The marine in the video should personally sue the journalist when he gets back state side.

It is an honor to be in the same military and the folks in your documentary.

Abraham Lincoln once said,”A man is about as happy as he makes up his mind to be.” And do you know what? He was right! I will be happy to take on this little project.

Cheers

Mark Nasche

Pat Dollard | Young Americans
A MOST awesome site….

Just one clip. 02 “Welcome To The Triangle Of Death”
Highly recommend the site. Watch the clips, look for the movie.
……

I would also be interested to read the article, any idea when this was? As an unpatriotic DemoRAT, I have a few laying around…

The gentlemen that you interviewed are so amazing-calm, eloquent- despite the hell surrounding them. Their grace and presence is awe-inspiring. Thanks for capturing that.

I agree we shouldn’t kill the journalist but how about torture? I suggest, if he is found guilty, we have him do a report on the evils of Islam for al-jazeera. Only he must show his face and give his full name and address to the audience.

I’ll bet you we can crash an e-mail server someplace, get some magazine subscriptions canceled, maybe a lawsuit or two. Lots of fun stuff.

These men are amazing. You’re not too shabby yourself. (That is to say, I’m blown away.) I personally would love it if you were to do a bit of a “Roger and Me” type of query of the Economist journalist mentioned by the Marine in this chapter. Better yet, if you could somehow have that same man confront the journalist on screen back in the States.

Ditto for Christian Amanpour, CNN and the NY Times. Or even Moore himself. The media loves soldiers when they hate Bush. Otherwise shut up. I think William Arkin’s infamous opinions of soldiers is much more the norm for the Angry White Media. (That our trooops are “mercenaries”.) I mean can you imagine Cindy Sheehan out in the Hamptons in July if she weren’t Sean Penn’s puppet? A lot of Gold Star mothers out there in Sag Harbor?

Pat, watched that clip of the CNN reporter mulling over Iranian weapons killing our boys in Iraq and seeming to condone it in that courderoy forehead, white-bread, pseudo-intellectual way. Just wondering, is it ok to question their patriotism yet?

Thank God for you all. Watching most of our media makes one feel as if George Orwell or Alice in Wonderland is around the corner. Up is down. Terrorists are “insurgents”. Bush is Hitler even as real life Nazis try and kill our men and women and if they can’t they blow up women and children. But turn the channel and they’ll be telling us George Clooney is brave. Beam me up, Scotty.

Pat, I am spreading the word about you.

Tom

The identity of a reporter for the Economist is not a secret. find the article, read it, form your own opinion. Remember that you don’t know what happened in reality. Which is why resolving this matter does not lie in the hands of a few insane posters who want to literally jump on someone’s throat just because of the suggestion that he might have done a false reporting.

While I can’t say that I oppose torture by principle, I hope you were kidding about physical torture as a mean of punishment. You do not battle oppressive, torturing regimes by becoming one.

The Media must report the truth. Far to much bias distortion of facts and spin by both sides. Remember though the media is essential part of our democracy

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American Public.” - Teddy Roosevelt (FDR)

Excellent clip. Thanks for speaking out against apolegetics for sedition.

Okay, For example, I do not think that nationbuilding in Iraq is a good idea…In fact my politics are near-socialist.

However, I’m an American and as such I unconditionally support the missions of the American Armed forces.

Those who don’t support the mission aren’t just being critical, they aren’t just being assholes, they *are* embellishing pretexts to launch terrorist attacks against our community, they *are* directly aiding the enemy PR effort, they *are* damaging the morale of the troops and the nation, and yet they *aren’t* ashamed, which is their #1 problem in my opinion.

So , treason or not,

The sordid elements of the American left lack and attack a sense of duty to God and Country at every possible opportunity. I think the word ‘dispicable’ comes to mind.

