Terrorists owe America and the rest of the world a lot more than that. I'd advise you to get them to pay up to the Iraqi families.
Iraq never engaged in terrorism that false connection is partially responsible for this slaughter. Source on the 100,000 figure Johns Hopkins University(BTW it is a correct figure): http://chronicle.com/free/2005/01/2005012701n.htm http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673604174412/fulltext I know that the $400 trillion figure is hyperbole but $4 million is pretty standard for wrongful death. Most of these deaths were not committed by soldiers, and those that were usually result in very real very heartfelt apologies by the soldiers involved. Most of these deaths are the result of misuse air power. listen to this http://www.thislife.org/
So what's your point? If the Iraqi's want that money, I say let them come on over and try to collect.
Danr, you remind me of the little boy running around beating on a drum, only in your case, your the entire brass band!
Right.............."They also acknowledged that the true number of deaths could fall anywhere within a range of 8,000 to 194,000" 100k. Real accurate number. You can't place any stock in a study that varies its maximum and minimum by oh, I don't know, a mere 186,000.
It is called a bell curve, 100,000 is at the top of the bell curve meaning that it is the most likely figure with 8000 and 194,000 having an almost nonexistant probability (this is all part of the science of statistics, I know this is not the kind of math we use everyday but it is real) . It is a rock solid study the science here is unassailable, as a matter of fact the guy risked his life many, many times to get the accurate numbers and aprx 80% of deaths were varified with a death certificate. Listen to that radio story on This American Life. I thought people would have a problem with the $4 mil wrongful death settlement figure. That 100 K figure really makes a lot of sence to me considering what is going on there. If you think about it 100 K people can fit into a large stadium, a few bombings at large gatherings could easily equal 100 K.
Look, it is not the figures or sums that matters. Just ONE "accidental" kill, regardless of whomever is bad enough. Forget compensation figures - they can't even replace a bloody life. "Oh sorry, I *accidently* killed your relatives" Everyone wouldn't be surprised if you get mad over me. I don't think I need to explain why. And geez, terrorism is such a nice excuse to term everything. "OMG HE KILLED SOMEONE" <- TERRORIST!!! Anyone can call somebody a terrorist just because he killed someone??? Or only when a Westerner get killed, will that person be considered a terrorist??? Why bother talking about the money and killing? A troll post? Even if this post is supposed to achieve something, there is nothing you can really do. If war in Iraq is costing US so much millions, why bother investing in powerful bombs when you can be bombing pennies instead. You know if they are dropped from such heights, they can be quite lethal??? And when they land on the ground, they are cash anyways. Good for everyone, except for the people hit by the raining pennies. Either join the military or join the protest - don't think this will accomplish anything.
I am fully aware of statistical analyses. However, he was also going into areas that were heavily concentrated with combatants, so there was a higher incidence of death, so let's say his statistics are skewed. This number has been debunked by proponents on both side of the political spectrum.
I posted it because of the story on This American Life broadcast on NPR on Saturdays. This program enjoys a strong following among those who are familiar with it. You can listen to an archieved replay for free here http://www.thislife.org/. Ira Glass interviews the statistician who did the study, this guy went into Fullijah (sp?) during some heavy fighting to compile the numbers because the random number chart dictated that city. Conservatives have tried to refute the study but they are not able to because it is real deal science. As for the value of each human life I could not agree with you more.
Zane you drank the Koolaid. This is the real deal. This guy risked his life to keep this thing random. The only serious guy who refuted it was interviewed on This American Life and he totally backs down from his criticism and totally embraced the truth of the study. There may be crackpots who refute this but no serious person does. Listen at that link.
Without getting myself into more hot water over my words, I just want to point out that I never said Iraq did anything. Go back and read my post, and you'll find that I said "terrorists."
I refute your study based on the fact that your source from NPR does not know any sort of exacting figures. A bell curve is a form of guesswork based on base statistical data. Fact of the matter is, the dude can't tell me how many people were killed, and of the figure that he cites as "civilians" he can't tell me how many of them actually were civilians. Therefore, I refute your study and your science.
I would not be surprised if 100,000 Iraqis were killed in the first Gulf War. Who attacked Kuwait? Who put those Iraqi grunts out there in front of the most powerful ground force in the history of warfare. Saddam. I'll bet most of the front line cannon fodder were Shia conscripts. G.H.W. Bush should have smoked the Republican Guards when he had the opportunity in Gulf War I. I wonder what would have happened had the roles been reversed?
I couldn't agree more. I think a more accurate source would be iraqbodycount.org who takes their numbers from news sources.
Sounds like you did not bother to listen to the show, your loss really (it is pretty engaging). His methodology is standard. If you throw out this methodology then you may as well teach creationism to the kids, this is simply how research (science) is done. As for some of the dead being "noncivilian" I suppose you may have a case there, definitions of civilian and noncivilian become blurred in this sort of chaos. I think that it is safe to say that they were not members of organized uniformed armies, some may have been insurgent/guerilla types probably not many. The Iraqbodycount thing come nowhere near the exhustive study I have sited. You can't throw out the scientific method just because you do not like the result, it is like saying I don't like gravity so I will jump off of this cliff. As for the first Iraq war we had a much better reason to be there then, this is a different time. I have friends who tell me that first Iraq war really sucked, they hated being there.
Ok, do you agree with the minimum 26k figure? Do you have any idea how many people that is? Or rather, have you been to a football stadium? Imagine seeing all those people around you in the stadium DEAD. Do you understand that even if we allowed a deviation of 10% or so, bodies are dead and will not do anything except to bring more misery to the family. What exactly are we supposed to do with them. Talk about their death??? Extract their body parts for human body sales so that they could be used to pay their family members to make them happy? And please, if you have never seen a dead body or never lost anyone to old age, cancer, etc, wait till you see more than 10+ bodies at once. I most definately wouldn't want to imagine in terms of hundreds, forget thousands. And I propose this question to you, have you ever seen a dead person's face when he / she dies in pain in real life? Or any more than just one at one point? If you haven't, this is a pointless topic for you. The point is, WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS TOPIC??? Arguing sums and compensation figures??? That's a politician's job unless you want to be one.
GX these orders of magnitude in the deaths are important. Look at the Holocaust deniers, there are plenty of people who want to deny that this suffering exists for whatever reason. Never forget.