Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Right-Wingers Can't Cover Up Iraq's Death Toll Catastrophe

By John Tirman, AlterNet. Posted January 21, 2008.


The warmongers who got us into Iraq are blaming everyone but themselves for the humanitarian disaster they created.
Advertisement

Now I know what Hillary Clinton meant, firsthand, by that "vast right-wing conspiracy." When the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the Sunday Times in London are going after you -- along with about 100 right-wing bloggers -- rest assured you've hit a nerve.

Or is it just Soros Derangement Syndrome at work?

More than two years ago, I commissioned a household survey of Iraq to learn how many people had died in the war. This topic had been virtually ignored by the news media and the U.S. government. It was important to know for at least three reasons. The first was to try to understand the nature of the violence there, which was steadily growing and creating a humanitarian crisis, possibly a regional conflagration. Second, it might tell us something about how and when to exit. Third, we needed to know for the sake of our national soul. What had we wrought?

So I contacted the people who had done a previous, largely ignored survey -- top public health professionals at Johns Hopkins University. They had published a survey in October 2004 that showed 98,000 had died in the first 18 months of the war, which was greeted with disbelief and charges of politicizing science, and quickly dismissed.

I said: "Do a bigger survey to improve the accuracy, and I will make sure it gets the proper attention in the news media." They did do a bigger survey, and I managed a public education campaign that permitted the results to be considered more broadly, results that estimated total deaths at 600,000 by violence after 40 months of war. The survey was published in the Lancet, the British medical journal. And get attention it did, roundly disbelieved and scorned by war supporters but spurring a brief but intense debate about the human cost of the war.

Dozens of statisticians and other professionals scoured the study and its data to see if the methods and implementation were proper; a special committee at the World Health Organization was convened to review it, and the Lancet had also subjected it to rigorous peer review. The survey held up to this scrutiny, with quibbles and some lingering "should have done this" and "might have done that." But virtually every competent person agreed that the study provided the best estimate we have.

Then, earlier this month, the National Journal, a Capitol Hill "insider" weekly, ran a cover story titled "Data Bomb" by Neil Munro and Carl Cannon. In a note by Munro, published by the National Review blog, he asserts:

George Soros funded the survey. The U.S. authors played no role in data collection and did not apply standard anti-fraud measures. The chief Iraqi data collector had earlier produced medical articles to help Saddam's anti-sanctions campaign in the 1990s, and said Allah guided the prior 2004 Lancet/Johns Hopkins death survey. Some of the field surveyors were employed by Moqtada Sadr's Ministry of Health. The Iraqis' numbers contain evidence of fakery, and the Lancet did not check for fakery.

It's a neat summary of their allegations, which include dozens of unfounded charges, promiscuous innuendo, misquoting of the principals and misunderstanding statistics, and relies on two disgruntled critics. It was a hatchet job, pure and simple. Not a sentence of Munro's summary is truthful, and that goes for much of the National Journal article, too, which I have demolished elsewhere (PDF). The principal author, Gilbert Burnham, M.D., Ph.D., and his colleagues have taken time from their clinics in Afghanistan and Jordan and Africa to answer the charges on the John Hopkins website, too ( with a letter here and a FAQ here).

But lies have a way of proliferating on the internet, and so it was with this set of schoolyard bully brickbats. What seemed most to get under the skin of the right-wing media was a small grant for public education funded by the Open Society Institute, a foundation created by George Soros.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, right-wingers, lancet study, johns hopkins study, civilian deaths, casualties

John Tirman is executive director of MIT's Center for International Studies.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hell to pay
Posted by: vox persona on Jan 21, 2008 12:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right wingers who still support this misguided counterproductive counterintuitive ill advised idiotic imperial war of choice, aggression and convenience should suit up in fatigues and go join the effort to democratize Arab Holy Land at the point of a gun, or whater the reason du jour is. I wish that every one of those murderous minded chickenhawks would have to dream every night in vivid realistic dreams one at a time of every single victim lost in this hellish misadventure, dream they are experiencing, in the body, of each victim and the way they died. Then wake up not being able to forget. That would be a good down payment for their warmongering intentions, but still not enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: slowbob4
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: PaulK
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: Sissy
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: Sean Bos
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: Chromedome2000
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Hell to pay Posted by: Doubtom
Sorry 'bout all them dead folks - but we still have a chance to control the oil!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 21, 2008 1:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's really amazing about Munro is that he tries to invoke Roosevelt as his guiding light - for a war of aggression?

