What do you think of when you hear an enourmously absurd death toll? Do you believe it without breaking it down? Ok, 650,000 civilian Iraqi casualties, well that is about 1 every 3 minutes, does that sound realistic? Ok, where are those casulties coming from? Bombs, gun shot wounds, cancer, old age, diseases? Just remember, 75% of all statistics are made up. Have a nice night :D
2006-10-31 14:46:33 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Dude, g and notme, just think about it. How could anyone count the casulties especially when people are blowing themselves up? How is my thought process in this not rational? I just don't accept the "experts" on what they say, because "experts" are seen conflicting with one another. Just question it. Yes, that 75% statistic thing is made up, but that was for laughs, since, um, it is probably the most accurate statistic you have ever seen.
2006-10-31 14:53:32 · update #1
Hey notme, I don't like casulties, and I am not saying the war is just, or trying to persuade such. I would just prefer if some people stopped accepting things because it helps their beliefs, and instead question it.
2006-10-31 14:57:46 · update #2
Steve, that is the funny thing, I don't believe a study until I look at the procedure done, and determine if it is logical on how they did it, and to see if they forgot to factor something in, like the first respondent to this question said. It is very misleading
2006-10-31 15:04:30 · update #3
I want the troops home, when the generals think they should come home. I don't think I should have a say in the matter, since I am not over there experiencing it first hand. If the army still sees a way for victory, then let them keep at it, but if not, bring them home before anymore die
2006-10-31 15:10:54 · update #4
It has been asked to one of the British ones, in the last month, and he said they should leave, but none of the others agreed. So I don't know, it could have changed
2006-10-31 15:20:58 · update #5
If you don't believe this study, that's fine, but you may not then believe any other studies using the same statistical methodology. This would include most all political polls, and would also include the studies of how many Kurd were killed by Hussein or how many people are dying in Darfur while Bush twiddles his humanitarian thumbs.
What I would suggest is that you take a moment to read the actual study and to listen to what other statisticians say about it. I've done both, and I have to say that the method seems quite sound - of course I only have a bachelors in math, and these folks have Ph.D.'s, so I also have to listen to what the experts say. As yet, I haven't seen a single statistician that had any serious quibbles with the techniques used.
http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/LancetStudy06.htm
2006-10-31 15:01:00 · answer #1 · answered by Steve 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hitting someone in self defense, is to get that person away from you to stop them from causing harm to you. Hitting someone because you are pissed off doesn't work at all! Giving a quick swat to a child to show them that they can get hurt by something they are doing is something completly different. I'm not for or against spanking, but i think it should be used as a last resort type of thing. I've said this before. My oldest was 3 and ran out into the road.. I gave her a quick smack to the butt not out of frustration or anger, but out of fear that she could get hit, and love because i wouldn't want something bad to happen to her. I'd say ignoring a tantrum is picking your own battles. I've done it before, once again with some kids this works, because you aren't giving into the negitive attention they are seeking, with other kids it doesn't work. Ignoring your child is sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing, depending on why and how it's being done...and what message the child is getting from it. LOL, if you are putting your child in their room and not allowing them to come out except for only to use the bathroom and only to eat then yeah i would guess it would be a form of inprisonment.. but that's only if you look at it that way.
2016-05-22 23:01:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question isn't how accurate a single study is, but why is there such a huge disparity between this and the white house's figure. To be fair, lets take the lowest in the range- 400,000 and the WH figure -30,000, and split the difference. 215,000. Is this too many? Or is the war still justified? Not to my mind.
Add: have you decided whether you want the troops home soon?
Add2: Has the question been asked of the generals? I don't think so.
2006-10-31 14:50:31 · answer #3 · answered by notme 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Oh, not to mention most civilian casualties are caused by Iraqi sectarian violence, not our troops. Careful, I hear the libs coming, and they're getting upset
Oh yes, and let me add one thing. We are fighting enemy combatants without uniforms, so anyone that kills themselves in a car bomb, any one who shoots rpg's at us, anyone who fights against us is a civilian, and because they are without uniform, the Geneva Convention classifies them as civilians, and better yet, war criminals. Hows that for upholding the Geneva Convention liberals? Get your facts straight before you bash this man. He knows what he's talking about
2006-10-31 14:49:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ohh scorbore, you smarty pants you! That was probably the icing on the cake right there, all the Lib theories shot to he!!...
So much for damning Pres. Bush for all those stiffling statistics they all swear by..........lmao!!!
2006-10-31 14:52:54 · answer #5 · answered by Delia 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree they must have added in the murders comitted by Saddam ( that was already in the thousands)
2006-10-31 14:59:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who gives a **** about the numbers!!!! The fact is people are dying as a result of US occupancy!!!!
2006-10-31 15:09:57 · answer #7 · answered by Jerry H 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
75 percent of all statistics are made up... nice...
I love how Republicans talk about how they are the "party of rational thinking" yet talk about how bad stats, science and reports are... hahaha...
what exactly is rational thinking then?
do yourself a favor... go take a stats class... see how much is made up and how much is not... I'm not saying they are all accurate, but many are accurate...
2006-10-31 14:51:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
our military oh my god Kerry hates,oh those damn Dem,s made it up to further their agenda,for sure...slick sticks for sure...
2006-10-31 14:51:13 · answer #9 · answered by CIVILIAN 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