Top Ten Myths about Iraq 2006

[Secretariat]

Here's one:

http://www.juancole.com/2006/12/top-ten-myths-about-iraq-2006-1.html

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Top Ten Myths about Iraq 2006

1. Myth number one is that the United States "can still win" in Iraq. Of course, the truth of this statement, frequently still made by William Kristol and other Neoconservatives, depends on what "winning" means. But if it means the establishment of a stable, pro-American, anti-Iranian government with an effective and even-handed army and police force in the near or even medium term, then the assertion is frankly ridiculous. The Iraqi "government" is barely functioning. The parliament was not able to meet in December because it could not attain a quorum. Many key Iraqi politicians live most of the time in London, and much of parliament is frequently abroad. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki does not control large swathes of the country, and could give few orders that had any chance of being obeyed. The US military cannot shore up this government, even with an extra division, because the government is divided against itself. Most of the major parties trying to craft legislation are also linked to militias on the streets who are killing one another. It is over with. Iraq is in for years of heavy political violence of a sort that no foreign military force can hope to stop.

The United States cannot "win" in the sense defined above. It cannot. And the blindly arrogant assumption that it can win is calculated to get more tens of thousands of Iraqis killed and more thousands of American soldiers and Marines badly wounded or killed. Moreover, since Iraq is coming apart at the seams under the impact of our presence there, there is a real danger that we will radically destabilize it and the whole oil-producing Gulf if we try to stay longer.

[Tom]

Two words - Bull Shit.
We could win if we were to fight it. There is not a shadow of a doubt.
To say otherwise is ignorance and cowardice.
If we were to fight WWII under the ridiculous rules of engagement we have in Iraq, we would never have landed at Normandy, let alone move to Berlin.

The myth is that we are fighting a war.
And we have the dems to thank for that.

[JPinMaryland]

I dont think no. 1 is a myth just because Kristol and Tom havent gotten the message yet doest mean it's a myth. I doubt many people in the Pentagon really believe it can be won..

[hcap]

http://www.juancole.com/2006/12/for-whom-bell-tolls-top-ten-ways-us.html

For Whom the Bell Tolls:
Top Ten Ways the US Enabled Saddam Hussein

The old monster swung from the gallows this morning at 6 am Baghdad time. His Shiite executioners danced around his body.

Saddam Hussain was one of the 20th century's most notorious tyrants, though the death toll he racked up is probably exaggerated by his critics. The reality was bad enough.

The tendency to treat Saddam and Iraq in a historical vacuum, and in isolation from the superpowers, however, has hidden from Americans their own culpability in the horror show that has been Iraq for the past few decades. Initially, the US used the Baath Party as a nationalist foil to the Communists. Then Washington used it against Iran. The welfare of Iraqis themselves appears to have been on no one's mind, either in Washington or in Baghdad.

[hcap]

Riverbend....from Iraq. Called a fraud by certain board members

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#116738820591 750213

End of Another Year...
You know your country is in trouble when:

1.The UN has to open a special branch just to keep track of the chaos and bloodshed, UNAMI.
2. Abovementioned branch cannot be run from your country.
3.The politicians who worked to put your country in this sorry state can no longer be found inside of, or anywhere near, its borders.
4.The only thing the US and Iran can agree about is the deteriorating state of your nation.
5. An 8-year war and 13-year blockade are looking like the country's 'Golden Years'.
6. Your country is purportedly 'selling' 2 million barrels of oil a day, but you are standing in line for 4 hours for black market gasoline for the generator.
7. For every 5 hours of no electricity, you get one hour of public electricity and then the government announces it's going to cut back on providing that hour.
8. Politicians who supported the war spend tv time debating whether it is 'sectarian bloodshed' or 'civil war'.
9. People consider themselves lucky if they can actually identify the corpse of the relative that's been missing for two weeks.

A day in the life of the average Iraqi has been reduced to identifying corpses, avoiding car bombs and attempting to keep track of which family members have been detained, which ones have been exiled and which ones have been abducted.

2006 has been, decidedly, the worst year yet.

.....3000 Americans dead over nearly four years? Really? That's the number of dead Iraqis in less than a month. The Americans had families? Too bad. So do we. So do the corpses in the streets and the ones waiting for identification in the morgue.

[PaceAdvantage]

.....3000 Americans dead over nearly four years? Really? That's the number of dead Iraqis in less than a month. The Americans had families? Too bad. So do we. So do the corpses in the streets and the ones waiting for identification in the morgue.