I saw your video clips in youtube today for the first time. I am impressed with your portrayal of the Marines you met while making your documentary. They’ve been put in a really difficult position and are doing the very best they can. While I feel there might be some editing involved (I only heard the Iraqis referred to as Hajis once…..something I am sure happens way more often than in your videos), I still think your clips are the most honest of any coverage that has come out of Iraq so far.

I’d be curious to see reactions in your comments from Iraq veterans. Also, how long ago was this filmed? It looks like it was 2005-2006? I really hope you or someone else will be able to go back again soon. Lots of things have changed since then, both in Iraq and in America.

Kick the hollywood types around all you want….they deserve it. But try not to be too hard on the average lefties. They want the same thing you do…..for our soldiers to do well and to come home safely.

Not being able to deny these facts , I can safely assume the soldier is telling the truth. Perhaps, you can tell me how you know he is lying?

Inspiring stuff Pat!

so are you talking about a lynch mob? Is that your understanding of justice?

Also, I didn’t say that the soldier was lying. I am only saying that the judgement is out, and with us not knowing more details, it’s not up to us. My gut feeling tells me that the soldier is not lying, but my gut feeling does not count when it comes to bringing someone to “justice” based on the little we saw.

Also, we know that American soldiers killed innocents and defenseless people. We know about the (systematic?) torture in the detention centers, and we know about planned rape and assassination of the innocent. There is no doubt in that, and if someone does, I can show you the sources which go beyond any bias the media can have.

Now these things happen during an occupation, they happened before, they will happen again, and the people of the occupied country don’t appreciate them. The question is whether it was necessary to bring this upon the Iraqi people. The war wasn’t self defense - there never was an Hussein - Al Qaida link and even if we believe that the administration did not mislead the people when it came to the threat of WMDs, we must at least see that their evaluation of the poor intelligence on Iraq was tainted by a strong bias towards the invasion.

Getting rid of Saddam Hussein was good. Giving the people some freedoms is great, though you can’t enjoy them when you are being blown up, or have to pay insane amounts of for fuel or electricity. Experts warned about destabilizing the region with the invasion, and they were damn right. And whether we talk about 30000 (Pentagon) or 655000 (”Lancet” study, 2006) “excel deaths”, this is a steep price. Btw, as far as I know the bipartisan Iraq study group suggests a figure close to 100000. I tend to go with that. Here by the way the link to the much debated Lancet study:

http://web.mit.edu/CIS/lancet-study-101106.pdf

Regarding the objectivity of the soldier that is being hailed here: While I agree that it is the soldier that gets much more “first-hand” experience than the western journalist, I have two reasons to doubt the objectivity. First, the army wants their soldiers to go out there and do a good job, and certainly are interested in them having a pro-war bias. Also, I think it is hard for a soldier to admit that he’s been to war and suffered because of terrible mistakes done by the administration. And no, I don’t think that Kerry would have done a significantly better job.

I don’t like getting labeled, but if you have too, ok, “liberal” is much closer than “conservative”. I don’t like the labeling because it draws away attention from the points made. People who hate liberals tend not to listen to you when you get labeled one, no matter what you have to say.

“Also, we know that American soldiers killed innocents and defenseless people. We know about the (systematic?) torture in the detention centers, and we know about planned rape and assassination of the innocent.”

I see that as an honest expression of your criticism.

As a young American (20) fixing to join the USMC, I suggest that those ideas are not useful outside of hurting the war effort, hurting our morale and hurting our will to fight.

I fear that the tone and content of your comments would convince people to view the soldiers as foolish villians as opposed to dutiful citizens.

That concerns me.

What do you think?

The objectivity of the “soldier” in question is actually a Marine lieutenant. You don’t call a Marine a soldier.

