamed of having done something is NOT the same thing as enjoying having done it.)
Using your logic, I could say that slender, sandy-haired North American men enjoy mass murder, and I’d actually have a stronger case than you do.
BlogReeder
Rather than debate the idea that we have lost Iraq, that we have no real plan other than ‘staying the course,’ and various other issues of importance
John..John.. Tim F. I can understand but YOU?…
Let’s see… 655,000 / 1300 = 503. So in order to believe this figure you have to accept this. Has there yet been such a tragic day when this many Iraqis have been reported killed? This would be average, some are more and some are less. 503 x 30 = 15000. This many would have had to die each month to support that figure.
This estimate just seems too high and to release this right before an election is highly suspicious.
chopper
i’m a pro-choice liberal feminist. and i enjoy the hell out of getting abortions.
ThymeZone
That’s right. I am going to go with the US Government’s estimates.
Oh wait … THEY DON’T FUCKING HAVE ONE.
How can that be? Iraq, the most inmportant country on earth if you believe the assholes in charge of the US, and our own government has no reviewable estimate of casualties?
How the HELL can they conduct a war, and manage an “emerging democracy” if they don’t know this?
How the HELL can you believe anything they say on the subject AT ALL if they have no formal estimate of their own?
Ryan S.
503 seems like a reasonable number to me. You have to remember that there are 26000000 people in Iraq so 503 isn’t too unplausible.
Pb
Paul L.,
And to that I would say that you’re an idiot. Really, can you back that nonsense up *at all*?
I’m not quite sure where you’re going with this, but… I will say that of course it’s better if you can do these things without the courts being involved, if you have a good relationship built on trust with the woman in question. But ultimately she does have both rights *and* responsibilities that men do not have, because of her unique biological role. And frankly, I think that’s a lot more realistic and fair than the Old Testament wisdom on this (Genesis 3:16), back when men had the rights, and women had the responsibilities:
Paul L.
So what magazine is encouraging men who mass murder to stop being ashamed of it.
Unless you are counting video game magazines.
RSA
To me either. I think some people are just having a hard time wrapping their heads around numbers that are too large to be familiar. For example, if you were to ask a random person on the street how many people die in the U.S. every day, over all causes, what kinds of answers would you get? I’d bet only a vanishingly small number of responses would be in the neighborhood of 7000, which is not far from the real value (about 2.5 million deaths in the U.S. per year).
Bruce Moomaw
Getting back to the Wormtongue business: I see that “NeverYetMelted” provides further proof of Walter Cronkite’s dictum: “Until I started surfing the net, I had no idea there we so many idiots in this country.” Note that he thinks (A) that our mistake in both the Korean and Vietnam Wars was not going for “total victory” (thereby almost certainly getting into atomic wars with Russia in the first case and China in the second), and (B) that every American should be “hard, stoic, isolate, and a killer.” Obviously, what did melt quite a while back is his brain.
Joey
Good question, but it doesn’t make the point you think it does. The Kosovo intervention wasn’t based on one giant lie. It was an international attempt to stop an ongoing genocide. Try as you like, Kosovo and Iraq have very little in common, outside of the US military being involved.
chopper
don’t forget ‘good looking’.
Joey
And according to Wikipedia (take it with a grain of salt, I suppose) 12,000 ethnic Albanians were killed and 3,000 Serbs were killed, civilian and military.
Pb
RSA,
And assuming everyone’s numbers are right, note that 503/26,000,000
Pb
Argh. Frickin’ HTML. Nevermind.
Steve
No, what you said is that the idea that “women agonize over the decision to have a abortion” is nothing but a “talking point.” That’s pure asshole talk.
Larv
Blogreeder,
The whole point of using a household survey like the Hopkins team did is that it captures unreported deaths. This is why their estimate is so much higher than those that rely on reported deaths, like IBC.
