Freedom Is On The March

Their point is not that the U.S. is killing them, it is that they were not likely to have been killed if the U.S. had not invaded.

 

Just not this many thousands is all they're saying.

 

They were not "dying terrible deaths..by the thousands" there due to disease or dehydration before we got there and blew up all the infrastructure so we could sell it off to the adminstration's corporate buddies.

You're just as dead.
THAT'S what the study says.

 

Saddam is accused of killing a little more than 300,000 Iraqis during his reign, which began in 1979.

Obviously, that isn't ideal. But the deaths of 300,000 Iraqis over a 30-year span is a helluva lot more enjoyable than 450,000-700,000 deaths in a three-year span.

The point: We knew we were worse off in this country because of this idiotic war, but through the magic of spin, we were asked to believe that the poor ol' Iraqis were about to be living the good life. That's obviously not the case.

 

So if we aren't doing anybody any good, why are we there?

 

Because of freedom.

 

Junkie, the choice isn't between "invading foreign countries" or "sealing off your borders." Please.

Fredo and His Band of Thugs invade a foreign country--an invasion based on lies , completely fuck things up, are responsible for the deaths of several thousand American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians and it's up to the critics to clean their shit up?

 

Fenian is funny.

He denigrates blogs except for when they meet his purpose.

Just like he denigrates everyone - unless they agree with his worldview.

 

Chris, I think Fenian only denigrates the political versions of "The World is Flat" blogs.

 

There's only so long you can hide behind those Russian Bill fantasy scenarios.

 

I'm sorry, this study just doesn't pass the smell test with me. It was put out by a group whose previous study was widely criticized for a questionable methodology (as mentioned in the NY Times article). The last study, as with this one, was also released just weeks before a major American election (that time the 2004 Presdenital election). The authors have acknowledged that they received an expedited review to make this issue of the Lancet (according to NPR). The editor of the Lancet (Richard Horton) is a high profile critic of the Iraq war, speaking at a number of public anti-war rallies in the UK.

The 600,000 works out to roughly 2.5% of the total population. During WWII, estimates range that from 500,000 to 900,000 (2.0% to 3.8% of the total population) of the Japanese civilian population died as a result of the war (this figure also includes effects of famine and disease). During WWII, unlike in Iraq, there was all out warfare against the civilian population including the fire bombing of most of the major cities not to mention the dropping of TWO atomic bombs.

 

From today's Bush press conference:

“I applaud the Iraqis for their courage in the face of violence. I am amazed that this is a society that so wants to be free that there’s a level of violence they’re willing to tolerate.”


Things that make you go..... "hmm?"