Your first point about doubting the Marine’s objectivity is wrong. Yes, the military is geared towards mission acccomplishment, as any professional military should be. Yes, having good morale and a “pro-war bias” will help. However, Marines and soldiers are not stupid and can exercise judgement. I served in Iraq for seven months and certainly had a MISERABLE time there. I didn’t enjoy the (human) shit burning detail, sleeping in the dirt, dealing with the scorching heat, flies crawling on my ass while shitting, not being able to take a shower, and not having any pussy the entire time on deployment. Also, having to go out on patrol everyday and putting my life on the line is not exactly my idea of fun. Getting shot at is not a fun experience and something I wish I never have to deal with again for the rest of my life. Most servicemembers probably share my sentiments of deployment being miserable, and like me probably miss home a lot when in theatre. That being said, it would take a lot more than having the higher-ups order or wish for us to be “pro-war” for us to truly believe in what we fight for - especially with all the misery, hardship, and danger we go through. We see the difference and progress we make and how important our mission and presence there is. We see with our own eyes and not through television.

I have seen with my own eyes and can tell you that much of what I saw went unreported. You never hear about the families and children we feed, schools we help to rebuild, and order and progress we have made over there. When I was there, the majority or Iraqis I met wanted us there, and for the most part, we were greeted as liberators. They were happy to be freed from Saddam’s oppressive rule, but you never hear about that in the media. You mostly hear about killing of innocents, Abu Ghraib, and the media vilifying our servicemembers, even though these are exceptions to the majority of our proud professional military. Remember the LCpl that was put on trial for killing an Iraqi who was playing dead? The media had a field day and almost had him court martialed and convicted for killing an enemy combatant and saving the lives of his fellow Marines. Any Marine in his situation would have done the same. I have seen and heard the truth with my own eyes and ears, and I’m fully capable of figuring out what is right and wrong(just like all the others who have served).

Your second point is also wrong. There are certainly mistakes and grievances the Bush administration has committed during the course of the war. An example of this is Halliburton’s war profiteering. Contracts being awarded to Halliburton even after they mishandled hundreds of millions of dollars is wrong. I saw with my own eyes that they hardly did any of work they were supposed to. The Bush administration has also made other mistakes along the way, and we (the military) are not ignorant of that - nor do we find it difficult to point a finger at the source of most of our suffering and disgrace(MSM, not Bush).

I’m honored that I had the opportunity to participate in the liberation and rebuilding or Iraq, but I’m quite disgusted with the filth and lies propogated by the media.

-Joe

Points taken. Marines and soldiers are not stupid, and I never said that. And they not only do have access to the media and their own experience to make their judgement, which is much more than the viewer/reader at home. Military command also can’t make sure that everyone supports the war, even if the higher-ups would prefer it. Just you criticizing the Halliburton business is not proof that my other point is wrong, though. I am talking about more significant mistakes, like, yes, invading Iraq. And I think there is a point that it is hard for many servicemen to admit such mistakes because they are so much involved. If you are putting your ass in line, you better believe that the whole effort makes sense. However, those two points I made might be relatively irrelevant.

I see that the media mostly reports on the violence and the negative sides of the occupation and there is little about the reconstruction effort etc. By the way, I don’t care that much about media consensus when forming my own opinion. If you ask me, 80% of the media is stupid. I try to pick the 20% that seems well-researched and either very unbiased or that clearly admits the bias, and take a look at the scientific side of the whole issue. Good media for example admits that journalism in Iraq has failed. Here’s a nice documentary about it:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13420.htm

Why you are calling for the media to report on Saddam’s crimes is beyond me, though. *Everyone* already knows that, and there is nothing newsworthy about this. They do report about mass graves found. What else do you want? Do you want a report on Saddam’s crimes after each negative news about Iraq? Now that would be very obvious propaganda.

Every study, partisan, bipartisan, non-partisan, that speaks with military personnel and Iraqi civilians shows that Iraq is worse off because of the invasion. Security and infrastructure were significantly better before the invasion, even with Saddam being a monster. Now the invasion is, theoretically, a good opportunity to turn the country into an even better place, but more people die in each year following it.

And the Iraqi people, so the polls, want the US to go. Again, it doesn’t matter which poll you look at. Even if you just take the polls by the US Department of Defense, you see that large majorities want Americans to leave as soon as possible, Sunni majorities support the insurgency against US troops. If this is about helping the Iraqis, why does their opinion not count?