"The Iraqi Opportunity: Berlin ’45. Tokyo ’45. Baghdad ’02.
By Neil Munro, reporter for The National Journal
November 6, 2001 11:30 a.m.

...In 1942, FDR, Churchill, and the G.I.s did not paralyze themselves with worry about the inevitable problems of post-war Europe, about German saboteurs, Luftwaffe raids, "Nordic supermen," Japanese Kamikazes, and secret V-weapons."


Hey - weren't FDR and Churchill responding to the aggressive behavior of Japan, Italy and Germany in places like Indonesia (then the Dutch East Indies), Poland, and Ethiopia?

Wasn't the agenda of the Axis powers mostly about oil? The Japanese needed Indonesian oil, and the Nazis were desperate to conquer the Middle East and the Caspian Sea region in order to get a permanent oil supply for their "Thousand-Year Reich", weren't they? That's why Rommel was charging all over North Africa, that's why the Nazis invaded the Baku oil region of the Soviet Union - they intended to meet up in the Middle East and gain control of the oil.

No, the model for GW Bush and Cheney is not Roosevelt or Churchill, but rather the Axis powers themselves - the Imperial Japanese would have applauded Bush's attempted seizure of the Middle East oilfields, if he had been on their side.

As far as Iraq goes, the fact of the matter was that Saddam was contained and helpless, militarily speaking, at the time of the invasion. What Saddam was doing was opening up his country to French, Chinese and Russian oil firms, while blocking out the U.S. firms - and once the French, Chinese and Russians were established, bombing the country would no longer be an option. That was certainly a subject of discussion in Cheney's Energy Task Force meetings, which featured maps of Iraqi oilfields and lists of foreign suitors for Iraqi oil (from which U.S. and British firms were prominently absent).

Saddam had also switched all of his U.S. dollar holdings to euros - a move that was loudly ridiculed by U.S. and British economists - until the euro gained 30% over the dollar. Take a look at Petrodollar Warfare, by William Clark, for more on that.

It was clear before the invasion that there were no WMDs in Iraq, despite the lies put forward by Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Rice, Powell and a whole host of think tank pundits, (for example, the clowns at the Brookings Institute - Ken Pollack and Mike O'Hanlon). The mushroom cloud, the supposed anthrax and VX weapons, the ballistic missile program - all completely bogus- as many people said at the time. The chief culprit, however, was the U.S. corporate press, who happily printed the lies without bothering to check them - and who even actively supported them.

So, why did all those Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers die? Why was Iraq torn apart, poisoned with depleted uranium, and subjected to all manner of atrocities, from death squads to perverse torture to destruction of the water, electricity, and health care systems?

It was all about gaining control of the oil, finding a new home for U.S. miltary bases in the region, advancing the political aspirations of the American Neoconservatives (NeoNazis is more like it) and instituting a massive privatization program - all for the benefit of Wall Street, the International Oil Corporations, and politically connected cronies of BushCo., such as Bechtel and Halliburton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» On credibility, Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: On facts... Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: On facts... Posted by: dmaciewski
» On Alpha Radiation Posted by: rgoalierob
» RE: On Alpha Radiation Posted by: tarheel
» RE: On credibility, Posted by: leafsong1
» All incorrect Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: All incorrect Posted by: abbadon2007
» Seems to be the case. Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» in before "semantics schemantics" Posted by: abbadon2007
Literary reference
Posted by: abbadon2007 on Jan 21, 2008 1:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It was in the Rama series that Arthur Clarke introduced an alien race that managed to embody war effectiveness and pacifism at the same time.

A single executive order to escalate conflict from homeland defense to preventative offense was enough to stop the aggressors with dramatic efficacy.

But in the declaration of war, it is the law that each member of the senate in support of a war resolution that is successful, shall willingly give up his own life, effective immediately on the execution of said resolution.

This effectively enforces the prioritization of War as the last recourse of a civilized society.

