Just checking on that moral highground
2006-10-11 15:11:43 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
PraTrp
Your answer suggests that you have been tainted by political retoric.
First the testing method was developed at Oxford Univ several years ago. It is the standard technique used by the World Health Organization for diaster enjury estimation. With over 20 years of us and scrutiny on the methodology it has stood as the most reliable testing method available.
No one squawked over using the same method after the Tsumani in Indonesia.
As to the who or what team conducted the survey. The Baghdad team acted as translators for the International survey team.
Why do you libs always want to discredit Bush
2006-10-13 05:31:45 · update #1
I blame Bill Clinton, I don't but I am hoping to beat a red to the punch.
2006-10-11 15:14:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
Everyone is just jumping on this band-wagon like I figured they would when this number came out. Do the research as to how this number was actually figured out:
The survey was conducted between May 20 and July 10 by eight Iraqi physicians organized through Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. They visited 1,849 randomly selected households that had an average of seven members each. One person in each household was asked about deaths in the 14 months before the invasion and in the period after.
Now, you tell me exactly how accurate this number is..
Democrats and liberals get so darn excited when they here about a lot of people dying, don't they?
Edit: I have not been tainted by anything. That is exactly how the survey is conducted. I've also heard people say that it the most reliable testing method available. Considering how it is conducted, do you truly believe that? Not even to mention the fact that this would mean that 500 Iraqi's die per day for three years. Do you believe that? Also, consider the fact that any and all deaths are added to this little poll. And finally, if three different households new the same person that were to die this poll would count that as three deaths. So, in essence let’s say that Mr. Joe Iraqi dies of a heart-attack and four of the households polled in this survey new that guy, then his death by heart attack would be counted four times and then multiplied by what ever method they use to get their total. If you ask me, this isn’t really all that accurate. So, basically, the overall answer to your question: No, I don’t believe that the invasion of Iraq caused 650,000 Iraqi deaths. Not even close.
2006-10-13 09:48:29 · answer #2 · answered by PraTrp 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1) Saddam didn't make fun of GHW Bush, he tried to kill him. Even you should undersrtand the difference.
2) Your statement the GW Bush killed 650,000 Iraqis is absurd because:
a) there is no verification of numbers anywhere close to this high &
b) most dead Iraqis were killed by Iraqis & other Arabs, not Americans.
I don't know about moral or ground, but definitely have the "high".
2006-10-17 13:40:09 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What other reason are we there for. It wasn't 9/11 or we would be in Iran. Bin Laden is not in Iraq. He was going after Saddam and just wanted an excuse to do it. Not only killing 650,000 people, but spending a billion dollars every two weeks to get it done.
2006-10-12 00:01:36 · answer #4 · answered by MrsMike 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. Saddam was the ultimate scapegoat. He was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy waged war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and then turned into a terrorist harboring, WMD developing bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Osama distraction". So all in all he is Saddam ed either way.
2006-10-12 12:02:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Have you been there? It has nothing to do with leaders making fun of one another. Unfortunately for the insurgents the US is better trained.
2006-10-11 22:23:40 · answer #6 · answered by lms 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey jerk off, the number one killer of Muslims, is other Muslims. The cowards can't face real solders, so the kill their innocent neighbors and countrymen while hiding behind the mama's burka.
2006-10-11 22:15:50 · answer #7 · answered by rikv77 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
This President is one who has placed the US constitution at risk, has placed world peace at risk, has placed the environment at risk, you think he is worried about etiquette?
2006-10-11 22:17:35 · answer #8 · answered by meldorhan 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There's no etiquette. Just business.
2006-10-12 01:12:48 · answer #9 · answered by Mysterio 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
About right. they should drown those 2 in that lovely thick black liquid they seem to covet so much.
2006-10-11 22:18:38 · answer #10 · answered by dingdong 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