President Bush says about 30,000 Iraqis have been killed

[auntAgonist]

since the beginning of the war.


http://www.cnn.com/US/

[tuvor]

1. As believable as his list of Iraq's WMDs.

The U.N. and U.S. intelligence sources have known for some time that Saddam Hussein has materials to produce chemical and biological weapons, but he has not accounted for them:

* 26,000 liters of anthrax—enough to kill several million people
* 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
* 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agents

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/nationalsecurity/disarm.html

(30,000 must have been the lowest estimate he could find.)

[wake.up.america]

2. 30,000 - We are supposed to believe that??!!

Another load of BS from the BA.

[auntAgonist]

3. my thoughts exactly n/t

[Mokito]

51. Rule of three...at the very least!

nt

[Rainscents]

4. Bush is full of shit! If he knew how to count, we wouldn't be in this

mess!

[Tempest]

5. How the fuck does he know?

"We don't do body counts."
- Tommy Franks

[wake.up.america]

7. I would really like to know how he came up with this number and...

his rationale for giving out such a numeber.

Is it, "2,000 of our guys is nothing compared to 30,000 Arabs."

or is it, "Don't belive what others say it is 'only' 30,000." ?

The numbers are wrong and his reasoning for coming out to give the numbers is based on his perception, partially true, that Americans do not boher to check his sources.

Pretty sick, the whole affair stinks.

[Tempest]

10. Between "shock and awe" and Fallujah

30,000 were killed just in those two actions.

Bush is full of shit, there's no doubt.

[CornField]

6. The army guy assigned to collateral damage disagrees

His low-ball estimate is 100,000 -- he said that was low because Fallujah, where most families are missing at least 2 people, was not even included in his study.

No link that I know of. He was interviewed by Ira Glass on NPR.

[neoteric lefty]

8. Whats his name? or do you got a link? nt

[CornField]

11. Here's a link to the NPR show

http://207.70.82.73/pages/descriptions/05/300.html

[neoteric lefty]

15. thanks nt

[Barrett808]

9. The Lancet study:

Lancet roundup and literature review
Posted by Daniel

Well, the Lancet study has been out for a while now, and it seems as good a time as any to take stock of the state of the debate and wrap up a few comments which have hitherto been buried in comments threads. Lots of heavy lifting here has been done by Tim Lambert and Chris Lightfoot; I thoroughly recommend both posts, and while I’m recommending things, I also recommend a short statistics course as a useful way to spend one’s evenings (sorry); it really is satisfying to be able to take part in these debates as a participant and I would imagine, pretty embarrassing and frustrating not to be able to. As Tim Lambert commented, this study has been “like flypaper for innumerates”; people have been lining up to take a pop at it despite being manifestly not in possession of the baseline level of knowledge needed to understand what they’re talking about. (Being slightly more cynical, I suggested to Tim that it was more like “litmus paper for hacks”; it’s up to each individual to decide for themselves whether they think a particular argument is an innocent mistake or not). Below the fold, I summarise the various lines of criticism and whether they’re valid or (mostly) not.

(more)

http://crookedtimber.org/2004/11/11/lancet-roundup-and-literature-review

[Samurai_Writer]

12. So you should probably multiply that by ten... *NT*

[maxrandb]

13. Your Link Doesn't Work

Takes me to CNN for a story about the plane skidding off the runway.

Can't find any story where the pretzledent sites 30,000 Iraqis killed.

[sabra]

14. here's another one

http://www.volunteertv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4233757

[maxrandb]

16. Thanks

Jeebus, I can almost see him talking all non-nonchalantly about 30,000 being killed. He'll have that Alfred E Newman "what me worry" smirk on his face. He talks about the death of 30,000 (probably a lot more) as if he's flicking a booger off his finger.

A sick, deranged, sociopath. "What's all the fuss about, it's only 30,000 dead, many of them woman and children, probably another 100,000 or so terribly wounded and disfigured". "What's the big deal people? after 9/11 America just had to blow off a little steam"

I hate these rat-f$%kers.