It seems too high? Okay, everyone, we can just do away with the whole field of statistical forecasting. From now on, whenever there’s a question that you would normally try to answer with polls or surveys, just ask Blogreeder what number seems right. He apparently has some sort of sixth sense for these things.
Seriously, on what basis does it seem too high? I’ve heard this a lot today, and it’s just mind-boggling to hear someone make such a claim without any kind of support.
Paul L.
Other than Ethnic cleaning and Mass graves. Where are the over 100,000 dead in mass graves?
It is a talking point. Not all women who get a abortion agonize over the decision. There are some pro-choicers who view getting a abortion the same as getting a boob-job or taking a birth control pill. A Medical Procedure.
As a after-thought, I should not have say that all Pro-choice liberal Feminists enjoy abortion. I am sure no one would “enjoy” getting a abortion or boob-job. They might be happy with the results. But the procedure is uncomfortable. (However I am guessing this since I have had neither procedure)
I was trying to be flip and failed. But it was fun to invoke the outrage.
However, Feminists do seem have a very casual attitude towards abortion.
HyperIon
but not as casual as Paul L’s attitude toward the truth.
RSA
What’s the margin of error on that estimate, by the way? And is it possible that “this estimate just seems too high”?
BlogReeder
Wouldn’t the daily bombings and/or body counts be higher than they are? I’m basing my belief on the lack of independent supporting reporting in support of this report.
Vladi G
There are some Republicans who like to bugger young boys. So using Paul’s example, I can extrapolate that to mean that the Republican party stands up for the right of grown men to bugger little boys.
BlogReeder
What would the normal attrition rate be in such a population?
We shouldn’t attribute All Iraqi deaths due to the war.
Paul L.
Ask William Cohen. He said it
As in 9/11 truth?
And this bugger little boys contingent, they are a vocal part of the Republican party? They have marches from buggering little boys.
i.e.
NOW/NARAL
John S.
Folks, you know Paul is an idiot. His blog is called Kingdom of Idiots. He has declared himself the king of this kingdom.
What more do you need to know?
SeesThroughIt
I remember a few months ago when the UN announced that program to curb the acquisition of assault rifles by terrorist groups and the like, Stephen Colbert did a predictably awesome bit about it on his show. In character, he announced that the damn dirty UN just wanted to “take away our guns!” he then read a clip from the UN program statement saying, “This is not an effort to take guns from law-abiding citizens,” then retorted, in character, “They’re trying to take our guns!” He then read yet another clip from the UN reiterating that it was not an attempt to override the second amendment, yadda yadda yadda, and followed that up with, “My god, they’re trying to take our guns!
What were the wingnuts screeching the following day? “The UN is trying to take our guns!” It was like the entire thing had been scripted and enacted perfectly.
Say, Paul, did you notice the lovely comments the abortion-getting blogger got from fine, upstanding individuals who share your views? Here’s a sampling:
Lovely people, those wingers, eh Paul? Fine slices of humanity.
Pb
BlogReeder,
Probably the rate they computed from their initial survey, which covered both pre-war and post-war deaths.
Indeed. But we should read the study first, because that’s an excellent example of exactly what they didn’t do.
Pb
SeesThroughIt,
My understanding was that Stephen Colbert got to that one a bit late, and the reason the UN made all those statements was because of the reaction they got from unhinged wingnuts. But in any case, yeah, it was brilliant.
DougJ
That’s 600,000 less people who want to behead us all.
Retief
That’s not entirely true. The CIA world factbook estimates that the deathrate in Iraq is 5.37 deaths/1,000 population, pretty much exactly what it was before the invasion. In a population of 26,783,383 that gives us a total of deaths in Iraq from any cause estimated for 2006 of ~143,827 dead people. Their methodology section seems to suggest that they just pulled this number out by looking at the age of the population. It seems low to me. Of course the CIA also claims that net migration for Iraq is zero for this year which seems unlikely.