Doug,

“As a young American (20) fixing to join the USMC, I suggest that those ideas are not useful outside of hurting the war effort, hurting our morale and hurting our will to fight.

I fear that the tone and content of your comments would convince people to view the soldiers as foolish villians as opposed to dutiful citizens. ”

Oh yes, this definitely is not good for morale. And this should hurt the will to fight. I am not talking about the servicemen, but about the whole war effort. This war is wrong on so many levels - the way the country was coerced to engage in it, the way it affects the country (Iraq), the way it leaves Afghanistan behind as an unfinished job, with the Taliban getting stronger again, and the way it is weakening America and basically all western nations. The sooner it stops, the better. I am sorry for the servicemen fighting in this war. I think that they can be proud of themselves, considering what many have to go through.

According to some people here, such thinking is also un-American. When I argue I try to show that it is, indeed, thinking about the issues, and not just making some propaganda claims (I wonder when Pat starts deleting my posts, I hope he doesn’t, because I find this discussion interesting). How such thinking can be un-American is beyond me. Is it not American not to support your government or a war, when so much speaks against both? Sounds fascist to me.

Just throwing a couple things out there; buuuttt…

Nation building takes time. Especially in regions where there has been nothing but crime, oppression, and warfare for two generations.

The Taliban has been able to begin rebuilding itself because of the wonderful haven provided by Waziristan; with thanks to the Pakistani government’s inability or unwillingness to clean up the region and police their own country and borders. Something by the way, that we offered to do, and continue to offer to aid them in, but are continually turned down.

Could you elaborate on how the WOT (or just Iraq) is weakening the US and the Western World?

I seriously doubt this. Maybe every study you have read, which I kind of doubt. It just isn’t what most people do. But maybe you are more motivated than most people, huh?

I just wonder, Morlock, what positive effect has losing a war ever had on the loser? How could our country possibly be better off declaring defeat and retreating (or redeploying to Okinawa if you like)?

It seems to me that if somebody wanted to end the war more quickly it would be by helping to destabilize and demoralize our enemy and not ourselves. The only thing demoralizing our country does is to make us second-guess every time we are faced with a crisis. This will result in far more innocent deaths than fighting a war, as it emboldens our enemies to perpetrate far more deadly attacks against the US and our interests around the world. Loudly disagreeing with those who don’t seem to have any interests further than short-term political success (and who echo the same sentiments of our enemies) is not fascist, it is called the democratic process.

I don’t know what kind of polls you have read, but the reception that I PERSONALLY got (along with all the other Marines I served with) was MOSTLY POSITIVE. I’m sure the Iraqis don’t want us to stay any longer than necessary, or as you say “as soon as possible.” However, this does not equate to them wanting us to leave immediately. I saw many that wanted us to make sure there was peace and stability before leaving, without staying any longer than necessary.

As for reporting on Saddam’s crimes, the media and jihadists in the Middle East portray Bush and the US military to be public enemy number one, the “Great Satan.” They seem to forget that Saddam, the Butcher of Baghdad, and his sons were monsters. Michael Moore and his false portrayal/propaganda of Iraq being not so bad before we came is an example of this false propaganda. I’m just asking for a reality check and a fair perspective here.

Also, most of the north (Kurdish region), central, and southern Iraq is stable, and much progress has been made. I saw with my own eyes. The part of Iraq being worse off after the invasion, is limited to Baghdad, Ramadi, and the surrounding areas - which is a small area in comparison to the rest of the country. I highly doubt that those that conducted these “studies” went out on a daily basis to various regions in all of Iraq to collect information on the welfare of the local population.

I don’t know what kind of polls you have read, but the reception that I PERSONALLY got (along with all the other Marines I served with) was MOSTLY POSITIVE. I’m sure the Iraqis don’t want us to stay any longer than necessary, or as you say “as soon as possible.” However, this does not equate to them wanting us to leave immediately. I saw many that wanted us to make sure there was peace and stability before leaving, without staying any longer than necessary.

