Where for art tho Lancet threads?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NEXT

S-2 EW3 Reply 10/31/2006 11:01:08 AM

"...They have run out of talking points and done what they could to use this "study" to influence voters. We won't hear about any Lancet studies at least in the MSM till the '08 election."

Good comment. I've wondered at the damage. Aside from those like eu4ea, who now appears to be arguing as a point- of-pride while avoiding Shek, few would consider this study as serious upon examination.

Sadly, few will examine with the same thoroughness displayed by Shek, TAC, Arbalest, swhitebull, P.M., and yourself. So what's the outcome? I'd suggest that those opposed to (variously or combined) this war, GWB and his administration, any war, etc. will now have a new benchmark from which to discuss the impact of this war. Inaccurate or not, 650,000 will sound correct to them. So it shall be. Some on the right will reject this study out of hand. Many others will question it's credibility and, finding it lacking, dismiss it. There will be a few undecided voters, I suspect, who will not question this data and instead allow it to sway their vote. As such, the actual impact on the election may be insignificant.

If the attempt by Roberts et al. and LANCET was to influence public opinion, I'd submit that they may have released this study about two weeks early. There's been sufficient time for the obvious flaws to now be exposed. That's happened. Thus, most of the hue and furor from this study is gone.

Too bad that both organizations have impugned their professional reputations over such a shoddy and unprofessional effort for dubious reasons of merit.

Quote Reply

Plutarch 10/31/2006 11:21:57 AM

If we ask ourselves the question "did Saddam create the environment of violence or was he a creature of the environment of violence?", we end up with a few, perhaps undesirable, questions.

1. How did Saddam react to the environment of violence?

It looks like he made it much worse.

2. If the environment of violence predates Saddam, there is an implication that it is systemic to the culture / civilization of the area. This points to the impossibility of a democratic state in Iraq.

Sorry, I do not, and did not, intend to hang the "defense of the Lancet Study" requirement on you. I may have implied this, by inferring meaning in your posts, and I apologize. I think that the Lancet’s methodology might be a bit flawed, but more importantly, that they (or someone) intentionally extrapolated it to the entire Iraqi population only for political purposes.

For some reason, the link... you provided (paragraph 6) indicate that al Sadr Jr. may be responsible for finishing Haidar Raifee Killidar, the custodian of a shrine. Al Sadr Jr’s culpability in the whacking al-Khoei is slightly less clear, but his alibi does not sound good.

It also points out that al-Khoei, at age 29 participated in the 1991 uprising against Saddam. Following the various links, al Sadr Jr. formed the Madhi Army in June 2003, also when he was 29 or 30, to fight the US (who apparently had no quarrel with him), instead of Saddam (who may have been involved in whacking al Sadr Sr.).

If al Sadr Jr. had any sense, he would have either 1) formed the Madhi Army years earlier (perhaps late-2001) to oppose Saddam, and thereby built up some real credibility for himself, or b) do what he did historically, but NOT attack the US and coalition forces.

But al Sadr Jr. did what he did, and there is a considerable body of opinion that says that his actions have enabled and legitimized the current violence in Iraq. Had he done nothing, or at least not attacked the local US forces, there is a very good probability that Iraq would be stable enough now, and that there would be no US troops in Iraq today. But this is useless speculation; things didn’t happen this way, and we are where we are.

"There is such a thing as personal responsibility."

Agreed, and without question.

I use Human Rights Watch’s figure of 290,000 deaths due to Saddam. By their own admission, the HRW number might be high or low.

HRW is neither a judicial nor a legislative body. They do not determine what constitutes genocide (or any other crime) and what does not, nor do they determine, for any given crime, whether a statute of limitations exists, or how long it lasts.

HRW also does not determine morality. Judging by the HRW excerpt in one of your previous posts, HRW is internally conflicted, and really can’t define how to act in a specific instance. They seem happy to evade personal and institutional responsibility and appeal to the UN, which means any action taken will be too late.

