Iraqi death toll now estimated to be 100,000

Re: numbers

Piggy quotes this site, so therefore it MUST be right.

Did piggy quote it? I thought that I was the first to mention it above. I have no idea about the veracity of their figures but at least they seem to be trying to count vouched casualties and not extrapolating from other criteria.
 
Re: numbers

OK Clubman, I think you linked to the site first, then Piggy quoted it.

As you say, the Iraq Body Count site attempts to at least provide sources or evidence for the quoted numbers.
And, by the way, those numbers include deaths among armed combatants, both Iraqi regular army and so called 'freedom fighters'...both of whom deserve what they get.

The fact is that the figure of 100,000 is now actually counter productive for the bleeding hearts who quoted it so quickly, because, with the real figure - being around a tenth of that number - the feeling is one of surprise and relief that it is in fact SO LOW!
 
Re: numbers

The fact is that the figure of 100,000 is now actually counter productive for the bleeding hearts who quoted it so quickly, because, with the real figure - being around a tenth of that number - the feeling is one of surprise and relief that it is in fact SO LOW!
Click to expand...

Asimov, the 100k figure isn't 'wrong', it's based on statistical analysis. For example how would you find out how many people in Africa are HIV+? One way would be to test each and every person to see if they are HIV+. Another, more practical way would be to take a representative sample, and do the appropriate analysis.
 
Re: numbers

Oh for goodness sake, must I keep repeating everything?

Actually, no, I can't be arsed.

Go back and read my post on Pg 1. 29/10/04 8:00 pm
 
OK Clubman, I think you linked to the site first, then Piggy quoted it.

Still can't see this. Doesn't really matter though.
 
Re: numbers

According to CH4 News tonight, the figure you quote is an ESTIMATE that was arrived at by interviewing 950 Iraqi families and extrapolating the number of dead relatives they reported to fit the population size.

They chose Fallujah as the town for the survey.

This would be like going to Omagh after ther bombing and carrying out a survey, then telling us that the estimated number of violent deaths in the whole of Ireland during that period was related to that event.

Total rubbish.

There was no actual body count. That figure is just way wrong.
Click to expand...

It seems you couldn't be bothered to actually read the article either:

For this reason, the researchers omitted it from their analysis—the estimate of 98,000 was made without including the Fallujah data. If it had been included, that estimate would have been significantly higher.
Click to expand...
 
Re: numbers

I liked the lastparagraph best.

The study is not perfect. But then it does not claim to be. The way forward is to duplicate the Lancet study independently, and at a larger scale. Josef Stalin once claimed that a single death is a tragedy, but a million deaths a mere statistic. Such cynicism should not be allowed to prevail, especially in a conflict in which many more lives are at stake. Iraq seems to be a case where more statistics are sorely needed.
Click to expand...

Here's a statistic:

So far, more than 500 insurgents have been killed in the Falluja offensive, officials at the Pentagon said earlier Thursday...CNN
Click to expand...

Add them to your list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top