Can you imagine a single member of our congress or executive branch sacrificing himself for the good of the country? Cowards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right-wingers?
Posted by: xi_people on Jan 21, 2008 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is this article focused on "right-wingers" when the so-called "left" is just as complicit in the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq?

The dimocrats, who falsely campaigned in 2006 that they would end this debacle, aren't even pretending to be anti-war anymore. Some of the most bellicose statements regarding a possible (and disastrous) invasion of Iran have come from the "front-runners" Obama and Clinton. Obama can't wait to get after Pakistan as well.

Any claim that its only the right who are warmongers is an outright lie. Both parties serve the same corporate masters and are deeply complicit in the ongoing genocide in Iraq. Both support an imperialist agenda, and see no problem with "preemptive wars" to steal resources from sovereign nations; invasions which ultimately end up killing millions of innocent civilians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No, that's a tangent Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: No, that's a tangent Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: No, that's a tangent Posted by: xi_people
» RE: No, that's a tangent Posted by: Democritus
» RE: Left-wing hawks? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Left-wing hawks? Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Left-wing hawks? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: ight-wingers? Posted by: M-RES
Good news:
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jan 21, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have just a day shy of one year left to go until this nightmare of an administration is hurled into history's trash can. One thing is certain: It is going to be one, excruciatingly long year. Fasten your seat belts.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
COUNT DOWN: ONE MORE YEAR!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good news: Posted by: QuestionAuthority
» RE: Good news: Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Good news: Posted by: data23
» RE: Good news: Posted by: madmax427
» RE: Good news: Posted by: Zeugitai
» RE: Good news: Posted by: Sean Bos
» RE: Good news: Posted by: particle
» So, Sean Bos Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Good news: Posted by: richholland
» RE: Good news: Posted by: TheNamelessCity
Call it what it is! It is not a "war".
Posted by: leland61 on Jan 21, 2008 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the case of Iraq there was no war. There was an attack, invasion and occupation of a soverign nation in order to control and exploit its resources. It is only a 'war' in the sense that our government organized a massive and violent campaign of murder against a civilian population in order to reduce it to a client state from which its wealth may be extracted.

Our government works for the oil companies and others but not for the people of the USA.

Just as Rome occupied and exploited Judea, Syria, etc., to extract the wealth for the rich and powerful, so the USA does today.

WE ARE EMPIRE. And like all empires of the past we rain down death and destruction wherever we go. We do it for the elite who run the nation. Instead of the Coliseum we have NASCAR etc. The tragic part of the entertainments for the masses in this Empire is that they have to pay for it themselves. At least in Rome the entertainment was provided to the plebs for free.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: lions ,tigers and bears..oh my! Posted by: wittler youth
Drop in the bucket
Posted by: PaulD on Jan 21, 2008 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all due respect to the people who feel passionately about Iraq the number of dead there is dwarfed by deaths from other causes. If we're truly concerned about saving human lives then our time, effort, and indignation can make a bigger difference elsewhere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Drop in the bucket Posted by: Sissy
» RE: Drop in the bucket Posted by: particle
» Blood on your hands Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: particle
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: Sissy
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: PaulD
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: particle
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: PaulD
» RE: Blood on your hands Posted by: PaulD
The UN reports problems with the Lancet report
Posted by: johnh on Jan 21, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are two major sources that have problems with the Lancet report:

1: World Health Organization/UN (Iraq Family Health Survey Study):
http://www.emro.who.int/iraq/index.htm

Published in “The New England Journal of Medicine”:
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/NEJMsa0707782

2: The Iraq Body Count:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/reality-checks/

Included below are abstracts from the New England Journal of Medicine article on the UN’s recent Iraq family Health Survey (Jan/08)and the Iraq Body Count’s points why the 600k number has plausibility problems.

In short the better estimate is 150,000, not 600,000 deaths.

No matter how one counts it – still a horrific number. But given the deaths under Saddam’s wars, sanctions and terror – knowing what is known now – would the Iraqi’s wish Saddam was still in power?

Violence-Related Mortality in Iraq from 2002 to 2006
Iraq Family Health Survey Study Group (1/9/08)
...
Background: Estimates of the death toll in Iraq from the time of the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 until June 2006 have ranged from 47,668 (from the Iraq Body Count) to 601,027 (from a national survey). Results from the Iraq Family Health Survey (IFHS), which was conducted in 2006 and 2007, provide new evidence on mortality in Iraq.

