[Rictor]

mik: Check here to see case by case statistics including the Source of the info. Its always two or more reliable news services.

Also, the reported Minimum and reported Maximum are usually the same, so its not like they're always taking the high numbers. And even in such cases when the reports differ on the number of dead, you have the handy High/Low counter. Even by conservative estimates, its still neatly 10,000 people.

[mikhael]

Rictor, I'm not going to argue the numbers. They might be right. I'm just saying the site is slanted (I may even agree with the slant).

[Rictor]

I'm also not interested in getting into an arguement, at least not with you. But I'de just like to know why you think the site is slanted. They have quite strict criteria for what constitutes a credible source. The way I see it, they're only doing what the military should have done anyway, so its not like they have some spooky anti-American agenda.

 I figure someone is bound to bring it into question sooner or later, so might as well try to explain it now.

[Kazan]

i think there needs to be a new variant of Godwin's law - for the term "anti-American agenda"

[Liberator]

How would you define that Kaz?

[Kazan]

do you know what godwin's law is

[aldo_14]

Godwin's Law     prov.     [Usenet]

"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. However there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any intentional triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.

Hehe.  I'd never heard of that one....

[mikhael]

From the Godwin's Law FAQ:

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

A reformulation:

As a HardLight discussion of current political events grows longer, the probability of someone being accused of having an 'anti-American agenda' approaches one.

[Flipside]

'Scuse my ignorance, but what is a 'non-citizen liberal'?

[Rictor]

Someone who is not currently a citizen of the United States and has a Liberal set of values.

[Kazan]

by liberator's definition of "liberal' that's just about the entire planet

[mikhael]

What about Australia's 'Liberals'? So far as I can tell, Australian 'Liberals' are actually conservative and 'Labor' is liberal. So are they liberal or conservative?

[aldo_14]

It's normally kind of dodgy to classify the nature of political parties by name, tho.......

[mikhael]

I know. It was a joke, Aldo.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Kazan
by liberator's definition of "liberal' that's just about the entire planet

As well as a significant portion of inanimate objects and roughly 2/3 of the animal kingdom.

You know, though I'm not a fan, I have nothing much against real conservatives. They stand for fiscal responsibility, personal accountability and limited government interference. The thing is, that today's Right has very little to do with conservativism.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by mikhael
I know. It was a joke, Aldo.

D'oh!  3 1/2  hours of sleep last night make Aldo extra dumb.

And talk in the 3rd person, apparently.

[.::Tin Can::.]

For all you foggies who say the economy sucks, I have 1 thing to say to you:

Get some facts. The economy is actually picking up from Clinton's mess.

[Stryke 9]

Um, no. The economy was doing extremely well under Clinton.

In fact, I recall there were similar spurious claims made when the economy tanked under the first Bush, under Reagan... none of them with any actual factual or even credible theoretical basis, no support or reason to exist at all except that if those who claimed it believed hard enough they wouldn't have to admit that they were totally wrong about how the economy works.

[.::Tin Can::.]

Another interesting thing: the number of current Iraq Civilian Body Count has not been tallied OR estimated. They found mass graves somewhere, so, I'm wondering if they are adding that to the list. But anyway, here we go. I will probably be critisized, slapped, booted in the ass and then spit on, but I'm saying it anyway because you can all go to hell:

Sure, things in Iraq have not gotten any worse, but they have gotten BETTER then before. Numbero Uno - Cinco

1) Children now go to schools, since the Iraqi regime did not educate their people nor did they have any regard for healthcare or education.

2) They now have politions, the Governing Council of Iraq, which is trying to draw up a constitution. Although I am sure a bunch of you will say "OMG! NO THEY DONT JEEZ YOU ARE SO WRONG!!!11!!1!1!"

3) Think about it: Being pressured by armed Iraqi gunment without a conciounse, while Sadaam's son goes in and rapes your wife. I bet that sounds like something you would love to stay up and worry about all night.

4) If, as all of you believe, 10,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in this war, think about how many MORE would die under the influence of Sadaam's power?

5) Bush did not lie about the weapons of mass destruction. He was given information by the CIA that THEY thought he had weapons of mass destruction, and he acted on the information and told everyone what HE thought was correct. If HE thought they had WMD, and the CIA thought they had WMD, and even SADAAM though he had WMP (I mean, he used chemical weapons on his own people. Come on!)

6) The people want the US to liberate them, because now instead of "major attacks" on convoys, they have major attacks on civilians, officials, and people who are just cooperating with the US. All this complete bull**** that they dont want us is wrong, and you know it.

[Grey Wolf]

I was fairly sure there was at least one college there. Didn't they mention a firefight at one?

But anyway, from most views, there wasn't much of a case for an actual invasion short of Bush's policy of preemptive strikes. And in my opinion, that policy sets a dangerous precedent.

Also, we should be out of there by now. Probably would have been if there was an actual post-invasion plan in place. IIRC, the MPs weren't sent in for months, and even though I have great respect for the US Military, they aren't the specialists you need to police a country in anarchy.