As for reporting on Saddam’s crimes, the media and jihadists in the Middle East portray Bush and the US military to be public enemy number one, the “Great Satan.” They seem to forget that Saddam, the Butcher of Baghdad, and his sons were monsters. Michael Moore and his false portrayal/propaganda of Iraq being not so bad before we came is an example of this false propaganda. I’m just asking for a reality check and a fair perspective here.

Also, most of the north (Kurdish region), central, and southern Iraq is stable, and much progress has been made. I saw with my own eyes. The part of Iraq being worse off after the invasion, is limited to Baghdad, Ramadi, and the surrounding areas - which is a small area in comparison to the rest of the country. I highly doubt that those that conducted these “studies” went out on a daily basis over an extended period of time to various regions in all of Iraq to collect information on the welfare of the local population.

Dennis Said,
I think I may have found the article the marine in the film was referring to. Although, very easy to find, there is no author’s name tied to it, that I could find. I’ve pasted the link below… Maybe someone can find this author’s name.

Keep up the good work!

http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news3/economist.html

First off, thank you for your service to our country. I know that service in the military is not usually considered a church picnic, and I appreciate everything you and your brothers (and sisters) have done for this country and others.

The portrayal of Saddam as a butcher, and Morlock’s dismissal of this fact, shows the true reason why this is not talked about. It gives true contrast between our troops and our enemies. While any innocent killed is a tragedy, there is a very obvious difference. Intent. Our side doesn’t intentionally kill civilians, and in fact, we risk the lives of our own in order to decrease civilian casualities. Saddam INTENTIONALLY killed innocent men, women and children because of his hate of their tribe, ethnicity or religion. Anyone who has seen the video of the horrible situation in the northern Kurdish area knows about what I am describing. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a closed society, and like most dictatorships, he was able to keep a lid on all his atrocities. Those who even SPOKE against him were at least punished by having their tongues cut out, and at worst, were forced to watch their wives and children raped, only to be killed afterwards. The death of the pure-evil Saddam and his sadistic sons is merciful compared to the horrors that their victims received.

Doug
I beleive you are absolutely correct in your assessment of the current position held by the democratic Left. there is an undeniable movement underway to destroy this countries will fufill our commitment to the people of Iraq that borders on sedition. Good luck with the corp and keep yourself safe. Check out this link if ever you are in doubt.
http://howardwasright.com/index.php/site/more/530/
Morlok
Dude… You are a complete and total TOOL (of the far left). The whole “Bush Lied”, “this is an Illeagal War”, “Torture”, and “Killing of innocents” meme has been waaaayyyy over done. As David said it demoralizes our country and our military. It emboldens our enemy. I have been working with the Iraqis for over 4 years and I can tell you that the thought of us leaving scares them to death.Your assertation that they were better off before the war is completely false and falls straight in line with the talking points of the Left. There have been major improvements in this country that would have never been possible without our intervention. The greatest problem we face is the security issue. This will never be solved as long as our politicians and our far Left continue with thier drum beat of “Bring the troops home”. You guys are providing “Aid and Comfort” to the enemy. The argument for this war was started by the Democrats in 98 during the clinton administration.
http://blogs.wizbangblog.com/2006/06/14/of-wmd-lies-and-democrats.php
I beleive that the bush administration could have done a much better job. I don’t agree with many of the decisions they have made regarding this whole endeavor. However, I am not the Commander and Chief. We are at WAR, The congress agreed to this War, The country agreed to this war. There can be no alternative other than the successful completion of this War. One wonders how we lost sight of that goal. The stakes are to great. What happens to the Iraqis if we pull up stakes and leave? Vietnam…. Cambodia…. Millions slaughtered…. This time however, the stakes are higher. The communist were not focused on attacking America directly. The guys we are dealing with now are not so generous. To use this war as an opportunity for political gain, as many of our politicians are, is beyond the pale. I beleive history will hold a harsh judgement of these politicians, and those that supported them, if we allow ourselves to loose again.
Anyway…. Off my soap box…. Keep up the great work Pat

The only thing weakening America and western nations are all of the defeatists that give aid and comfort to our enemies. We are the good guys, they are the bad guys. It is that simple.