The same source also gives us a birth rate of 31.98 births/1,000 population and an Infant mortality rate 48.64 deaths/1,000 live births. 31.98/1000 times a population of 26,783,383 gives you ~856,533 babies born in Iraq. multiply that by 48.64/1000 and you get ~41,662 dead babies in Iraq this year. This means that only 100,000 of the other 25.9 million non-babies in Iraq could die this year for all these numbers to add up. Maybe that’s right in a young population like this one but it seems silly to claim that the deathrate during the current war there is the same as it was with no war.
So certainly they don’t have a coherent one.
The CIA’s 5.37/1000 is not so different from the 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people that the study found durring the preinvasion period. In the post-invasion period it was 13.3 deaths per 1,000 people. Clearly mortality is higher than before, as one would expect with a freaking war going on. If mortality roughly doubled that gives about an extra 140,000 deaths a year (if the ~5/1000 rate is right) for three years is 420,000 more dead for whatever reasons than would have been true had the rate stayed the same. If it’s more like 2.3 times what it was, you go up from there. And if you start with a higher rate pre-invasion that just makes the absolute numbers bigger if you generalize the results of these guys found.
People seem to be getting excited about the 600,000 nubmer but in a population of 26 million over the course of three and a half years it’s not outrageous. If the death rate had stayed identical at 5.37/1000 you’d have ~500,000 deaths during those three an a half years. Is it so hard to believe that the death rate has increased during the invasion and susequent violence?
Tsulagi
I really, really wish Darwin would get to work on these idiots. How about helping the process along and send these fine, upstanding Christians to Baghdad to share their message of love. Let them hand out flyers outside mosques preaching about the evils of abortion. That’ll work.
Why not be a modern day Paul, Paul? Lead your like-minded flock to Baghdad to do good work. Just like another day at Disneyland.
ThymeZone
I know, I am one of those weird people who actually read the CIA factbook pages.
My assertion was based on today’s response from Spud Chump, President of the United States, when he was asked about the death toll. From the transcript I can only conclude that he, and his pals, have abolutely no clue whatever. If they have one, they are covering it up.
r€nato
The CIA world factbook estimates that the deathrate in Iraq is 5.37 deaths/1,000 population, pretty much exactly what it was before the invasion.
I believe the Lancet study was addressing the 600,000 figure as excess deaths, that is, those not due to ordinary causes of death such as old age.
Retief
No clue whatever. I’d have to agree with you there.
bud
It’s a study produced by the same people who brought you the October 2004 study – who admitted that they timed the release to influence the election, and, hey, it’s October again – which was thoroughly debunked. Give it a couple of weeks to let everybody analyze it, and we’ll probably see the same.
Oh, wait, you wanted hokey reasoning. Nevermind.
Retief
r€nato,
Precisely, because in the households they interviewed the deathrate more than doubled. What is your guestimate of the change in the deathrate in Iraq due to the invasion deaths and the continuing violence. From 5.5/1000 to what? 11/1000? 8/1000? 6.5/1000? Even if your guess is a low 6.5/1000 that’s 91,000 “excess” dead versus the baseline.
phillytales
Freedom is hard work.
demimondian
Um, bud? You don’t know what you’re talking about. You might go read the studies in question — registration is free — and look at the method the investigators used, and then decide what you can challenge without looking like an idiot.
Regrettably, you’ll find that the number of things you can challenge without leaving your mom’s basement is small. You’d need to go to Baltimore to look at the primary source material.
Steve
Thoroughly debunked! It was THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED! I don’t know how, I don’t know why, but I read some blog posts that seemed to really really criticize it, and that’s how I know it was THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED! One of the world’s most respected medical journals printed a new study using the same methodology because they enjoy enhancing their reputation by running THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED materials!
I’d cite you chapter and verse as to how it was THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED, but there’s obviously no need, as all my friends in the righty blogosphere already know that it’s THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED!