Results: Interviewers visited 89.4% of 1086 household clusters during the study period; the household response rate was 96.2%. From January 2002 through June 2006, there were 1325 reported deaths. After adjustment for missing clusters, the overall rate of death per 1000 person-years was 5.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.89 to 5.77); the estimated rate of violence-related death was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.81 to 1.50). When underreporting was taken into account, the rate of violence-related death was estimated to be 1.67 (95% uncertainty range, 1.24 to 2.30). This rate translates into an estimated number of violent deaths of 151,000 (95% uncertainty range, 104,000 to 223,000) from March 2003 through June 2006.

Reality checks: some responses to the latest Lancet estimates (from the Iraq Body Count)

A new study has been released by the Lancet medical journal estimating over 650,000 excess deaths in Iraq. The Iraqi mortality estimates published in the Lancet in October 2006 imply, among other things, that:
1. On average, a thousand Iraqis have been violently killed every single day in the first half of 2006, with less than a tenth of them being noticed by any public surveillance mechanisms;
2. Some 800,000 or more Iraqis suffered blast wounds and other serious conflict-related injuries in the past two years, but less than a tenth of them received any kind of hospital treatment;
3. Over 7% of the entire adult male population of Iraq has already been killed in violence, with no less than 10% in the worst affected areas covering most of central Iraq;
4. Half a million death certificates were received by families which were never officially recorded as having been issued;
5. The Coalition has killed far more Iraqis in the last year than in earlier years containing the initial massive "Shock and Awe" invasion and the major assaults on Falluja.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» John Hopkins Response... Posted by: M-RES
Karmic Collateral
Posted by: worldancer on Jan 21, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm continually plagued as I move about my daily life in upper NW Washington, negotiating my movements, whims, and little annoyances--traffic lights, lines at Starbucks, the price of tomatos. I'm haunted in unguarded moments by suppressed images, beneath those flashed silently on The News Hour, of young American soldiers cut down in their prime. I'm talking about the everyday Iraqis so poignantly if anecdotally portrayed in Moore's Farenheit 911 (for example). Or those faceless, numberless humans who are the subject of Tirman's article.

The last paragraph is the crux of it. The toll is horrendous, whatever the exact number.

I dated someone who's parents were Holocaust survivors (Dakau and Buchenwald), and over years of intimate contact with those families learned much about the psychological and behavioral effects of such bio-basic tragedy. I've also met George Soros several times when he was chairman of a foundation to which I belonged. This I know: It takes at least three generations for the surviors' families and milieu to come to grips with the trauma of murder, genocide, rape, and persona non grata. Grandmothers, grandfathers, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, sons and daughters ripped from the love and joy of life; cultural histories and personal stories wiped out; brilliant, joyous futures never to be; all wiped out in an instant by war that hardly touches the citizens of its perpetrators. A brief scanning of The History Channel reveals what today, in a milieu of smart bombs and stealth technology, we so easily repress in our own consciousness: The "obsession" with the Great War and with WW II. Look at Palestine and Isreal, see the context of 20th century warfare, imperialism, colonization; consider alongside the questionable "numbers" cited here, those outside the ledgers, those left behind, those raped and ripped from their "homes". What's a home? What's a neighborhood? What is it worth to each and every human being no matter where they live on this planet? Three generations--a century yet to be--still marred by the greed-compelled short sightedness of our "elected" representatives.

In our name! ~ Worldancer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why pick on George Soros?
Posted by: Democritus on Jan 21, 2008 6:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right-wing commentators such as Munro are driven into a frenzy whenever Georg Soros and his Open Society Foundation are mentioned. Everything Soros is for, they are against.

According to these corporate hacks, whenever Soros is mentioned as having contributed to some cause, that cause is tarred as being some sort of liberal-socialist-communist front. So why are these so-called journalists so obsessed with Soros?