"We can justify an invasion now of the Sudan on humanitarian grounds to stop genocide in Darfur, but we cannot invade the Sudan in 2015 for the same purpose"

I’m inclined to think that the UN should move into the Sudan now (since it wasn’t done last year, or the year before) to end the killings. I think that it will be pointless to do so in 2015.

"So does that make the killings more justified?"

"Justification" seems to be a new dimension to this thread. Justification is also a cultural/religious construct. Is it really necessary to discuss this?

Saddam still seems to feel that his actions while in power were justified and legal; apparently many others today disagree, and seek revenge on those that did Saddam’s bidding. Others seem to be trying to instill fear in the general population, for one of a few reasons.

Culturally, and probably religiously as well, all sides see themselves as justified.

"1. How did Saddam react to the environment of violence?

It looks like he made it much worse."

I agree that Saddam made it much worse, but the Shia also have blood soaked hands since they took power, so I think a democrati

Quote Reply

Plutarch 10/31/2006 12:03:32 PM

Yeah, we can refute Reuters' #'s too. they say 33 dead in the sadr city carbombing..It's 28 killed in that attack today...I'm sure....you and reuters are wrong.

You say it's 100 average. I say you can't come up with 100 today. I say that everyday. I only have to be right on half of the days. Today was a horrible day. Anyhoo, doesn't mean it's all good, either.

Civil War: You (whichever one you are) say we're way beyond civil war. I say that some on the most powerful men from all 3 communities are still trying very hard to hold it all together. I say George Washington was an insurgent. I say this is no insurgency, and far from civil war. (not that there isn't at least some modicum of involvement from such a faction out of the many......ah whateva....This aint no civil war, either!

"You say it's 100 average. I say you can't come up with 100 today. I say that everyday. I only have to be right on half of the days. Today was a horrible day. Anyhoo, doesn't mean it's all good, either."

Oct 30th: 28 killed in the Sadr City Bombing, (28), Essam al-Rawi of the AMS and his bodyguard were killed (2), Raad Naem al-Jeheshi was also killed (1), car bombing in the Amil district killed six (6), car bombing near Yarmouk Hospital killed one (1), car bomb in the al-Harthiya area killed two (2), car bombing in al-Bayaa district killed seven (7), fifteen bodies were recovered in Baghdad (15), suicide bombing in Waleed near the Syrian border killed six (6), In Baiji gunmen killed two policemen (2), four bodies were found in Mosul (4), two militamen were killed in Balad (2), six bodies of policmen were found in the Suwayra river (6), a roadside bomb killed two in Khallis (2), six blindfolded bodies were discovered in Mahmudiya (6), in Baquba gunmen killed four (4), a roadside bomb killed three in Basra (3), and a suicide bomber killed three in Kirkuk (3),

28 + 2 + 1 + 6 + 1 + 2 + 7 + 15 + 6 + 2 + 4 + 2 + 6 + 2 + 6 + 4 + 3 + 3 = 100

"You (whichever one you are) say we're way beyond civil war. I say that some on the most powerful men from all 3 communities are still trying very hard to hold it all together."

name me 3 members of each community who are actively trying to hold Iraq together and who are not beholden to special interests (ie militas).

" say this is no insurgency, and far from civil war. (not that there isn't at least some modicum of involvement from such a faction out of the many......ah whateva....This aint no civil war, either!"

Insurgency: An insurgency is an armed rebellion by any irregular armed force that rises up against an established authority, government, or administration.

civil war: Sustained military combat, primarily internal, resulting in at least 1,000 battle-deaths per year, pitting central government forces against an insurgent force capable of effective resistance, determined by the latter’s ability to inflict upon the government forces at least 5 percent of the fatalities that the insurgents sustain.”
(From Errol A. Henderson and J. David Singer, “Civil War in the Post-Colonial World, 1946-92,” the Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2000

Iraqi Security Forces Battle Deaths:

Jan-05	109
Feb-05	103
Mar-05	176
Apr-05	199

Quote Reply

EW3 10/31/2006 12:29:29 PM

something that trouble

"fifteen bodies were recovered in Baghdad (15), four bodies were found in Mosul (4), six bodies of policmen were found in the Suwayra river (6), six blindfolded bodies were discovered in Mahmudiya"

Not suire the accounting process for them. Were these people killed on the 30th?