[vogonity]

38. I heard the audio of him saying it.

It was chilling. He said it like you or I might say "I had pizza for lunch."

Nice sig!

[Viva_La_Revolution]

69. exact quote...

"About 30,000. More or less."

heartless pissant!

[ConcernedCanuk]

17. 30,000 Iraqis for 3,000 @ 911 - It's the American Way !

.
.
.

Never mind that the Iraqis didn't have 1% responsibility for the 911 attacks,

or that the number of Iraqis slaughtered is probably closer to 200,000

The USA sure showed the world who's who RIGHT??

Ignore the United Nations, the International Court - the International Red Cross and majority world opinion

How long does the US Administration think they can get away with all this shit?

The world is not fooled

The USA is the largest terrorism threat in the world

The USA's not so subtle infiltrating 80% of the world's countries with their military and "ideals" has not gone unnoticed,

and the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq was/is so blatant a disregard for world opinion that the US has initiated it's imminent demise - "superpower" or not

The other 5.5 billion people in the world will not cow-tow forever to a coupla hundred million warlike idiots from a continent that their ancestors invaded and occupied just a few centuries ago . . .

America - "Land of the Free" ? -

Just ask the poor taxpayers, and the innocents curtailed by the infamous "Patriot" act . . .

Freedoms begone - the PNACers got a better idea - - -

(sigh)

[wake.up.america]

19. Now if America would just realize Bush has created a much more....

dangerous world.

All those Freepers reading this are challenged to explain how Bush has made the world safer or at least explain the rationale behind his policies and how this rationale will make America and the rest of the world safer.

[CBHagman]

18. Another link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm

By the way, The Washington Post generally prints only U.S. deaths. For a while they also had -- in tiny print -- the estimated Iraqi deaths, which were based on international estimates because the Pentagon doesn't keep track of Iraqi dead. The figure that sticks in my mind is 100,000-plus Iraqi deaths, including civilians.

[baldguy]

20. 100,000 deaths = 1,000,000 wounded

Each of those 1,100,000 has a mother, father, sister, brother, cousins, neighbors & friends. In a country of 26,000,000, everyone has been hurt by the American occupation.

[PerceptionManagement]

21. Do you think Iraq thinks regime change was worth it?

Do you think that number is remotely accurate? How can anyone believe anything this administration says? Furthermore, why is the mis-administration pointing out the 30,000 figure? Are they proud of it? Do they think it's indicative of how well we are doing?

Just what the hell are they thinking? Really?

[PassingFair]

40. Yes!

I heardt tell that they wuz throwin' roses at that thar Lieberman fella.
Freedom is on the march!

[Psephos]

22. Here's the most credible go-to site on Iraqi deaths

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

No political axes being ground here, although they seem pretty progressive-friendly to me. They maintain a database based on cross-checked, reported deaths from all available verifiable sources (news reports, mortuary filings, medical records, etc.).

As they point out, reported deaths can only be a subset of total deaths.

They also have compiled a downloadable dossier that analyzes time, place, and cause of death, allowing one to see trends, and make accurate assignments about who killed whom and how.

Here's the dossier page:

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr12.php


Peace.

[RedSock]

23. 30,000 in the first 2-3 weeks

didn't the pentagon tell woodward for one of his lovey-dovey bush books that 30,000 iraqis were killed in the first 2 or 3 weeks of the invasion?

[usregimechange]

26. I wish every American could see their faces as they passed...

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

36. That source supports ** Interesting

I personally would think it would be at least twice to three times that.

[Psephos]

41. Actually, they don't support *'s number - here's why

The database creators go to some pains to say that the verified death count is a subset of the full count, and that war obliterates many records.

What they do provide, IMO, is a strong basement number that cannot be refuted. No reasonable person can say the actual number isn't higher. How much higher? Now we pass more into the realm of supposition than fact. My supposition is it's considerably higher. I'd be interested in studies from other wars that could provide a statistical tool for adjustment.

Peace.


edit: added a couple of words for clarity

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

43. Well, from a political point of view, yes it does

support his assertation.

There is no proof the number is higher, and he quoted a midline number from an independant source.