While he was studying at the London School of Economics, Soros was influenced by Karl Popper, a philosopher of science who also wrote a political work entitled The Open Society and its Enemies. Soros was taken by the idea of a free and open democratic society, as opposed to the closed societies he had experienced in Europe during WWII--the German society under Hitler, and the Soviet society under Stalin. This is why he founded the Open Society Foundation--to help democracy flourish throughout the world.

Why should this so enrage people like Munro? The answer is that neo-cons like Munro have been convinced by the political views of Leo Strauss, and Strauss's beliefs included telling "noble lies" if it furthered the cause of an authoritarian state. In other words, Strauss believed in a closed society--with the elite ruling the underclass and keeping them in line. In attacking Soros, people like Munro are furthering the aims of a Straussian philosophy. In this way they can also conveniently camouflage the carnage that is occurring in Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraq may have paved a new Muslim Super Power again
Posted by: flymulla on Jan 21, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bottom line to my comments is WE LIVE IN A building, we put a post outside where all can see,” To Let .sell or rent”. Does that explain what we are in?
Let me elaborate. The terrorist have been bad. I agree and you agree as we have seen the damage they have done to our structures and how now we are coughing up to weed them out. It is expensive at what cost? Here is a typical example of what we do and what we think we are doing
Kenya and Tanzania were the targets of Osama in 1992. Kenya was in the minds of many but Tanzania. No. Sir. This was only a postage stamp. Even the letters were marked as P.O.Boxxxxx Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania, South Africa. The Osama bombs turned this to read Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania, East Africa. Would you call this as a blessing to many in Tanzanians? Yes? They are on the map. Once they were never known except for the tourists who came to see the lions on the trees in Manyara parks. Here I am not advertising anything. Same is the case with Iraq. Hussein, AH (we always salute them with alihis salaam) grandson of the Prophet Mohammed, SAW or many write this as PBUH peace be open him. Was martyred in Karbala. Sadam and his cronies with many Sunni scholars kept this hidden from the Muslim books. Shias knew of this. On 19th January the TV was abuzz with the ceremony held by the Shias beating their chests mourning in the death of the grandson Hussein.
The tints of black and white are out on the table and more followers do not wonder about this hiccup but are proud to state that the invasion of USA has at least opened up the Shia sects very apt, very clear, and the Shias thank them for them. They could never have done this. This is free note to many who never knew the truth from the lectured false.
I see that way. Call this cruelty; I am not a politician who kills many. Even Gaza today on 21st January is in dark. Israel has cut of the power. Egypt is helping Palestine. No, the picture seems to be coming out more open then any time before. Is this what I want, Yes sir. Bu all means. I feel sorry for the mothers who lost sons, I feel sorry for the wives who lost the husbands. I am sorry. But that is the policy of the false decision by the politicians was oil. They did not succeed. They failed. Do I blame them? Yes. The young soldiers got marred by the wars in many countries by the name of fanatics, terrorists, Mullahs, the Osama groups, Saadam Kirks. But why blame the poor. Israel cuts off the power of the hospital where the babies are dying. Is this wart we wanted the wars for? I doubt.
Am I happy now? No. many are still on the verge of half meal a day in the days of plenty. It grieves anyone.
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:the wall Posted by: wittler youth
The thing that gets me.....
Posted by: ptoddchesser on Jan 21, 2008 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is the glaring lack of military service by the children of these war supporters. They are all to ready to send someone else's children to fight but God forbid that one of their's should serve.
It's also not surprising that the bulk of military recruiting takes place in areas that are middle class or where the average income is near or less than the poverty line.Hmmmmmm....
I don't know what the numbers are but it would be interesting to know exactly how many children of members of Congress are serving.I know John McCain's son enlisted but he is the only one I know of for sure. Ahhh....for the life of privilege.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The thing that gets me..... Posted by: Gilded_Truth
» RE: The thing that gets me..... Posted by: ptoddchesser
» THE DRAFT? Posted by: Longdream
» Children of Chickenhawks Posted by: TruthBeTold
» RE: The thing that gets me..... Posted by: braxxian1
YOU CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO CARE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 21, 2008 7:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most Americans have no personal investment in Iraq and even less interest. They are wrapped up in their selfish lives also called 'family values'. They worry more about affording a cell phone for each kid than they do about whether or not the same kid will end up "serving his/her country" and perhaps making the "supreme sacrifice". If they thought about it they might have to do something, and they're too busy. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: YOU CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO CARE Posted by: Southern Gal
» RE: YOU CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO CARE Posted by: crazy carlos
I've got three words for Munro and Cannon.
Posted by: Longdream on Jan 21, 2008 8:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RICHARD MELLON SCAIFE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wrong war and wrong numbers
Posted by: carbon-based on Jan 21, 2008 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By far Iraq will define the disaster known as the Bush administration. Never has there been a "comedy" of errors as the criminal Bin Laden goes one way and the "good guys" go the other. What Iraq had to do with anything other than Saddam thumbing his nose at the west is still a mystery.