So tell them to stop f'in killing each other already and get to work forming their new nation, post-Saddam!

Am I supposed to feel sorry for Iraqis? Is that what you're telling me to do? Feel guilt, shame and sorrow? As if we ruined some sort of utopia they had going on over there?

You can continue to accuse Bush and Washington DC of everything under the sun. However, even IF BushCo is GUILTY of everything you say they are, Hussein STILL had it in his power to PREVENT everything that has happened since the early 90s, yet his ego and his stupidity got in the way, and he screwed up his own country.

And just like all those around the world who hold individual Americans responsible because of who we elected as our President, I HOLD IRAQIS responsible for what has happened to their country, as they sat idly by while THEIR leader went about mucking everything up in Iraq over the years.

As you said, TOO BAD.

[hcap]

Of course your supposed to feel sorry. And while your at it sympathy for the victims of a unjustified invasion, poorly planned occupation and post invasion chaotic conditions, that led to over 650,000 unwarranted Iraqi deaths. As done by your heroes.

Apologies are in order. Unless you still think the good news outweighs the bad, and only the prejudices of the dirty liberal effete commie lovin' snobs who dared question the stupidity of the bushies, are responsible for the Iraqi outcome.

You and other enablers of the neocon policies are responsible, for the chaos

You claim "So tell them to stop f'in killing each "? Convienient? Lets you and the others off the hook? What happened to reason number 10 or was it 11-the one where we invade to help the Iraqi people remake their country?

You broke it you own it.

[Tom]

Hcap - BREAKING NEWS.

We are not killing them in Iraq.
They are killing each other.

They are a democracy now, they can kill whoever they want! :rolleyes:
You really think that will stop if we leave today?

It is not our fault they are not civilized - animals will be animals.

[singunner]

I wish everone in the world would look up the words "bigot" and "ethnocentric" and then try to avoid their meanings as much as possible... You just called human beings animals (which is true, though you made it sound as if you were exempt form this ruling)... And your avatar is a chimp...

[Tom]

Try Preperation H...might get that bug out'o there fer ya!

[kenwoodallpromos]

In your last 2 posts you say 3,0000 Iraqis dead per month, then you say over 650,000 total Iraqis dead.
I guess I'm the only anti-war type who does not think we have been at war 30 years? (I think only since 1991- 15 years including during Hussein's truce violations. Maybe the 650,000 counts Hussein's killings too!)!).

[hcap]

http://www.jhsph.edu/refugee/research/iraq/

October 11, 2006

Updated Iraq Survey Affirms Earlier Mortality Estimates

Mortality Trends Comparable to Estimates by Those Using Other Counting Methods

As many as 654,965 more Iraqis may have died since hostilities began in Iraq in March 2003 than would have been expected under pre-war conditions, according to a survey conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The deaths from all causes—violent and non-violent—are over and above the estimated 143,000 deaths per year that occurred from all causes prior to the March 2003 invasion.

http://www.jhsph.edu/refugee/research/iraq/wsj_response.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6045112.stm


The refugee crisis as well. But hey, who cares. As the orangutan, (correction not a chimp) a few posts up says "they are animals"


http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1966333,00.html

[JustRalph]

Myths about Iraq? Hanging your ass for being a tyrant is no longer a myth.


There are broader implications here. Every asshole in the royal families and the other pseudo "democratic" countries over there are sitting around thinking about what might happen to them if the U.S. takes over the country and then turns them over to the people they have treated like shit for years. This is a good thing.

[PaceAdvantage]

The numbers have never added up, yet the guys who spout these stats never address the mathematics of the situation.

[lsbets]

The numbers have never added up, yet the guys who spout these stats never address the mathematics of the situation.

The mathematics have been addressed, but there was no counter to the math, juts hope that the numbers were that high.

[hcap]

Denial.
Youse guys broke it so now youse own it and really must own up to it.
Ain't easy if you think your John Wayne and think John never shot an innocent bystander. I guess that's why we have the catch all "collateral damage" Military speak for we didn't mean it

Just read the literature instead of taking the simplistic road.
Nothing wrong with the math. Peer reveiwed.

Let's see maybe you can also refute the number of Iraqi refugees fleeing?
Your next point will be numbers of Philidelphians fleeing inner city Philly for the suberbs is no worse than Iraq so not to worry.

[PaceAdvantage]

The mathematics have been addressed, but there was no counter to the math, juts hope that the numbers were that high.