Quite odd behavior from Old ** today, all in all.

[Psephos]

46. Well, I agree with you

There is no proof the number is higher. We all have our own opinions about that, of course, but I think we do ourselves more harm than good just tossing numbers around because they *seem* so undeniable to us. "Seem" is not good enough. When we stick to facts backed by evidence, our arguments no longer require shouting to be heard. They speak for themselves.

Again, as the creators of the database note, war makes mortality assessments hard because by its very nature it destroys evidence.

BTW, I note that Bush's staff later went to some pains to say Bush's number was not an official count, and was gathered from news sources. I don't see where this statement fits into the W.H. political calculus.

Yes, strange behavior indeed...

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

47. Yes, but politicians can't just toss numbers out

seem is all they have for their statements unless they want to support hard numbers with government statistics, which this particular government says it does not maintain (which, is of course, bull shit)

[fshrink]

24. Even if it were accurate,

is this intended to make me feel better? The answer is "yes". The meaning is "we lose soldiers but we kick ass tenfold". And this is addressed to the large portion of the US people who voted just for that. Without a clear stance from the opposition (if there is one) on what is this war exactly about, how wrong it is and how wrongly it has been planned and launched, this message is likely to earn the Idiot another couple of points in the polls. Which is just why it's there in the first place.

[CJCRANE]

31. Yes, there's clear race war overtones IMO

but what's even worse is that it reduces American soldiers to expendable drones. If one American dead = 10 Iraqi dead then how is this any better than the logic of the suicide bomber (i.e. one of our guys dies but we kill a load of them).

[usregimechange]

25. Is that more or less than what Sadam killed in 20 years?

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

35. Indeed, Bush has Hussein beat cold 10 times over.

[Emillereid]

27. Even if we accept his numbers, aren't 30000 dead people as a result of

an immoral, illegal invasion of a soverign country, war crimes?

[ramapo]

28. How very Christian of us

Amazing how the "religious" revel in killing

[AnneD]

29. And less than 2,000 died or are missing due to Katrina.

This is why I don't trust anything that comes out of that man's mouth.

[foo_bar]

30. "30,000, more or less", he said without a flicker of acknowledgement

It's like Barbara Bush buying groceries, it all happens through middlemen.

[shayes51]

32. That "more or less" statement shows what he really thinks

of human life. How dare he!

[Harper_is_Bush]

33. Is it possible to get a proper link? thx. n/t

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. 30,000 in the first month alone. More lies from our fearless leader.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

37. link?

[Initech]

39. Isnt this the same guy who said we should "err on the side of life"?

What a fucking douchebag. Seriously.

[sofa king]

49. I think that's only on the side of white, Christian, Republican life.

...And those upon whom white Christian Republicans depend to keep the linen clean. But even those people are fungible, especially so if abortion can be made illegal.

[TankLV]

42. And he said therestill were WMD and other LIES - why should we care

what this AWOL WAR CRIMINAL says - he only knows how to LIE - that is the only certainty.

[DemonFighterLives]

44. Olberman played a lot of the clips

dubby had all he could do not to smirk after saying the 30,000 more or less, like it was pocket change. He also tried to answer a question about why they keep pushing Iraq ties to 911. The knuckster said that it was a good reason to put Saddam on notice since we were fighting terror anyway. He also said that Saddam did not allow inspectors or give up his weapons.
Bigtime liar all around!
:freak:

[progressivebydesign]

45. Most of those killed were not insurgents.. We are not at war with Iraqis.

I think some people outside of DU don't get it that we are NOT now, and have not been at war with the Iraqi people... of course, when you look at 30k+ dead citizens, you have to think we are at war with them. We were supposed to take Saddam out of power, cripple his army, and set up our puppet govt. Instead... we killed thousands and thousands of innocents, blew the infrastructer to bits, and generally fucked everything up. Did Rummy and Cheney and Bush REALLY believe this would be a war of weeks? That we would be liberators? Or they that evil or that stupid? We are not in a real war, we are squandering our military and our troops lives for what should have not been an invasion, and what now should NOT be a war, but a police action.