Do they only get counted once? I know I've seen the same US soldier reported killed over a 3 day period a few times on the news here. (that's what raised the issue for me).

The other thing that should be added is that since we are using reports for body counts now, then we have to accept the body counts from these type of reports in the past. The counts in the past have been well below 100/day. In fact this method is what IBC has been using and they come up with a maximum count of < 51K since the war started. link

Quote Reply

PlatypusMaximus 10/31/2006 3:54:03 PM

Yeah...just like SWB.....except you're wrong.

"suicide bombing in Waleed near the Syrian border killed six (6), "

Try four.

That's the same percentage of which your off regarding the actual totals for Oct 30...Which is between 69-80

You continue to be wrong about the numbers in every single post, and I'll continue to insist that the average has not yet reached 100...I don't have any stake in deflating the numbers... I'd love to see it go to 1000. I just won't believe it if it's not true.

AND

THEIR

SHOVELS

Quote Reply

Arbalest 10/31/2006 4:40:10 PM

We seem to be on the verge of getting too far away from the topic of this thread, the Lancet study.

"No but the UN does. Genocide is extremely hard to prove, and the 1948 Genocide Convetion excludes "political groups,"and "opponents of the regime" from the definition of Genocide."

Which way to go with this?

Do I point out that the UN does not determine what constitutes genocide, as they have no legal or enforcement authority over any one?

Should I point out that if "political groups" (Baathists, members of the Khmer Rouge) and "opponents of the regime" are excluded from the definition of Genocide, then this seems to leave only individuals, who can be tried for murder. This argues that there is in fact no such thing as Genocide, even though hundreds, or millions, of men, women and children were killed simply because others though it should be done.

Perhaps it is better to simply point out that every time mass killings happen (Darfur, Southern Sudan, Bosnia, East Timor, Rwanda, etc.), by the time the UN starts to make debate on the instance, a large percentage, possibly even most, of the killing has been done.

I observe, therefore, that the UN does not, in fact, determine what constitutes genocide, primarily because they are unable to do so.

Turkey and Armenia: As a practical matter, the statute of limitations ends, in Western eyes, when all perps are dead. Who remains alive to be tried? Is there a point to invading Turkey today?

What can be done for the descendants; money, a separate country? The Turkish borders were determined long ago, by conquest, and seem as legitimate as any other land boundary. Even in the areas of Turkey indicating large Armenian, Kurdish or other minorities, the ethnic Turkish population is significant.

Cambodia: Pol Pot and most of his gang of perps are dead; the failure to capture them while they were alive rests with the Cambodian government. The remaining Khmer Rouge are for the most part low-level soldiers, proving anything will be tough. Again, what could invading Cambodia today accomplish?

East Timor: There is a current force of UN and Australians in East Timor. There are many problems there, and the UN is one of them. Check the Australian board. There are problems in the region.

The Iraqi Shia may not have clean hands, but very many of them can claim to be killing those who themselves perpetrated the murder /rape/etc. of family members. Very many cultures and people, historically and today, see these actions as legitimate.

Virtually no one buys, or has ever bought, the implicit argument that clean hands are a prerequisite to defending one’s self , family and home, demanding justice, or exacting revenge.

Quote Reply

Plutarch 10/31/2006 4:47:07 PM

Yeah...just like SWB.....except you're wrong.

"suicide bombing in Waleed near the Syrian border killed six (6), "

Try four.