What I meant was the folks who like to post about these supposed humongous casualties among civilians never address the simple mathematics that you and kenwood state that tend to dismiss these fantasy body counts.

[PaceAdvantage]

Just read the literature instead of taking the simplistic road.
Nothing wrong with the math. Peer reveiwed.

Good to see you tackling the basic math head-on.....way to go!

Exactly who is in denial here?

[hcap]

The study is published in the October 14, 2006, edition of the peer-reviewed scientific journal, The Lancet. The Lancet is the world's most prestigious medical journal. Prior to publication, the Iraq study was subjected to a thorough peer-review by specialists in the field of epidemiology.

http://www.jhsph.edu/refugee/research/iraq/index.html
http://www.jhsph.edu/refugee/research/iraq/Human_Cost_of_WarFORMATTED.pdf
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1013/p01s04-woiq.html

Report methodology

First, though, to the report itself. Its strength, its authors argue, is in its tried and trusted method.

"The mortality survey used well-established and scientifically proven methods for measuring mortality and disease in populations. These same survey methods were used to measure mortality during conflicts in the Congo, Kosovo, Sudan and other regions"

(Where btw, the Bush administration uncritically accepted similiar results thru the same techniques)


It took a sample and then extrapolated broad results from that sample. This is a technique used in other areas of conflict, in public opinion polling and in marketing, for example, in assessing television audiences.

In 2004, 33 clusters were chosen across the country with 30 households in each cluster. These households contained 7,868 people. This time, 47 clusters were chosen, with 12,801 people.

The method was to question people about deaths in their household first in the "pre-invasion" period and then in the "post-invasion" period leading up to July 2006.

The difference would constitute what the survey calls "excess deaths".

The report says that there were 82 deaths pre-invasion and 547 post-invasion.

It then multiplied these figures up in relation to the Iraqi population of 27,139,584, and came up with an estimated 654,956 "excess" deaths, 2.5 % of the population.

Some statistical caveats are entered. The lowest estimate of deaths is put at 392,979 and the highest at 942,636. The lowest figure is still much bigger than the other counts.

Of the "excess" deaths, 601,027 were attributed to the violence (mainly from gunfire and mainly among men aged 15-59), the rest coming largely from increased illness and disease.

The report concludes: "Our estimate of excess deaths is far higher than those reported in Iraq through passive surveillance methods. This discrepancy is not unexpected. Data from passive surveillance are rarely complete, even in stable circumstances, and are even less complete during conflict."

[Tom]

Peer, eh?
You there are MORE of you out there????:eek:

[hcap]

YOU ARE OUT OF BANANAS.

Among other things.

How do they peer review absurd statements by monkeys?
An infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters over an infinite amount of time. Eventually some orangutang says something that makes sense. Peer review time. Attention King Kong University, Skippy Roller Skate Academy get ready

Let's see Posts: 18,737 only 4 gadzillion more to go?
I and Kong can hardly wait. :jump: :jump:

[BIG RED]

Try Preperation H...might get that bug out'o there fer ya!

Why do I come over here and read what you guys and gals say?

For the entertainment :faint:

[Tom]

The numbers have never added up, yet the guys who spout these stats never address the mathematics of the situation.


Yes they did.....

[chickenhead]

did they ask the families who did the killing? I see they asked whether it was a violent death or not, I wonder if they asked who did it. I'm just curious.

As for the method of figuring this number, however tried and true it is...it seems very likely people would naturally skew the data as they report it. It would be pretty normal if you're in the middle of a war zone to recall everyone you know who had died recently. Maybe a little harder to remember your second cousin Jim Bob who had a heart attack 8 years ago, or your friends Aunt Betty who died in the car accident.

[hcap]

Hey Ace, read da rest of 'em

So hard bein' a mathamatheezein
http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0000ACMIQ.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V56687472_.jpg

Oh gawwd only another 4 gadzillion posts to go.
http://www.planet.nl/upload_mm/8/2/4/1998915409_1999998464_monkey_typewriter.jpg

[boxcar]

You and other enablers of the neocon policies are responsible, for the chaos

You see, PA, how Libs can never bring themselves to assign true and substantial blame to the bad guys? Else, how could these "patriotic, loyal, freedom-loving Americans" continue to blame America for ALL the many ills of this planet? As you've rightly said, SH could have prevented everything that is happening. But it was more important to the King of Fools to "save face" -- but only in the end to lose his life and hurl his country into turmoil and chaos.

What a wise, noble, honorable and virtuous leader this Saddam Hussein was... :rolleyes:

Boxcar