Just as much a mystery is the 600,000 Iraqi death number. Considering most of the casualties were a result of Iraqi "insurgents" one wonders how that number can even be close to accurate! But then, Bush doesn't believe it so maybe it has some validity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wrong war and wrong numbers Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Wrong war and wrong numbers Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Wrong war and wrong numbers Posted by: leafsong1
» Inaccurate Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Inaccurate Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Inaccurate Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Inaccurate Posted by: leafsong1
Yakkity
Posted by: audiodef on Jan 21, 2008 8:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read page one before my brain started going BLAH BLAH BLAH.

It's an illegal war, and thus when the first person to die as a result of it died, it was already one death too many.

We need to exit as occupiers immediately (i.e. never mind the oil, people are more important) and start providing humanitarian aid. We screwed over a lot of people, and we have a lot of butt-kissing to do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yakkity...yes Posted by: Captainmagic
Questions
Posted by: willymack on Jan 21, 2008 9:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is there even a trace of decency among the criminals who "run" this country? Is there any question as to what they'll do for money-or won't do? Is there anyone out there who DOESN'T think we're being held hostage by a greedy, lying, murderous, and pathological gang of psychopaths? Is there any question that the Iraq tragedy is about money, and money alone? Does anyone think this regime gives a fat rat's ass about our military personnel, let alone the Iraqi people? Are our people EVER going to stand up and defend themselves against the evil that is the bush regime? It doesn't look too hopeful, now, does it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Questions Posted by: alphaeagle
Thanks for this article.
Posted by: kentigereyes@yahoo.com on Jan 21, 2008 9:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
However, I think it very important to not blame the huge fiasco in Iraq, and Afghanistan, only on the rightwingers. The so-called leftwingers, or dems, have not stood up to the despicably evil "w"/DICKY regime on this crime. The United States of Arrogance is in very deep dew. Ken

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

STORMY7
Posted by: dpodlogar on Jan 21, 2008 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND, THAT MORE THAN A MILLION IRAQIS ARE DEAD BECAUSE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. WE KILLED A MILLION OF THE POOREST WITH TEN YEARS OF SANCTIONS BEFORE THE HORRID BUSH EMPIRE.
WITH THE "SHOCK AND AWE" BOMBINGS WE KILLED THOUSANDS. BOMBS HAVE A WAY OF DOING THAT. EVEN OUR SO CALLED "SMART BOMBS." THE KILLING WILL CONTINUE LONG AFTER WE PULL THE TROOPS. DEPLETED URANIUM WILL TAKE IT'S TOLL ON WHOMEVER SURVIVES THIS ILLEGAL WAR. JUST LIKE THE ONES WHO SUVIVED THE GULF WAR.
WE MUST AS A NATION HOLD THE BUSH/CHENEY ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
INDICT IMPEACH IMPRISON THE BASTARDS IN THIS ADMINISTRATION.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: STORMY7 Posted by: Zeugitai
Not All Military Support Bu$h & CO
Posted by: Gilded_Truth on Jan 21, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This post is a bit off topic, but I have always admired and respected Andrew Bacevich, a graduate of West Point, who served in the Army in Vietnam, retired as a Colonel, and holds a Ph.D. from Princeton. He is a professor of history and international relations at Boston University. His son, Andrew, was killed in Iraq last May.

If you did not see his recent article published in the Washington Post, it is quite an indictment of Bu$h, the American Enterprise Institute, William Kristol, etc.

Surge to Nowhere
Don't buy the hawks' hype. The war may be off the front pages, but Iraq is broken beyond repair, and we still own it.

By Andrew J. Bacevich
Sunday, January 20, 2008; B01


As the fifth anniversary of Operation Iraqi Freedom nears, the fabulists are again trying to weave their own version of the war. The latest myth is that the "surge" is working.

In President Bush's pithy formulation, the United States is now "kicking ass" in Iraq. The gallant Gen. David Petraeus, having been given the right tools, has performed miracles, redeeming a situation that once appeared hopeless.

Entire article can be read at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/

wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/18/

AR2008011802873_pf.html

"Look beyond the spin, the wishful thinking, the intellectual bullying and the myth-making. The real legacy of the surge is that it will enable Bush to bequeath the Iraq war to his successor -- no doubt cause for celebration at AEI, although perhaps less so for the families of U.S. troops. Yet the stubborn insistence that the war must continue also ensures that Bush's successor will, upon taking office, discover that the post-9/11 United States is strategically adrift. Washington no longer has a coherent approach to dealing with Islamic radicalism. Certainly, the next president will not find in Iraq a useful template to be applied in Iran or Syria or Pakistan."

Amen Brother Bacevich!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Grenada, Chile, Iran
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jan 21, 2008 11:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nicaragua, Guatemala, Hungry, Angola, Cuba, Indonesia, Pakistan, Palestine....

How many innocent civilains must die before our greed is satisfied?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Neoconservative PR monkeys.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 21, 2008 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's quite a list - William & Irving Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Stephen Cambone, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Newt Gingrich, Zalmay Khalizad, Robert Kagan, etc.

Their main home (when out of political power) has been the American Enterprise Institute, as well as the Heritage Foundation.

Take a look at http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/ for the complete list and profiles.

Behind these think tanks are a host of large corporations and conservative billionaires (the most famous being Richard Mellon Scaife). For example, Heritage Foundation donors have included Coors, Scaife, General Motors, Ford Motors, Proctor & Gamble, Chase Manhattan Bank, Dow Chemical, Mobil Oil, and Smith Kline Corporation.

To really understand the rise to power of the American neoconservatives and the forces behind them, watch the three-part BBC documentary, The Power of Nightmares

Essentially, the neoconservatives are idiots who came to power via financial alliances with large corporate interests and political alliances with the religious right. Their reign has been a disaster for the entire world.

However, it's not just the neoconservatives - institutions like the Brookings Institute (home of Michael O'Hanlon and Ken Pollack, major war promoters) and the U.S. corporate media ran with their themes and spread the propaganda far and wide.

It's no wonder than neither the neoconservatives nor the corporate press want to acknowledge the disaster and slaughter in Iraq that they are primarily responsible for.

As far as "the left's responsibility", recall that anyone who spoke out against the invasion in 2003 and 2004 was viciously attacked by both the neoconservatives and the corporate media.

For example (and there are many), see the Tying Kerry to Terror Tests Rhetorical Limits, Sept 2004, WP

"It was the latest instance in which prominent Republicans have said that Democrats are helping the enemy or that al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents and other enemies of the United States are backing Kerry and the Democrats. Such accusations are not new to American politics, but the GOP's line of attack this year has been pervasive and high-level..."

"...Whatever the merits, the charges that terrorists prefer Democrats have been echoed by independent commentators and journalists. CNN analyst Bill Schneider, asked about Hastert's remarks, agreed that al Qaeda "would very much like to defeat President Bush."


That is why you see the current alignment between the neoconservatives and the leading corporate press outlets (CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, NBC, etc.) on the issue of the Lancet study and the situation in Iraq - neither group wants to see their past actions and motivations examined in public.

The corporate press mantra has been "Let's just forget about it and move on..." That's also why there's been no real discussion of the failure to find WMDs in Iraq, despite all the pre-invasion propaganda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sleep, war-mongers, sleep...
Posted by: tico on Jan 21, 2008 12:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Scientists may challenge colleagues who are climate-change deniers sponsored by Big Oil. They may do so on the used methodology and analysis... but they shouldn't do so merely on the fact that it's Big Oil that financed this. Similarly, whether George Soros' created OSI funded this research bears no relevance to it's credibility. Only a rigorous scientific analysis of the methodology does.