[pinniped]

48. Yes, I always rely on the stupidest monkey POS alive for accurate...

information.

[Theduckno2]

50. Another case of Bushco "cherry-picking" the evidence?

Unless Bush would be specific in explaining how the figures were arrived at and what those figures represented, his figure of 30,000 is of little value. His apparently callous use of the figure seems to reflect his lack of humanity.

The appearence of honesty is what is important to Bush, not actual honesty and forthrightness. Did he take the opportunity to talk about the Iraqis who; were wounded, had there homes destroyed or died a premature death due to inadequate health care? Did he mention the lack of power, lack of potable water or improper sanitation?

[TiredOfLies]

52. Bush Estimates 30,000 Iraqis Killed in War

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051213/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

I wonder where Bush gets his numbers from, i've heard that about 100000 Iraqies have been killed

[HysteryDiagnosis]

53. Hmmmm, smart bombs, not so smart. Ya think??? nt.

[A Simple Game]

54. Maybe he is a conservative after all! n/t

[liberal N proud]

55. It is the same math they use to declare the economy good

[Old and In the Way]

56. I wionder how it feels to know that your lies to start an elective war

results in the deaths of 30,000 people. You think he gets off on that? I do.

[mallard]

57. The public acknowlegement that 30,000 or more...

... have died as a result of the 'incursion' is a step in the right direction. Now that it's admitedly that bad, wonder if Bush could please let us know who's idea it was to invade.

[K-W]

58. 100,000 was a year ago. EOM

[DemonFighterLives]

61. Welcome to DU!

He did say more or less or thereabouts. His margin of error is 100,000 +/-.
Maybe more! The more he kills the higher that Saddams millions go up too.

[fortyfeetunder]

59. Sounds like a Santa Claus answer

:sarcasm: "he's making a list and checking it twice"

[Tight_rope]

60. 30,000 Iraqis killed! Are we suppose to be proud that many innocent

people have dead for lies. Not me! In fact, I'm ashamed.

[ecoalex]

64. No media response

What got me was to see the media lately snuggling back to ashat's underarm. All know the 30,000 more or less was bullshit, yet noone countered it.NBC had a Brian Williams love fest with him, and Today had a his numbers are up party with the whore Russert.The media has been called back to their duty, cheer on ashat. Sure his #s are up you ashats are propping him up again, and allowing lies to permeate again. Murtha is dismissed too, again the media moguls whipped the producers back into line ashat must be not held responsible, and must be shown as the leader he is.BULLSHIT

[progressoid]

62. I bet they really appreciate the Democracy(tm) and Freedom(r) we bombed

into them.

[K8-EEE]

63. When Did They Begin Counting?

Did they begin counting after 100,000 or so? Because for the first 2-plus years they said they didn't have any count.

[superconnected]

65. Can soldiers turn back into normal people after they've been

killing people, and their tour of duty ends?

That's a whole lot of dead iraqis up there whether it's 30k or 100k.

And we're watching the mass murderer(Bush) get away with it. How can HE be normal after causing this much carnage.

[Felix Mala]

66. It's chilling that he would admit to 30K without a hint of shame/sadness

Afterall, he volunteered these men, women and children to serve in the front line of "His War."

[otohara]

67. Washington Post Said 100,000 Over 1 Year Ago

100,000 Civilian Deaths Estimated in Iraq

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 29, 2004; Page A16

One of the first attempts to independently estimate the loss of civilian life from the Iraqi war has concluded that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians may have died because of the U.S. invasion.

The analysis, an extrapolation based on a relatively small number of documented deaths, indicated that many of the excess deaths have occurred due to aerial attacks by coalition forces, with women and children being frequent victims, wrote the international team of public health researchers making the calculations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7967-2004Oct28.html

[Festivito]

68. Correct article quote: "more than 30,000 Iraqis" NOT about, or estimate

Bush is being disingenuous, not false.

[bhaiti11]

70. why doesn't he give the exact number of the dead soldiers...

30,000 Iraqis have been killed, Are the America people safer today?

[goodhue]

71. CNN reports 100,000 more than a year ago . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/