Originally Posted by Billo_Really

So you're saying Lancet is NOT a highly esteemed medical journal. And that John's Hopkins and Columbia University don't know what their talking about? And that I should really take your word (and opinion of polls) over what they have said?

Is that what you're saying?

Originally Posted by Hundebolg

The Lancet IS the michael jordan of public health, it's the world's leading medical journal. Even Dr. Frankenstein reads it while travelling by train in "Young Frankenstein" .

Another Survey has been released by a very reputable polling institution stipulating even higher numbers. There's already a thread on it : http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...n-victims.html

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

No what I am actually saying is that one should look at the myriad of different information out there such as that Iraqbodycount and other surveys that consistantly show around 100k killed (mostly by Iraq on Iraq) rather than finding the most extreme example and case and claim that since they are some sort of "medical Journal" and the numbers inflate your Ghoulish desire to make the US look bad only refer to them as the be all end all truth.

To do so would be rather ignorant and simple agenda pandering to your political beliefs.

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

So you are hawking your "US troops are terrorists" thread now, how wonderful.

Originally Posted by Tashah

Must I repeat over and over? It is an estimate... an approximation.


A bad analogy. The Holocaust has been studied in depth since 1945. Almost every major university features a Department of Holocaust Studies. Are major academic resources even remotely of this nature dedicated to the study of Iraqi war dead? I very highly doubt that.


You're totally missing what I've been saying. Scroll up. I agree that the death rate has been significantly elevated. Anyone with half-a-brain can surmise that much even without Lancet.

What I do disagree with is the attempts of certain members here to spin the estimates. They attempt to lay each Iraqi death at the feet of the US military.

This sort of spin is statistically and forensically impossible and plainly dishonest. I challenge anyone to break down the sum-death-total into distinct mortality catagories with empirical data.

Unless one can do this, the causal nature of sum-total mortality cannot be quantified and thus conclusions exist only as speculation. One can say with relative certainty that the mortality rate is elevated, but one cannot solely attribute this elevation to one specific catalyst without the requisite catagorical data.

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

I've never said it was the "...be all end all..."

Do you know what the shortcomings of the Iraqbodycount are?

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

No, he's saying you don't know what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

Great debate tactic. You don't like the Good Reverend waxing factual so you use the hear no evil trol tactics like this here above.


Tell me billio, how do I not know what I am talking about?

Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und

Do you know what the shortcomings of the Lancet Survey are?

Do you understand the methods used in the Iraq Body count (and amnesty int, and others that say 100k)?

"Lean: Very Liberal"

I know enough.

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

Now you're playing word games.

I asked you a question, you didn't give me an answer.

BTW, I'm liberal in some areas, conservative in others.

Try again, maybe your luck will change.