In my opinion, the only reason most defeatists are so bold and loud in their rants against the USA is because they can. We are a nation that is good and civil, and they know that they will be safe no matter how vitriolic they become. They wouldn’t dare speak out against the terrorists we are fighting. In fact, if they lived in any of those “religion of peace” countries, they wouldn’t even have the oportunity to speak their minds. Yet, somehow surrendercrats equate us and them, like we are equals.

First, the WOT weakening the US:

It’s weakening the US from within, because it is undermining democracy. With habeas corpus violated, the kidnapping of foreign citizens without evidence that they are guilty, and torture of prisoners, the US has made a big step towards China. Also, this things has costed almost half a trillion dollars so far, and this is according to congressional appropriations.

With the war in Iraq, the US has politically isolated itself from the largest parts of the world. Anti-Americanism is on a high, which strengthens every politician that promises to defy the US. With the intelligence failure that led to the invasion, the country has embarassed itself, and, together with hailing those governments as the new pioneers of democracy (”New Europe” for example) that in fact disregards what the majority of the people say, the US has lost reputation and support.

As far as I understand, the US has lost military options with the troops tied to Iraq, but I am no military expert.

The Afghanistan democracy effectively ends when you leave the city of Kabul. And while nation building takes time, the situation is not getting better, but worse.

As for the polls, you can find a collection of results here:
http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55

As for the studies, have a look at the Iraq study group results published last year. This was a study group with as many Republicans as Democrats leading it. Have a look at the Lancet paper I linked to, which doesn’t rely on anectdotal evidence (remember that there are sevicemen who made different experiences than you guys - they just don’t hang around here), but on looks at 1850 households throughout the country. David, I don’t know what you mean by saying that reading studies is not what most people do. It probably is not. But the good thing is that the information is out there. You don’t have to rely on the evening news, on Michael Moore or on Pat Dollard. There are enough scientific publications out there that are very clear about the methods they use to evaluate the situation. Have a look at them and make up your own mind.

Joe: As for the peaceful regions - so far, the invasion has been very good for the northern, Kurdish population. They don’t have their Kurdistan, but they enjoy autonomy, which is what they wanted. And yes, there are other peaceful regions. Also Basra is relatively peaceful, though the British forces are still losing men there due to attacks. But don’t forget that more than a fifth of the population live in the areas you describe. Imagine if the US got into such a situation and someone would say: “Listen, except for the states California, Texas and Illinois the country is in relative peace.”

David, in a previous post I described Saddam as a monster. How this is supposed to be dismissing the fact that he was a butcher I don’t understand. Anyway, Saddam intentionally killed people (in his worst days with support of western states including France, Germany and the US if I might add). But the US invasion led to a very significant rise of the death rate in Iraq, and at least ten times as many deaths as Kurds were gassed by Hussein, though yes, most of these deaths surely were not intended. Now you can say that these deaths were driven by different intentions, and if this is really relevant to you, sure, then it is better to have all these deaths under the US occupation.

About what good it would bring should the US retreat, here is how I see it: I think that if you look at how the past 4 years went, with each year demanding more victims, one can conclude that the US presence will not bring peace to the region. The US will leave eventually, and it is well possible that the country will stay chaotic after that, for quite some time. Who knows what will come out of it. But since this process seems inevitable, it is better for the US to get out soon. It’s a sad situation, and I do hope that I am wrong.

And you should disagree if you have a different opinion. I just get tired of seeing critics of the war called “un-American”.