David Zincavage
For John Cole:
http://neveryetmelted.com/?p=1707
demimondian
You know, Steve, you’re right. David Zincavage has also pointed out that the study is THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED. He would be glad to tell you why, but he really is too busy explaining about how the THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED people from Johns Hopkins would be peeing their pants in fear if they visited a dangerous place like Iraq. Or Rwanda, during and after the genocide. Or Zaire/Congo during and after the fall of Mobotu. Or…any of a bunch of other places where brutal people had recently committed terrible acts.
Oh, and which they’d visited. Just so that their measurements could be THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED by ad hominem wielding ankle biters who want to scare the rest of the world enough that they don’t feel like cowards.
John Cole
Thank you David. The most precious part of that THOROUGH DEBUNKING was the insinuation from Omar that by citing the study I am playing on the suffering of Iraqi’s:
Special.
Steve
I confess, I’m so desperate for someone to attempt an actual critique of the merits of the Lancer study, I went and read that whole post, at the blog with the pretentious Trevino-esque name. Guess what? Tons of rhetoric about dishonest leftists, not a single substantive point!
But the post did link to three other blogs which have responded to the study, so I followed those links as well. Guess what? Tons of rhetoric about dishonest leftists, not a single substantive point!
Maybe I was too hard on Mac for arguing that the 2004 Lancet study overcounted by including Fallujah (it didn’t). I mean, he may have been wrong, but a) he admitted it and b) he’s the only one all day who’s even TRIED!
The righty blogs do seem to be getting a kick out of quoting this one Iraqi who’s offended by the dishonest motives of the leftists behind this study. All I can say is, I hope John enjoyed this attempt to play the absolute moral authority card!
Pb
Yes, “this one Iraqi” who just happens to be one of the Middle East Editors of Pajamas Media. Here’s an interview:
And here’s Howie Kurtz:
Steve
Are these the two guys from Iraq the Model? I mean, I respect their opinion, but when the wingnuts constantly trot out the same two guys to back up everything they say, you kinda start to wonder.
Pb
Steve,
Bingo.
demimondian
There are legitimate critiques possible of this study. One could go back to the houses in question and check death certificates. One would need to recruit Iraqi colleagues to attend, but it could be done. One could run a a parallel study. If the authors of the study are genuinely dishonest — that is, if this is actually a hack job — then you’d expect to be able to come back with a solid refutation.
The problem is that the method used is standard, and so the estimate can only be “wrong” if it’s fed bad data or if the math is incorrectly performed. It’s perfectly possible that the study is, in fact, wrong: the authors could have selectively chosen data, their volunteers could have brought in fake data, they could have run the wrong analysis, etc.
And what do you do if you go out and come back with similar numbers? Suppress them? Or publish them, and expose yourself to the right-wing wolves?
tBone
This sounds like a perfect job for the Debunkers in the rightwing blogosphere. What do you say, fellas? Airline tickets on me.
Personally I’d suppress them. Wolves are scary. I saw a commercial about it a couple of years ago.
Ryan S.
Here’s a good post from an actual math person.
Kurt
Hey, whats a few lives, at least they got that “Flag Burning” bill passed, and we don’t have to worry about that happening anymore. Good job Congress.
amreiakgulag
These people were dead when we got there.
Saddam did it!
willie
this is a time tested jem of a republican excuse,
“well i haven’t seen that report so i really can’t comment on it.”
Ben
2 more GOP deflections:
1) Most of those killed are either brown or gay, no loss
2) What I’m hearing which is sort of scary is they all want the US to stay in Iraq. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality and so many of the people in the area are, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this–this death is working very well for them.
Steve
Knowing how those guys do business, they’ll probably start publishing the pictures and contact info of the Iraqi families on the web.
Anyway, I finally found a blog post that raises some thoughtful points about the survey. Mind you, I had to go to Daily Kos to find it!
It’s increasingly seeming to me that the only way these results are not reasonably accurate is if there was actual fraud in the data-gathering process.
hit_escape
Freedom means never having to say you’re sorry.
