Hamas leader killed.

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:NGK7c.126$zc1.1@okepread03...
"Yama" wrote

On the other hand, Iraq certainly is a lot more dangerous place now.

Iraq was dangerous place since it was created. It is probably the least
dangerous place now since its creation.

I was there with my father in 1961-1962, and *nothing* I've seen so far
is even half as scary.

Yes, just yesterday two of my countrymen were shot in this "safer" Iraq.

In article ,
"Yama" wrote:

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:NGK7c.126$zc1.1@okepread03...
"Yama" wrote

On the other hand, Iraq certainly is a lot more dangerous place now.

Iraq was dangerous place since it was created. It is probably the least
dangerous place now since its creation.

I was there with my father in 1961-1962, and *nothing* I've seen so far
is even half as scary.

Yes, just yesterday two of my countrymen were shot in this "safer" Iraq.

Compare to the previous situation. They were averaging about _fifty_
times that, for the last twenty years or so.

Hell, the Hussein regime killed more Kurds in one *day* than there have
been Iraqis, American, Brits, and others killed in this entire *war*.

But I guess it doesn't count if the killings were done by a murderous
dictator. They get a free pass, right?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
news
In article ,
Yes, just yesterday two of my countrymen were shot in this "safer" Iraq.

Compare to the previous situation. They were averaging about _fifty_
times that, for the last twenty years or so.

Not to claim that Saddam didn't get lot of people killed, but above is just
silly.

Hell, the Hussein regime killed more Kurds in one *day* than there have
been Iraqis, American, Brits, and others killed in this entire *war*.

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more than
5000 people. But hey, lets not get the facts on the way of a good rant.

In article ,
"Yama" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
news
In article ,
Yes, just yesterday two of my countrymen were shot in this "safer" Iraq.

Compare to the previous situation. They were averaging about _fifty_
times that, for the last twenty years or so.

Not to claim that Saddam didn't get lot of people killed, but above is just
silly.

No, it's just math. Average of about 40,000 per year, including all of
the wars. If you include Iranians killed in the war, double that.

Hell, the Hussein regime killed more Kurds in one *day* than there have
been Iraqis, American, Brits, and others killed in this entire *war*.

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more than
5000 people.

The worst estimates I've seen were around 10,000, and that was from one
of the most-loony left-wing sites. There would have been a lot more,
but there just wasn't that much fighting against active resistance.
General estimates are under 5,000, and that includes all of the
non-Iraqis Hussein hired from neighboring countries who got killed (and
who represent about half of the fatalities among the continuing active
"resistance").

But hey, lets not get the facts on the way of a good rant.

We're still waiting for your *first* fact.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
"Yama" wrote:
Not to claim that Saddam didn't get lot of people killed, but above is
just
silly.

No, it's just math. Average of about 40,000 per year, including all of
the wars. If you include Iranians killed in the war, double that.

This math comes from where? Iraq suffered some 200,000 dead in Iraq-Iran
war, that is considerably less than 40,000 per year even during the war.

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more
than
5000 people.

The worst estimates I've seen were around 10,000, and that was from one
of the most-loony left-wing sites. There would have been a lot more,
but there just wasn't that much fighting against active resistance.
General estimates are under 5,000,

From where? Biggest estimates (from "loony left-wing sites") put the number
of civilian deaths alone to 13,000. Most reasonable estimate I've seen puts
the total amount of losses to 13,000, of which 4300 were civilians.

Hospitals of Basra alone reported receiving close to 2000 bodies before the
end of war. Neither the battles or the bombings in or around Basra were
anywhere near the intensity of those in Nasiriya, Karbala or Bagdad. US
military itself reported hundreds of dead Iraqi almost every day in ground
battles alone.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:50:19 +0200, "Yama" wrote:


"Chad Irby" wrote in message
news
In article ,
Yes, just yesterday two of my countrymen were shot in this "safer" Iraq.

Compare to the previous situation. They were averaging about _fifty_
times that, for the last twenty years or so.

Not to claim that Saddam didn't get lot of people killed, but above is just
silly.

Hell, the Hussein regime killed more Kurds in one *day* than there have
been Iraqis, American, Brits, and others killed in this entire *war*.

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more than
5000 people. But hey, lets not get the facts on the way of a good rant.


What is your source for casualty numbers?

Al Minyard

In article ,
Alan Minyard wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:50:19 +0200, "Yama" wrote:

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more than
5000 people. But hey, lets not get the facts on the way of a good rant.

What is your source for casualty numbers?

Any time anyone tells us that more than a couple of thousand people were
killed during the war, it means "iraqbodycount.net."

Of course, they can only *name* a few hundred out of that number, and
their entire methodology stinks (lots of double-counting), but a lot of
the loonier folks swear by it.

Not to mention that they include all deaths, including postwar attacks
by terrorists who are going after Iraqis and theoretical health problems
(they included that in their methodology, but the dire warnings of
infrastructure and health system collapse never happened).

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
Alan Minyard wrote:
What is your source for casualty numbers?

Any time anyone tells us that more than a couple of thousand people were
killed during the war, it means "iraqbodycount.net."

Nope. Basra figure came from BBC. Associated Press reported 3200 civilian
deaths between March 20 and April 20 alone. Iraqbodycount.net puts civilian
death figure to over 10,000, which is signifantly higher than most other
sources.

For some reason, USA does not seem to be interested about Iraqi casualty
figures at all. That is sort of disturbing; if they promote war as a
solution to problem, one would expect that they at least are concerned about
it's actual cost.

In article ,
"Yama" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
Alan Minyard wrote:
What is your source for casualty numbers?

Any time anyone tells us that more than a couple of thousand people were
killed during the war, it means "iraqbodycount.net."

Nope. Basra figure came from BBC. Associated Press reported 3200 civilian
deaths between March 20 and April 20 alone. Iraqbodycount.net puts civilian
death figure to over 10,000, which is signifantly higher than most other
sources.

In other words, according to your own cites, the most reliable figure
you can come up with shows that I was right in the first place.

Thanks.

For some reason, USA does not seem to be interested about Iraqi casualty
figures at all. That is sort of disturbing; if they promote war as a
solution to problem, one would expect that they at least are concerned about
it's actual cost.

....and it's *really* interesting that folks like yourself are so
unconcerned about Iraqis that the years and years they spent being
murdered in wholesale lots by their own rulers have no effect on you,
since you're more concerned about short-term losses in a war of
liberation than you are about the *hundred* times that many lost due to
Hussein's actions...

But I guess it's okay with you that many more Iraqis die, as long as
it's not done by the US.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 18:53:15 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Alan Minyard wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:50:19 +0200, "Yama" wrote:

Let it be absolutely clear that this most recent war killed LOT more than
5000 people. But hey, lets not get the facts on the way of a good rant.

What is your source for casualty numbers?

Any time anyone tells us that more than a couple of thousand people were
killed during the war, it means "iraqbodycount.net."

Of course, they can only *name* a few hundred out of that number, and
their entire methodology stinks (lots of double-counting), but a lot of
the loonier folks swear by it.

Not to mention that they include all deaths, including postwar attacks
by terrorists who are going after Iraqis and theoretical health problems
(they included that in their methodology, but the dire warnings of
infrastructure and health system collapse never happened).

Thanks, that is what I thought :-))

Al Minyard