“It’s weakening the US from within, because it is undermining democracy. With habeas corpus violated, the kidnapping of foreign citizens without evidence that they are guilty, and torture of prisoners, the US has made a big step towards China. Also, this things has costed almost half a trillion dollars so far, and this is according to congressional appropriations.”

It is not undermining Democracy. You must mean the Justice system as American citizens enjoy it. The capture of enemy combatants and financiers from areas falling within the ground war aspect of the WOT is not the kidnapping of foreign citizens. Although if you prefer, I have a few friends that wouldn’t have minded just killing them on the spot three years ago, although that would be against American ideals about the value of life and liberty as well as counterproductive. Nor do “we”, “torture” detainees as you claim. They do worse to us in SERE and Air Force Survival School. Finally, I had no idea that warfare and all the logistical support, as well as nation-building efforts included in the WOT (there is far more than Iraqi and Enduring Freedom going on bud) could be found cheaply; might you name an alternative please?

“With the war in Iraq, the US has politically isolated itself from the largest parts of the world. Anti-Americanism is on a high, which strengthens every politician that promises to defy the US”

This year, I spent the holidays in Colombia and Belize, with a stopover in Mexico. Also, I spent three weeks in Italy and Hungary last year working with COESPU and hosted by the Carabineri. I got the distinct feeling that Americans are appreciated, they (the citizens of these and other countries) love everything about us. Especially in Hungary (and other former Soviet-bloc nations I’ve visited) where people fly American flags outside their homes. Merely being an American (we’re easy to pick out due to our distinctive accents) makes you friends in these countries. I simply cannot relate theses people’s feelings towards America, our people and our ideals, in such a small space.

“But the US invasion led to a very significant rise of the death rate in Iraq, and at least ten times as many deaths as Kurds were gassed by Hussein, though yes, most of these deaths surely were not intended. Now you can say that these deaths were driven by different intentions, and if this is really relevant to you, sure, then it is better to have all these deaths under the US occupation.”

Wars tend to do that, and in case you didn’t know; since the “insurgents”, who are really just criminals and terrorists, don’t wear uniforms, they are counted as civilian dead. Use your imagination. Ever wonder why there is a “Coalition” and a “Civilian” count but not count for enemy combatants? And by the way, after reading the information provided by your link (Iraqanalysis.org, who by the way has inflated their numbers by claiming them “estimates”. An estimate could be off by six billion and still called an “estimate”) I can see that the closest they come to discerning between innocent and combatant deaths is in “Table:4 Violent deaths by Cause and Time” of the .pdf file, “Mortality after the 2003 Invasion of Iraq: a cross sectional cluster sample survey” where the Table’s author creates the classes of “Unknown”, “Coalition” and “Other”. Unknown, we can assume, is the label applied to non-Coalition combatants. The “Unknown” “Cause of death” is higher than the “Coalition” in every case but Pre-invasion, in which they are equal.

Besides which, I defy you to prove that the American-led Coalition is responsible for more innocent deaths than the Hussein regime. *Defy*.

Stark,
You show that you don’t know how such studies work. They always work with estimates. You ask a certain number of people until you get a statistical significance of your data, meaning that the sample very likely representes the population. Which basically means that with a chance of 95%, between 393000 and 943000 people were killed. The number with the highest chance of being true is 655000. It’s the way statistics works everywhere, not just here. You may want to read more about how they reached their conclusions. Every number would be an estimate, but there are better and worse estimates, and according to their data, the further you get away from the 655000, the worse your estimate gets. So saying that 655000 and six billion are both estimates is like saying that evolution and Intelligent Design are both theories. Of course thast’s the truth, but one is much better and credible than the other if you look at the data. In the article itself you can read why they chose this method and not what are called “passive surveillance measures”. Let me quote:

“Data from passive surveillance are rarely complete, even in stable circumstances, and are even less complete during conflict, when access is restricted and fatal events could be intentionally hidden. Aside from Bosnia, we can find no conflict situation where passive surveillance recorded more than 20% of the deaths measured by population-based methods.”