Soony
So, that is what Rumsfield meant when he said ” They (Iraqis) will get tired of dying.” I never could understand how someone can get TIRED of dying. He made that statement about two years ago when the estimate of Iraqis killed was between 250.000 to 300.000.
Mark
Civilian deaths! Hell, all terrorists are civilians!
That sure looks like we’re definitely winning the war on terror and we’re just getting started. Just wait till we get the nukes online.
sulphurdunn
If the mean daily death toll from violence over the past two years is set at 100 (not unreasonable), then 73,000 people have been killed directly in just the past 48 months. Non-violent deaths from war related causes can be reasonably expected to have been at least four times that number (again not unreasonable). If demographic data on pre-war death rates justifies doubling that figure…so be it.
jay walker
650,000?
That’s just a comma.
Hedley Lamarr
Freedom is “slow and cumbersome” and besides, we got diverted over the problem of salted peanuts.
Gerhardt
According to our administration, the lower limit is 30,000 killed. This report says the upper limit is 600,000 killed.
Regardless of whether one supports or defends the administration, a reasonable person would say this equation is true:
600,000 > x > 30,000
where x = # Iraqi sons and daughters killed
Another item a reasonable person would find valid is that these deaths occurred under our control. We run Iraq. We have the largest military there, we control the government, we control the oil, etc.
The question for me is: why is “x” amount of people killed by violent means under our watch acceptible?
I posit that arguing about the limits of this equation is a sign of tacit admission of the failure of the operation.
DC Exile
How ’bout Lenin’s old quote on why it was necessary to kill so many people to institute the Soviet state (also very appropriate to those modern-day Trotskyites, Neo-cons): “Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.” It’s pithy, dismissive and incredibly arrogant in the face of such human tragedy. Perfect for Neo-cons of all political stripes.
Martin
Don’t forget Donny’s infamous “In a free society, people can do what they want” (referring to post-invasion looting) I guess that covers being kidnapped, tortured, blown up etc..
KansasKowboy
If you adjusted the ratio of that to the population of the USA and if those deaths would have happened here, the count would be over 6,000,000. So if 6,000,000 people killed each other in this country with the help of a foriegn occcupying army over the last three years, wouldn’t we think that there was something seriously wrong?
jman
The number one reason should blame Clinton.
Freakaloin
but remember…an iraqi is only considered 2/5th of a person so its not nearly as bad you think. isn’t that right wingnuts?
Timtimes
What sulphurdnn said. Then there’s always common sense that would bring about the same conclusion, but Thugtards only say what they get paid to say by
the office of strategic information.
Remember that the Thug rats are being PAID to be vocal SHILLS. They value
the money uber alle.
Enjoy.
{õ£õ}
Here is the report.
http://www.thelancet.com/webfiles/images/journals/lancet/s0140673606694919.pdf
It may be thick for the amerikan idol crowd but it is available for peer review and casual viewing
That’s more than can be said about the US rummy numberz which are plucked from the drudges of the pond.
Daily body counts? Are you crazy? The US now only counts homicides by certain methods, like gunfire. Getting blown up by a bomb is out of fashion and no longer counts.
The study simply determined the death rate in Iraq by comparing the number of deaths from ALL causes before and since the March 2003 US invasion/occupation.
Prior to the invasion, the death rate was 5.5 death per 1000 per year. Since the invasion, the death rate was 13.3 for the 40 month period of the study.
The only thing not believable about the 655K murders to me is that 13.3 per 1000 per year seems a bit low.
Thomas Mc
Gerry Studds.
And Bill Clinton. If he’d just arrested Dubya, Cheney & Rumsfeld in 2000 when he had a chance, none of this could have happened. It’s all his fault.
David B.
First the Republicans get blasted for UNDERPERFORMING Democrats on virtually every aspect of American life that matters and NOW you’re blasting them for OUTPERFORMING Democrats on unnecessarily killing innocent civilians.
Why can’t you Lib/Dems make up your minds?
brooksfoe
“We were attacked!”
Ed Drone
“5. Freedom isn’t Free. Freedom is messy.
5a. Freedom is hard.”
No need to separate them — make it a mantra:
5. Freedom isn’t Free. Freedom is messy. Freedom is hard work. Freedom is for those who can tolerate a small amount of death and destruction.
Ed
brooksfoe
One could go back to the houses in question and check death certificates. One would need to recruit Iraqi colleagues to attend, but it could be done.
Yeah, one could — but the researchers already did that. 92% of those asked produced the death certificate. Which is pretty good, considering that heading down to town hall for a death certificate isn’t usually your top priority when you’re scrounging about for enough money to buy a couple of meals a day and there’s shooting in the streets.
Bluestocking
Good lord…entry #1 on this Top Ten list would almost be laughable if it didn’t demonstrate such a jaw-dropping level of utterly wanton ignorance on the part of the anonymous author. In this day and age of the internet, anyone who isn’t altogether clear on what an epidemiologist does has no excuse for not looking it up. If this chucklehead (there’s no other word for a person like this) had done that, they would have discovered that an epidemiologist specializes in infectious disease and that it’s not the same as a dermatologist!
Salo
“9/11 changed everything.”
FastMovingCloud
Tony J,
You aren’t, by any chance, a speech writer for the Shrub, are you? You even have the expressions and gestures he should use. Without those, he would be bound to do something completely inappropriate (more so than usual, I mean).
squiddy
uhh, how about:
-“Not true, they were 655,000 unrelated acts of passion.”
john
Here is my coulter impression: They killed 3000 people in the WTC attack…that means the life of an american is worth about 218 iraqis. We should be happy that our value is increasing.
Emilym
600,000 people who weren’t even american citizens? OH, I am so sick of the world being broken down for the simple consumption of those who matter, and those who simply don’t. Obviously those who don’t are ‘tolerating’ this genocide because they choose ‘freedom’. American freedom to do whatever America wants. Read Bush. And by the way, for those still braying American superiority, folks like Paul L., you’re not free anymore either, fool, you just don’t get it yet.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
Has there yet been such a tragic day when this many Iraqis have been reported killed?
Have you in the US seen any story about someone in Ireland dying, this year? At all? I mean, since we’re assuming that the American media is in the business of reporting every death in a foreign country.
This goes to show that people in Ireland live forever.
BC
1. It’s Clinton’s fault.
2. That 665,000 isn’t a count of civilians, its a count of terrorists.
=my2c
Al Qaeda did it!
The War on Terror = 911 Response
On 9/15/06 Bush said on the White House lawn that he found out about explosives placed high in the WTC buildings on 911. He said he found this out by torturing an Arab whom he called the mastermind of the 911 attacks, KSM.
For 5 years, the testimony of the FDNY regarding the explosives in the WTC was called conspiracy theory.
half a million dead? Al Qaeda did it! 19 Boxcutter-Wielding Highjackers did it!
bert
It’s the UN, stupid.
Tony J
Fastmovingcloud,
The scary thing is, I wrote that speech before reading the text of El Residente’s latest Press Conference.
I was taking the piss. But then the brainless waste-of-skin goes and says more or less the same bloody thing.
Yeah. That’s scary.
Nancy
It’s the capitalist way: outsourcing death. We kill them over there so that we don’t have to kill them here. We give them liberty and give them death at the same time, with apologies to Patrick Henry.
Lawrence
“Top Ten GOP Excuses Regarding the Casualty Estimates”
Number 11: It’s a partisan hit piece on the administration in which the casualty count was deliberately overestimated by 625 thousand.
“Moreover, the report’s authors have been revealed as anti-war partisans. One is a former Democrat congressional candidate, the other recently made outlandish accusations about the motivations of the governments leading the war effort”
http://newsbusters.org/node/8310
grendelkhan
Actual quote from Hot Air commenter Gregor: