Five years on
What does it say that we can't even estimate within 100,000?
(PS. That market McCain and Graham famously visited almost a year ago is now unsafe and controlled by the Mahdi Army.)
[Posted by Mike - Born at the Crest of the Empire]
A recent World Health Organisation and Iraqi health ministry report estimated that 151,000 people were killed between the start of the invasion on March 20, 2003 and June 2006.
Other estimates have put the number of civilian deaths as a result of the conflict between nearly 48,000 and as high as 601,000.
(PS. That market McCain and Graham famously visited almost a year ago is now unsafe and controlled by the Mahdi Army.)
[Posted by Mike - Born at the Crest of the Empire]
posted by Libby Spencer at 8:30 AM
5 Comments:
Can't or won't? They're still insisting the economy is just in a "rough patch" without mentioning that it's the roughest in 60 years and that it's getting worse. Cheney claims things have changed dramatically for the better in Iraq even with millions of homeless, millions without water and basic health care.
Maybe it works - I read that more than half of Americans think it's getting better.
Fair argument.
If your "they" is the Bush admin, they're still sitting on that 40,000-50,000 number.
My "we" was intended to reflect everyone else from the media to the public to those people who have really followed the war.
It's incredible that after 5 years, no one has any real idea (within a factor of ten!)
These were human beings, not metrics, and nobody has any idea.
http://www.slate.com/id/2186740/pagenum/2
If link doesn't work, article's on Realclearpolitics.
Like you, Fogg, Hitchens is a tital Christian hater. He's also a genius drunk.
"tital Christian hater"
Oh really? I sort of like tits and I'm not a Christian so I can't be a Christian hater - unless you meant a hater of Christians. Too bad all you have is cynicism to go with your grade school rhetoric.
For the sake of your own credibility, ust cut it out. You won't do anything but make a fool of yourself by inventing things about me and then chastising me about it as though it were true. You fling shit like "far left liberal" around as though it weren't a contradiction in terms and you do it to build straw men to argue with since you have no real arguments, just puerile instigations.
I've never met a Christian, so it's moot. I don't think it's possible to be one or even to know just what it means to be one and don't start up again, I know more about Christian history and theology than you do.
What I do hate is hypocrisy so what you say is only true if you equate Christianity with Hypocrisy. Is that what you're saying?
I don't like Hitchens actually. He's logical only when he wants to be, but of course he has a superior command of the language, which I admire.
Any more stories you want to make up so you can keep doing your little dance?
What an asshole! Such vitriol over a typo and an arcane rule of grammar
Post a Comment
<< Home