I don’t know how many people were killed in total by Hussein, and I didn’t say that Americans killed more than Hussein did. I don’t know how many people Hussein killed. Read my post more carefully. So sorry, there goes your defiance. The first Gulf War (Iran-Iraq) killed about a million people, the war in ‘91 claimed about 150000 lives. So if you give Hussein the sole responsibility for that, the death toll under his regime is already much higher. Add the thousands of people he killed in his country. However, even more conservative guesses suggest that the number of people killed during the invasion and the occupation is higher than the number of deaths per year during the last years of the Saddam regime.

Btw, since Hussein had support from a number of western countries right through his worst attrocities, which makes it hard to say who “caused” many of the deaths.

As for the torture: Cheney himself admitted that waterboarding was “useful” to acquire information. You might call this harmless, I call it torture, especially if you don’t sign up for it.

As a personal note, I don’t care which party says what. When you look at history, the difference between the foreign politics of the Democrats and the Republicans are very minor and superficial, though yes, on this narrow scale the Democrat party is more appealing to me.

As I said, when it comes to the argument, I don’t care which party says what. I don’t know if I would give my vote to the Democrats in an American election. And btw, I agree with you that more people should take part in the democratic process. In other countries (like Brazil, for example) you have to vote, and this is not a bad rule. You can still cast an empty ballot if you want, but at least you have to cast one.

the whole idea of freedom is having the right to do something or not do something as long as you dont infringe on the rights of others. requiring people to vote is not freedom.

Anyways if as you say 80% of the media are idiots then i suggest you read and article called “A litany of Leftist Lies” By jacob Laksin Frontpagemagazine.com August 13,2004

he goes over in great detail the alleged lie by bush about saddam buying uranium from niger,the idea that Bush called iraq an imminent threat,the alqaeda saddam connection, the idea that iraq has increased the terrorist threat in the us, wmd’s etc.

you will find that you have been unduly influenced by our leftist media, and since you have no experience in the field, you obviously have been duped by the idiots.

read the article if you dare to have your mind changed. Or are you too open minded for that?

you are very right about the long tem objectives of islam. the leader of CAIR in america said at a speech one time that they are not here to be a part of the population but to dominate and make shariah the law of the land. they of course have denied saying such things and the media portrays them as a muslim aclu. Yeah the aclu with guns and bombs.

“lo, fight them until all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.” (Quran 8:39)

“Men , do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man? Yes. In swearing allegiance to Muhammad, we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.” (Ishaq:204)

will read it. Give me some time for my reply because I won’t be on this site this weeekend.

American politics? No, not specifically. It’s poor dinner conversation.

On the statistics of your “study”.

” Every number would be an estimate, but there are better and worse estimates, and according to their data, the further you get away from the 655000, the worse your estimate gets. So saying that 655000 and six billion are both estimates is like saying that evolution and Intelligent Design are both theories. Of course thast’s the truth, but one is much better and credible than the other if you look at the data.”

Oh, and the numbers “393,000 and 943,000″ leave a huge space to play in. 393k is an inflated number, and if the basis of your study is on an inflated number and an estimate that is about twice that, there are problems with your collection methods. The standard deviation of the three numbers (minX, med, and maxX) is 224′620 by the way.

Besides which, my comment wasn’t targeted *at* the numbers, I drew a small point in saying that a statistic is a statistic, no matter how inaccurate. My point was that the study made no differentiation between enemy combatant and innocent deaths. Nor did it even list “insurgents” as a cause of risk factor. They were assumed to be grouped with “unknown”.

And they are both estimates, just as well as intelligent design (ID) and evolution are both theories. But whereas the only surefire way to figure out the ID/evolution question is to die, people can go to Iraq and count the bodies. Not the he said she said; the bodies. Or, they can accept the mortuary affairs officers who give the most accurate numbers out there. But if anyone would like to pop in and run a private, civilian, mortuary affairs type operation; g