That's the same percentage of which your off regarding the actual totals for Oct 30...Which is between 69-80

AND

THEIR

SHOVELS

"Elsewhere Monday six Iraqi policemen were killed by a car bomb on the Syrian border, reported Iraqi official television. The explosion took place near the Waleed compound on the Syrian border, 550 kilometres west of Baghdad."

link

There may be some discrepancies in the numbers, bodies found one day are reported to have been killed on that day. However Reuters does not publish all the violence, maybe one-third or one quarter of it given that September's total number of people killed by violence in Baghdad was 2,667 and Reuters had only listed 707.

"More than 2,660 Iraqi civilians were killed in Baghdad in September, according to new Health Ministry figures - 400 more than the month before despite an intensified U.S.-Iraqi sweep aimed at reining in violence."

That's 90 people per day just in Baghdad. At least 3539 were killed for the motnh of September.

Why do you insist that the average is not 100 per day when it clearly is?

You may see no stake in deflating the numbers but surely the Iraqi government does. Yet they don't refute these numbers: Over 3000 Iraqi Civilians Killed in June, U.N. Reports - New York ... Violence out of control in Iraq; 100 killed, 1000 flee every day ...

You don't like those numbers? How about these?

"One thousand people now would be displaced per day at least, and perhaps even worse is the fact that 100 people are killed every day."

The victims were mainly police recruits, judges, lawyers, journalists and women targeted for "honour crimes", prompting a brain drain of professionals who are essential to rebuild the country, according to Egeland.

About 2,000 people are crossing the border with Syria every day, bringing the number of Iraqi refugees abroad to about 1.2 to 1.5 mln, he said.

Another 1.5 mln Iraqis are now displaced within their own country, the UN estimates."

3 million refugees. Do you want to contest those numbers as well?

3 million refugees, 100,000 dead, no central control by the government, 120 attacks per day, but not an insurgency or a civil war?

Quote Reply

PlatypusMaximus 10/31/2006 5:35:54 PM

link

Now, now...2 wrongs don't make a right

Now you're gettin' it!

Why do you insist that the average is not 100 per day when it clearly is?

Clearly, yesterday was not the case. Clearly today wasn't either. 100 is about as bad as it can get ...It's not the average.

Insurgency: If I go on a murderous rampage against anyone who goes to church, is Asain, or shops at Publix, I'm not offering viable government, I kill, then I hide untill I can kill some more. I'm more than happy to kill my way to the top if it will aid me in my killing. I am not an insurgent, nor a militiaman, I am a murderer. Kinda like an elevator car not being a car.

Quote Reply

Plutarch 10/31/2006 7:12:42 PM

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1216125.php/Baghdad_blast_kills_at_least_32_workers_wounds_100__Roundup

" target="_blank">link
">link

Now, now...2 wrongs don't make a right

Now you're gettin' it!

Why do you insist that the average is not 100 per day when it clearly is?

Clearly, yesterday was not the case. Clearly today wasn't either. 100 is about as bad as it can get ...It's not the average.

Well 70 were killed today and another 40 were kidnapped and thus they are presumed dead...so that's 110.

Except when there are 50,000 of you, and you all act and think alike, and your targets are scouted out beforehand and are specific and consistent, and when the government wants to sit down and talk to you then you are an insurgent.

BTW--The Mau Mau of Kenya did not offer a viable government eitther yet they are still classified as insurgents.

You don't get to make up the rules as you go along. Show me one serious scholar of Insurgency/Counterinsurgency doctrine or terrorism/counterterrorism that does not classify the current situation in Iraq as an insurgency. Not civil war, but just insurgency.

Quote Reply

shek 10/31/2006 9:31:59 PM

There are several insurgencies being conducted in Iraq, and Iraq is indeed experiencing a civil war as the various sectarian groups forsee the day that the US will not be in town and are now jockeying for position. The forced migration of minorities from the various neighborhoods to create purely segregated neighborhoods is just one of the many signs of this struggle among the various factions.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NEXT

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy