Iraqi Dead May Total 600,000

[MichaelFJF]

The Health Ministry just released figures today (AP - no I won't provide a link - I read it in the paper - look it up yourself) that indicated 2600 civilians died in September. They cited a few other monthy numbers that were similar. Extrpolate that and see if you get 600,000. The OP is a politically motivated joke. Period.

 

[Charlie V]

The hard, empirical evidence just doesn't support that number, which is closer to 50 people per day, which comes closer to 60,000 people, including soldier casualties from the invasion itself.

I take it that's not coming from the liberal media?

I was just being funny. As I pointed out earlier, these numbers don't mean a lot. They're just numbers.

If there were 60 deaths, that's way too many. If there were 60 deaths, it is an horrific tragedy.

In all honesty, I consider it silly to argue.

Whether it's 60,000 or 600,000, can any of us really imagine it?

When you get beyond a certain number, it might as well be, "a trillion zillion gillion." It doesn't mean anything. It's just a number.

Let's say it was 60,000. It really doesn't matter. 6,000.. 60,000.. 600,000.. 6,000,000,000.

What matters is.. even if it was 60, or 600, if you put human faces on the numbers, considered their lives, their hopes, their dreams, their families, their children and parents, the tragedy would become real to us.

If there are 60,000, then I'd like to see 60,000 photographs of them as kids on the playground. Of those that are babies, I'd like to hear about their births, their families. Of those that are children, I'd like to know how they were doing in school, what the name of their best friends are, and what thier favorite flavor of ice cream is. Of those that are adults, I'd like to know which were married, and who caught the bouquet if they have that tradition. I'd like to hear of their laughter, of their joys and their sorrows.

When we get through a few dozen of those, tell me 60,000 isn't a big number. Pretty much like 600,000 or 6 million, or 60 quatrillion zillion. It's all the same -- it's all more misery than my mind could begin to comprehend.

Charlie

 

[ScottBot]

The Health Ministry just released figures today (AP - no I won't provide a link - I read it in the paper - look it up yourself) that indicated 2600 civilians died in September. They cited a few other monthy numbers that were similar. Extrpolate that and see if you get 600,000. The OP is a politically motivated joke. Period.

2,600 x 36 months = 93,600, still far fewer than 600,000.

 

[Guttermouth]

The Health Ministry just released figures today (AP - no I won't provide a link - I read it in the paper - look it up yourself) that indicated 2600 civilians died in September. They cited a few other monthy numbers that were similar. Extrpolate that and see if you get 600,000. The OP is a politically motivated joke. Period.

Cool, we've only caused the deaths of tens of thousands, then, not hundreds of thousands. Thank goodness. I feel all warm and proud inside.

 

[Charlie V]

2,600 x 36 months = 93,600, still far fewer than 600,000.

Only 93,600 lives snuffed out? Yea! Whoo-hoo!

Guess what?

Here are the numbers dead on 9/11/01, not counting the hijackers, numbers from Wikipedia:

World Trade Center: 2,602 dead 24 listed as missing.
American 11: 88 dead
United 175: 59 dead
Pentagon: 125 dead
American 77: 59 dead
United 93: 40 dead.

I'll assume the 24 missing as dead.

2,997 dead from the 9/11/01 attacks.

93,600, you say?

2997 x 31.2 = 93,506.4

This war is worse than 31 September 11ths. It's more evil than the actions of 31 Osama Bin Ladins. Against a country completely innocent of guilt on the 9/11 attacks. Evil more than 31 times the evil that was unleashed on us on 9/11/01 has been unleashed on Iraq.

Charlie

 

[oldbetang]

Only 93,600 lives snuffed out? Yea! Whoo-hoo!

Guess what?

Here are the numbers dead on 9/11/01, not counting the hijackers, numbers from Wikipedia:

World Trade Center: 2,602 dead 24 listed as missing.
American 11: 88 dead
United 175: 59 dead
Pentagon: 125 dead
American 77: 59 dead
United 93: 40 dead.

I'll assume the 24 missing as dead.

2,997 dead from the 9/11/01 attacks.

93,600, you say?

2997 x 31.2 = 93,506.4

This war is worse than 31 September 11ths. It's more evil than the actions of 31 Osama Bin Ladins. Against a country completely innocent of guilt on the 9/11 attacks. Evil more than 31 times the evil that was unleashed on us on 9/11/01 has been unleashed on Iraq.

Charlie

The actual numbers are not nearly that high and the blame for those deaths does not lie with the US.The number of civilians killed by US military action amounts to somewhere between 2000 and 4000. While those deaths are regrettable, the blame for them lies primarily with Saddam Hussein.

 

[ScottBot]

Only 93,600 lives snuffed out? Yea! Whoo-hoo!

Guess what?

Here are the numbers dead on 9/11/01, not counting the hijackers, numbers from Wikipedia:

World Trade Center: 2,602 dead 24 listed as missing.
American 11: 88 dead
United 175: 59 dead
Pentagon: 125 dead
American 77: 59 dead
United 93: 40 dead.

I'll assume the 24 missing as dead.

2,997 dead from the 9/11/01 attacks.

93,600, you say?

2997 x 31.2 = 93,506.4

This war is worse than 31 September 11ths. It's more evil than the actions of 31 Osama Bin Ladins. Against a country completely innocent of guilt on the 9/11 attacks. Evil more than 31 times the evil that was unleashed on us on 9/11/01 has been unleashed on Iraq.

Charlie

I agree. Why aren't you ranting and railing about the terrorist who are creating all this death and misery.

