true_blue_bill Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 91 Confirmed dead today, and that's basically an average day in Iraq, right? 365 days times 100 [averaging up to 100 from 96] and 36,500 a year. Now we know that reporters, public health officials, GIs, etc. can't really get around Iraq at all to see the carnage. With this in mind the larger numbers of hundreds of thousands of dead since the invasion makes since. True, earlier in the occupation things were not as bloody, but the death toll surely must be over 100,000, at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 91 Confirmed dead today, and that's basically an average day in Iraq, right? 365 days times 100 [averaging up to 100 from 96] and 36,500 a year. Now we know that reporters, public health officials, GIs, etc. can't really get around Iraq at all to see the carnage. With this in mind the larger numbers of hundreds of thousands of dead since the invasion makes since. True, earlier in the occupation things were not as bloody, but the death toll surely must be over 100,000, at least 807514[/snapback] Study published last week said over 600k. It was in all the papers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Bill Maher knows the answer to this an exchange with Bill Maher and Danielle Pletka: when the host brought up the report last week claiming that 655,000 Iraqis have been killed since the start of the war.... Pletka: From left to right, people who understand about doing these sorts of studies agree that thing is horse manure if I can say that on cable TV. It is absolute rubbish. (side chatter) I’m sorry, my children are watching. Seriously speaking, you can say that people have died… Maher: Whatever… Pletka: No, no, it’s not whatever. You’ve got to remember that a million people have died under Saddam Hussein… Maher: Excuse me kids, but stop watching…what ass did you pull that out of? Pletka: I pulled that out of the U.N. ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Bill Maher knows the answer to this an exchange with Bill Maher and Danielle Pletka: 808155[/snapback] Pletka: I pulled that out of the U.N. ass. And the biggest ass, is leaving the UN in January. Ta Ta Kofi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 And the biggest ass, is leaving the UN in January. Ta Ta Kofi 808178[/snapback] lawl @ ur sig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 UPI reporting on The Lancet's report The Lancet is a well-respected, non-political institution. Don't like that? How about Johns Hopkins. Even if the toll is "only" 100,000 - The US wanted the world to stop everything when we lost fewer than 3000 to a horrific attack. I challenge anyone here to consider losing 100,000 Americans, anywhere, and then to say honestly that it's no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 UPI reporting on The Lancet's report The Lancet is a well-respected, non-political institution. Don't like that? How about Johns Hopkins. Even if the toll is "only" 100,000 - The US wanted the world to stop everything when we lost fewer than 3000 to a horrific attack. I challenge anyone here to consider losing 100,000 Americans, anywhere, and then to say honestly that it's no big deal. 808208[/snapback] How about reading the Lancet? Has anyone other than me read the actual published article, or only what Bloomberg and UPI are spoon-feeding you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 ...only what Bloomberg ... spoon-feeding you? 808234[/snapback] ... there's an image I don't need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 So Saddam killed a million people? That's quite a few. He's a bad guy. Of course, he did rule for, what, 34 years? So a million people divided by 34 years equals about 30,000 per year. Sounds about the same to me. The math does make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 So Saddam killed a million people? That's quite a few. He's a bad guy. Of course, he did rule for, what, 34 years? So a million people divided by 34 years equals about 30,000 per year. Sounds about the same to me. The math does make sense. 808291[/snapback] Actually more like 20-25 years. Which doesn't really diminish your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 So Saddam killed a million people? That's quite a few. He's a bad guy. Of course, he did rule for, what, 34 years? So a million people divided by 34 years equals about 30,000 per year. Sounds about the same to me. The math does make sense. 808291[/snapback] Yeah, well. It got worse in his last few years of rule. After he got that " Best of Three Stooges" DVD set in 1995, all hell broke lose, dead bodies all over the place from bad nuggies. Sad, really sad. Iraq's being blinded , is really a problem. Had they seen the DVD, they would have known the old " put you hand up to you nose trick" to stop the blinding of so many. I'm glad the Jews know this trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Yeah, well. It got worse in his last few years of rule. After he got that " Best of Three Stooges" DVD set in 1995, all hell broke lose, dead bodies all over the place from bad nuggies. Sad, really sad. Iraq's being blinded , is really a problem. Had they seen the DVD, they would have known the old " put you hand up to you nose trick" to stop the blinding of so many. I'm glad the Jews know this trick. 808302[/snapback] Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Actually more like 20-25 years. Which doesn't really diminish your point. 808299[/snapback] I think he was actual head of state for 23 years although I have always read that his reign or power/terror was really 34 years as he was the hatchet man for Bakr. But within months, the Baath party had been overthrown and he was jailed, remaining there until the party returned to power in a coup in July 1968. Showing ruthless determination that was to become a hallmark of his leadership, Saddam Hussein gained a position on the ruling Revolutionary Command Council. For years he was the power behind the ailing figure of the president, Ahmed Hassan Bakr. In 1979, he achieved his ambition of becoming head of state. The new president started as he intended to go on - putting to death dozens of his rivals. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1100529.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 So Saddam killed a million people? That's quite a few. He's a bad guy. Of course, he did rule for, what, 34 years? So a million people divided by 34 years equals about 30,000 per year. Sounds about the same to me. The math does make sense. 808291[/snapback] A million where? Maybe in one part of Iraq. I believe the number is closer to 3 million. Hell if I remember correct after Gulf I he supposedly killed 800,000 in southern Iraq alone for their treachery. How many Iranians were gassed and killed as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think he was actual head of state for 23 years although I have always read that his reign or power/terror was really 34 years as he was the hatchet man for Bakr.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1100529.stm 808318[/snapback] It's debatable, though, whether he really had enough power to truly accomplish mass murder before maybe 1976 or so. So let's split the difference and call it 30 years. Either way, he's a very very bad man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I challenge anyone here to consider losing 100,000 Americans, anywhere, and then to say honestly that it's no big deal. 808208[/snapback] Isn't that about the population of Berkeley? Sorry...what was the question again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
true_blue_bill Posted October 18, 2006 Author Share Posted October 18, 2006 Isn't that about the population of Berkeley?Sorry...what was the question again? 808403[/snapback] Or some rural counties in Mississippi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 UPI reporting on The Lancet's report The Lancet is a well-respected, non-political institution. Don't like that? How about Johns Hopkins. Even if the toll is "only" 100,000 - The US wanted the world to stop everything when we lost fewer than 3000 to a horrific attack. I challenge anyone here to consider losing 100,000 Americans, anywhere, and then to say honestly that it's no big deal. 808208[/snapback] Problem is, most of the killing's been done by Iraqis ON Iraqis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Isn't that about the population of Berkeley? 808403[/snapback] Don't think anyone would really miss those 100,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Problem is, most of the killing's been done by Iraqis ON Iraqis. 808673[/snapback] That would still be a result of the invasion, which is all the Lancet study was saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts