Iraq: Al-Sadr makes a move.

"William Black" wrote in message
...

"Dann" wrote in message
0.81...
On 21 Oct 2006, John Gilbert said the following in
link.net.

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
That's funny Sept 11 happened when we were far more isolationist than
we
are
likely ever to be in the future. It has taken 5 years of fighting in
Iraq to achieve a similar body count as happened in a couple of hours
on one Tuesday morning.

Point of fact, the body count in Iraq is 600,000+ and rising.

A fact based accounting puts the number between 50,000 & 100,000.

A what?

We're talking about a study by the John Hopkins School of Epidemeology
published in a peer reviewed journal.

Produce a similar academic study subjected to peer review that uses 'fact
based accounting' please.

--
William Black



The Iraqi Health Ministry estimates 50,000 deaths in Iraq since March 20003
and the Brookings Institution estimates 60,000. Iraq Body Count estimates
44-49,000 reported deaths. The UN estimate of 19,000 deaths this year means
it would take approximately 20 years to reach the the John Hopkins numbers
at the current rate. In other words, multiple reputable sources find the
Hopkins numbers to be innacurate.

Jarg

"Jarg" wrote in message
om...
"William Black" wrote in message
...

"Dann" wrote in message
0.81...
On 21 Oct 2006, John Gilbert said the following in
link.net.

"tscottme" wrote in message
...
That's funny Sept 11 happened when we were far more isolationist than
we
are
likely ever to be in the future. It has taken 5 years of fighting in
Iraq to achieve a similar body count as happened in a couple of hours
on one Tuesday morning.

Point of fact, the body count in Iraq is 600,000+ and rising.

A fact based accounting puts the number between 50,000 & 100,000.

A what?

We're talking about a study by the John Hopkins School of Epidemeology
published in a peer reviewed journal.

Produce a similar academic study subjected to peer review that uses 'fact
based accounting' please.

--
William Black



The Iraqi Health Ministry estimates 50,000 deaths in Iraq since March
20003 and the Brookings Institution estimates 60,000. Iraq Body Count
estimates 44-49,000 reported deaths. The UN estimate of 19,000 deaths
this year means it would take approximately 20 years to reach the the John
Hopkins numbers at the current rate. In other words, multiple reputable
sources find the Hopkins numbers to be innacurate.

Engl;ish not your first language or something?

"Produce a similar academic study subjected to peer review that uses 'fact
based accounting' please."

Propaganda pieces produced by some US puppet doesn't count.

The UN can't even tell you how many New York parking tickets they didn't pay
this year, never mind how many dead...

With a total population of twenty seven million and a pre war deathrate of
over five per thousand a year any rate that is less than a hundred and fifty
thousand a year is telling lies

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

William Black wrote:
"Dann" wrote in message
0.81...

On 21 Oct 2006, John Gilbert said the following in
thlink.net.


"tscottme" wrote in message
...

That's funny Sept 11 happened when we were far more isolationist than
we

are

likely ever to be in the future. It has taken 5 years of fighting in
Iraq to achieve a similar body count as happened in a couple of hours
on one Tuesday morning.

Point of fact, the body count in Iraq is 600,000+ and rising.

A fact based accounting puts the number between 50,000 & 100,000.


A what?

We're talking about a study by the John Hopkins School of Epidemeology
published in a peer reviewed journal.

Produce a similar academic study subjected to peer review that uses 'fact
based accounting' please.

His mind is made up. Don't be confusin' him with the facts.

Cheers

==bob

tscottme wrote:
"Raptor" wrote in message
It's an insurgency. You don't win by killing the enemy. You win by cutting
off their reinforcements.

--

That's why I envoked the General Sherman reference. The American Civil War
wasn't won because the Union killed all the Southern soldiers. Sherman
waged war on the plantation owners and war-making abilility of the South.
The Salafists and the Twelvers will fight until the last future cab driver
is dead in the street. They won't fight 1 month after their butt is set
ablaze.

The Civil War wasn't an insurgency.

The Iraqi insurgency isn't "winning" by blowing up our tanks or shooting
down our aircraft. Their weapons are small arms, IEDs and RPGs. No
amount of destroying their "warmaking ability" will stop such attacks.
They're winning by picking off our soldiers in ones and twos, and by
fighting each other with small arms. By committing violence of any
significant kind, they show that we have not achieved our objective and
thereby win.

You win an insurgency by winning the hearts & minds of the people who
might otherwise become insurgents. Most of the violence in Iraq now
occurs because no one is keeping the streets safe. Keep the streets
safe, and the violence ends quickly, except for those determined to die.
Most Iraqis are not determined to die. We can deal with the dead-enders
if we choose to.

The alternative is nuking the whole place.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

If FDR fought fascism the way Bush fights terrorism, we'd all be
speaking German now.

Bob Matthews wrote:
William Black wrote:
We're talking about a study by the John Hopkins School of Epidemeology
published in a peer reviewed journal.

Produce a similar academic study subjected to peer review that uses
'fact based accounting' please.

His mind is made up. Don't be confusin' him with the facts.

There are no facts, just estimates. The 600K number comes from
well-accepted methodology.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

If FDR fought fascism the way Bush fights terrorism, we'd all be
speaking German now.

"tscottme" writes:

That's funny Sept 11 happened when we were far more isolationist than we are
likely ever to be in the future. It has taken 5 years of fighting in Iraq

Isolationist doesn't mean what you imply. Of course, I am never wrong
:-) If the US didn't pursue foreign trade and engage in all the
necessary practices associated with getting contracts and deals, then
isolationasm would make sense. You can't go and engage the world in
trade (and mostly win) without making enemies in many places, and then
say "oh well, we won't think about any military strategies because we
want to practice military isolationism".

The best compromise is to beat our enemy like a rapid dog and then withdraw.

Oh, we are in a good mood today! Isn't that what everybody says before
the fight bogs down?
--
Gernot Hassenpflug ) Tel: +81 774 38-3866
JSPS Fellow (Rm.403, RISH, Kyoto Uni.) Fax: +81 774 31-8463
http://www.rish.kyoto-u.ac.jp/radar-...members/gernot Mob: +81 90 39493924

Raptor wrote:

There are no facts, just estimates. The 600K number comes from
well-accepted methodology.


Then you should read a little on the subject of methodology, in
general, and that study, in particular. 47 data clusters...

forssberg wrote:
Raptor wrote:

There are no facts, just estimates. The 600K number comes from
well-accepted methodology.


Then you should read a little on the subject of methodology, in
general, and that study, in particular. 47 data clusters...

The methodology is well-accepted. We use it to assess the impact of
epidemics or genocides, and base policy on the resultant numbers.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

If FDR fought fascism the way Bush fights terrorism, we'd all be
speaking German now.

Raptor wrote:
forssberg wrote:
Raptor wrote:

There are no facts, just estimates. The 600K number comes from
well-accepted methodology.


Then you should read a little on the subject of methodology, in
general, and that study, in particular. 47 data clusters...

The methodology is well-accepted. We use it to assess the impact of
epidemics or genocides, and base policy on the resultant numbers.

The doctors are asking for too much money then.

Andrew Swallow

Raptor wrote:

The methodology is well-accepted. We use it to assess the impact of
epidemics or genocides, and base policy on the resultant numbers.


From your purely theoretical answer I deduce that you're not aware of
the debate on the abnormally low number of cluster samples used in the
Lancet study. Other methodological critiques have also been moved by
credible people.