 

[Charlie V]

I agree. Why aren't you ranting and railing about the terrorist who are creating all this death and misery.

Bush?

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

The actual numbers are not nearly that high and the blame for those deaths does not lie with the US.

Not the US. Just Bush. And a few others. Cheney, Rumsfeld. Those who decieved us to enter this unnecessary war.

Charlie

 

[oldbetang]

I agree. Why aren't you ranting and railing about the terrorist who are creating all this death and misery.

Good question!

 

[dlamberth]

I agree. Why aren't you ranting and railing about the terrorist who are creating all this death and misery.

The actions of Bush and Company have resulted in a LOT more deaths than have the terrorist. Who should we be ranting and railing against?

.

 

[dlamberth]

Comment Of Sen. Patrick Leahy
On The Study Of Iraqi Deaths,
By The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School Of Public Health,
As Published In The Medical Journal, The Lancet
Wednesday, October 11, 2006​

“These numbers are shocking and illuminate a tragic reality in Iraq that has been consistently and callously ignored or downplayed by the Bush Administration to conceal facts about the war from the American people and from the world.

“While some of these deaths are undoubtedly insurgents who have engaged in violence against our troops, the overwhelming majority are Iraqi civilians who have never been our enemy.

“Without a clear picture of the situation on the ground, policymakers are flying blind in making decisions about Iraq, and so is the public. The lack of oversight of the war by a compliant and complicit Republican Congress has helped the White House hide the truth from the American people. In the meantime studies like this have tried to fill the information vacuum. Despite the President’s efforts today to discount these findings, these researchers have earned credibility over the years for their demographic studies. But whether this estimate is high, low or the same as the actual numbers of deaths of Iraqi civilians, the fact is that chaos, misery and insecurity in Iraq are compounding the effects of the poor planning and bad decisions that the Bush Administration continues to make in Iraq. ‘Stay the course’ long ago became untenable as a strategy for success there.

“At what point will the White House and Republican leaders in Congress recognize that their incompetent, myopic policy in Iraq has unleashed a human catastrophe with more misery each passing day? The Administration is trying to discredit and deflect attention from this report. It would be far better if they would recognize the need to change course in Iraq and begin bringing our troops home from this deadly quagmire.”


http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200610/101106.html

 

[ScottBot]

Bush?

Charlie

sheesh.

 

[ScottBot]

The actions of Bush and Company have resulted in a LOT more deaths than have the terrorist. Who should we be ranting and railing against?

.

How many people has the President killed? I think it grossly unfair and rather ignorant to cay that everyone who has died in the world in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 thusfar is the responsibility of the President. I'll assume he is guilty of the Tsunami and Katrina because he didn't sign the Kyoto Accord either.

 

[MachZer0]

I take it that's not coming from the liberal media?

I was just being funny. As I pointed out earlier, these numbers don't mean a lot. They're just numbers.

If there were 60 deaths, that's way too many. If there were 60 deaths, it is an horrific tragedy.

In all honesty, I consider it silly to argue.

Whether it's 60,000 or 600,000, can any of us really imagine it?

When you get beyond a certain number, it might as well be, "a trillion zillion gillion." It doesn't mean anything. It's just a number.

Let's say it was 60,000. It really doesn't matter. 6,000.. 60,000.. 600,000.. 6,000,000,000.

What matters is.. even if it was 60, or 600, if you put human faces on the numbers, considered their lives, their hopes, their dreams, their families, their children and parents, the tragedy would become real to us.

If there are 60,000, then I'd like to see 60,000 photographs of them as kids on the playground. Of those that are babies, I'd like to hear about their births, their families. Of those that are children, I'd like to know how they were doing in school, what the name of their best friends are, and what thier favorite flavor of ice cream is. Of those that are adults, I'd like to know which were married, and who caught the bouquet if they have that tradition. I'd like to hear of their laughter, of their joys and their sorrows.

When we get through a few dozen of those, tell me 60,000 isn't a big number. Pretty much like 600,000 or 6 million, or 60 quatrillion zillion. It's all the same -- it's all more misery than my mind could begin to comprehend.

Charlie

Sounds like you're saying that no war should be fought. Is that right?

 

[MachZer0]

The actions of Bush and Company have resulted in a LOT more deaths than have the terrorist. Who should we be ranting and railing against?

.

That's because Bush gets credit for deaths caused by American soldiers and deaths caused by terrorists.

 

[ScottBot]

That's because Bush gets credit for deaths caused by American soldiers and deaths caused by terrorists.

You forgot that Bush also gets credit for unpredictable acts of nature, disease, famine, and traffic accidents. Meteor deaths are being considered.

 

[Charlie V]

Sounds like you're saying that no war should be fought. Is that right?

I'm saying in this case, no war should have been declared. No pre-emptive invasion should have taken place.

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

That's because Bush gets credit for deaths caused by American soldiers and deaths caused by terrorists.

Bush's war has created terrorists.

Many of these "terrorists," in the alternate universe where Bush did not declare war, were regular people working regular jobs in peacetime Iraq, people who would stay as far away from Al Queda as possible, people who found Al Queda horrifying. Then, along comes Bush's invasion -- the greatest recruiting tool Al Queda could have ever wished for.

I'm not the only one who's certain that Bush's war has created more terrorists than it's killed. Many military officials and generals have said as much.

Charlie

 

[MachZer0]

You forgot that Bush also gets credit for unpredictable acts of nature, disease, famine, and traffic accidents. Meteor deaths are being considered.

We shouldn't forget Cory Lidle.