It makes sense for scientists who don't buy into the idea of anthropogenic cause of climate change to come up with a study that allows this hypothesis to be tested rather than the scientists who are already convinced. Doesn't mean the 'skeptics' necessarily have the money to conduct a study. Because their ideas overlap with some big fat cats in the industry, it just makes it more likely the study will receive funding. Same principles apply here.

Finances are vital. More finances (often) imply a more thorough research approach. Without George Soros money, it could be argued, there would perhaps not have been enough funding to do the 'fieldwork', the actual interviews performed in Iraq (actually Tirman denies this). It is true that one's presuppositions may lead to bias but this should be judged only from a thorough analysis of the methodology.

The only relevance the National Journal article bears is that it may mean pro-imperialists now sleep a little easier (or am I overestimating their moral values?) and that the Michelle Malkins of this world will brag on their blogs: "I-told-you-they-pulled-that-650.000-from-their-asses"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can't hide the facts from the witnesses
Posted by: Crazy H on Jan 21, 2008 12:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The lies told to the American people only serve the American politicians, and then only in the short term.

The Iraqi people are there right in the middle of it all. They know darned good and well how many of their friends, family and countrymen have died.

Understating those numbers may protect the guilty in the short term, but long term all those newly-minted orphans are going to grow up and join Al Qeaeda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

With mass deaths, righties got what they wanted
Posted by: deang on Jan 21, 2008 12:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right-wingers may jump from one avoidance tactic to another when confronted with the mass deaths caused by the US, but that's largely because they don't normally admit that mass deaths of Iraqis is just what they wanted. Nothing thrills a right-winger more than mass slaughter by their military, and the higher the number of dead on the targeted side, the more the rightie can claim he's winning. What was it Schwarzenegger once said about his attitude toward St. Reagan's out-of-control, lawless militarism during the 80s? "As long as we've got all this great military technology, we might as well use it." And what's that common US expression used when an American is asked why he's done something cruel? "Because I can."

And while Republicans are dancing around the issue of 1.2 million dead Iraqis while secretly loving it, Democrats are pretending that only a few tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed (as if that's not so bad), preferring to ignore the professionally done Lancet and Johns Hopkins studies showing that over a million Iraqis have been killed, a figure which unembedded journalists on the ground in Iraq are sure is an underestimate.

Speaking of unembedded journalists in Iraq, anyone here who doubts that the US is directly responsible for all deaths in Iraq since 2003 is urged to read Dahr Jamail's work and look into his sources. The US has deliberately undertaken a Reagan-esque divide-and-conquer strategy of fomenting sectarian death squads to make civilian deaths appear internecine. That's in addition to the ongoing US air war that causes most deaths in the country, just like it did in Vietnam. Dontcha just love America?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Happiness, brainstrain, perspective, truth, Iraq, quicksand, crane
Posted by: nigelbest on Jan 21, 2008 1:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
happinessfinneganswake.blogspot. Is there enough humility or openness generated by 600,000 deaths in Iraq to consider and take to heart the following? Or is there still perfect confidence that we are doing the right thing by talking about the details of the particular war of the present time?
Perspective is truth, Aristotle. It follows that lack of perspective is untruth. [And happiness, everyone's everything, depends totally on truth. There is no untrue happiness.] Have we perspective? Have we truth? Can we maximise happiness, minimise grief without perspective? Only those who have the big picture are awake, Heraclitus. Have we the big picture? Are we awake? No. Being awake to a part of the picture is sleep, unconsciousness. Small things are easier for people, Plato. Good things are hard, Plato. 'Higher' consciousness is hilltop, overview consciousness.
Perspective is, imo, something like this. The social pool of wealth is limited, not unlimited. Vast, but limited. Growing, but finite, limited. Potentially unlimited, but always actually limited. The world is finite, the total world hours of work is finite. Individual contribution to wealth is limited, not unlimited. Yet everyone is just going for more. With everyone just going for more, some will get more than their rightful share, and others less. Money or wealth is the joker good, good for virtually all things, so underpay is theft of virtually all things, including social power. Theft of virtually everything inspires anger, righteous anger. So overpay is always under attack. Overpay is overpower, power to rake money. So inequality grows.