COMMENTS:
Voted : No
They barely report their own losses..
Pssst! Rightwingers ... this is another example of holding to principle even when politically inconvenient. You should try it sometime.
Voted : Yes
Thank you for being there, cathexis.
Voted : No
No, even the Pentagon has admitted to 'not counting' those civilians killed by mortar attacks and roadside bombs.
by mojo on Wed Oct 11, 06 8:52am
[+]
Voted : Yes
Yes. It has been all over the news. Just sickening to think about. Really a horror that did not need to have ever happened.
I don't know who is voting no. You must not be watching the news, because its been on every channel and in every paper the last few days.
AP NEW YORK
A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates.
The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."
In the new study, researchers attempt to calculate how many more Iraqis have died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. Their conclusion, based on interviews of households and not a body count, is that about 600,000 died from violence, mostly gunfire. They also found a small increase in deaths from other causes like heart disease and cancer.
"Deaths are occurring in Iraq now at a rate more than three times that from before the invasion of March 2003," Dr. Gilbert Burnham, lead author of the study, said in a statement.
The study by Burnham, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and others is to be published Thursday on the Web site of The Lancet, a medical journal.
An accurate count of Iraqi deaths has been difficult to obtain, but one respected group puts its rough estimate at closer to 50,000. And at least one expert was skeptical of the new findings.
"They're almost certainly way too high," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington. He criticized the way the estimate was derived and noted that the results were released shortly before the Nov. 7 election.
"This is not analysis, this is politics," Cordesman said.
The U.S. has quashed the accurate counting of Iraqi casualities, for obvious reasons. Nothing must be done to contradict the image of "Mission Accomplished!"
Viva Bush!
BL: The comment was an error -- supposed to have gone on a different ballot. Don't know how I ended up getting it here.
^A little dementia setting in maybe?;)
Yes BP, I've read about the number of deaths.
Voted : No
To quote one Nelson Muntz, "Haha!"
Voted : Yes
Yes, reported all over the place.
Probably just as much as any other country.
600,000 is an estimate, based on sampling. Most of the interviews for this study were carried out in Baghdad, so it's bound to be an incorrect figure, because, according to the news, the capital is far more violent than anywhere else in the country.
Having said that, western reporters are not reporting from any other cities or towns, except perhaps for Basra. The violence could be equally as bad in those smaller towns, but we never hear about it.
We simply don't know, and any group or news report that attempt to report deaths are just as ignorant as the rest of us. Our reporter just sit hiding in the green zone, relying on independent Iraqy journalists and photographers for their stories and figures.
I notice no one bothered to question the source, the way the study was carried out, the bias of those who initiated it.
Does this ballot reek of double standards or what?
Cath: you especially are extremely critical of any report I put up, even when it's from the BBC which isn't known for rightwing pandering, and yet you accepted this 'controversial new study' released at a suspicious time, and without citation, without even a bit of doubt. You do realize this is hypocrisy don't you?
^This ballot didn't reek until islamzog showed up.
Voted : No
Not truthfully at least
by Kiki on Sun Mar 11, 07 7:50pm
[+]
|
