The Lancet claims theirs is the standard methodology used in poorer and conflict areas. I suppose it's what we have to work with until the Iraqis get together a census. Maybe it's not as accurate, but I'm sure it's much more accurate than counting death certificates in a war zone or trusting the Bush Administration's numbers.
Does a high number or a low number support or negate the validity of the invasion or any progress? Whose definition of progress? Does the difference between 75,000 dead or 650,000 dead make the invasion any more just? We're not even counting internally displaced persons (last I heard 2.5 million)--and you thought Katrina was bad? We're not even counting communities without electricity, water, safety and other infrastructure. Whatever the death count, it is the innocent who have paid the price of the war as they always do.
EXACTLY... At one time I was a very active pool player... never got beyond mediocre, but thought I was getting pretty good, UNTIL I learned that the people who were REALLY GOOD at it would always say they could "shoot a little bit."
A wise person knows that both knowledge and wisdom are an ever-increasing bubble, like a balloon, and the more you know, the more you realize there is to know and the more you realize you DON'T know... "The Wise One" obviously has NO CLUE of this fact.
As for Ms. Klein's book, which I'm about 8 pages from finishing at present, all I can say is she's my newest hero (and the only one younger than me). She may be a socialist, but she's a DEMOCRATIC socialist, and regardless of her politics, she provides AMPLE EVIDENCE that both the American government, American and multi-national corporations, and "Chicago-School" economists have essentialy RAPED the world economy for the past 40 years to essentially make a very few rich people much richer, while the poor got poorer and many in the middle class joined the ranks of the poor -- and they're doing it RIGHT NOW right here in the "good ole U.S.A."!
What I can never understand is, if the problem is big corporations acting bad with the protection of government, how is giving government more power going to help? It seems to me you would want to limit the ability of the government to get in bed with these corporations, rather than promote it. I mean, is government suddenly going to be more responsible, more concerned about the working poor, and more interested in controlling the excesses of corporations just because you've given them more control over these things? Assuming that corporations aren't going to change their behavior, what is it that's going to make government change it's behavior?
Because, J. Hanley, the way things are currently set up -- especially the way the current administration has handled things -- the ONLY government "involvement" with big corporations is almost ALL towards helping them to maximize their profits -- quite often at the expense of both American workers and consumers, with only the "fatcats" and MAYBE their shareholders benefiting... And the Bush Administration -- wherever possible -- has taken this to a NEW EXTREME by "outsourcing" as much and many government services as it can to "the private sector," by doing things like spending WAY MORE DOLLARS in Iraq with no-bid corporate contracts with companies with which it's top members are chummy -- than it does on the actual MILITARY. We see reports of all the dollars spent in Iraq on the news, but we rarely or never see how much of that is actually going to Big Business, rather than the military -- and those big businesses are charging WAY MORE to do things the military used to do for itself than it used to cost the military (like serve meals to the soldiers)...
The same thing happened in New Orleans after Katrina... One example given by Ms. Klein in the book is a private company given EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS to recover dead bodies in the greater New Orleans area in the aftermath of the storm at the rate of $12,500 per body! I don't know about YOU, but I think that's WAY MORE than the going rate for body recovery. There were VOLUNTEERS willing to help recover bodies FOR FREE (morticians, EMS workers in their off hours), but this company wouldn't let them because, of course, it viewed them as competition -- even though IT took more than A YEAR to get the job done and EVERY CENT that company took in was paid for by AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS!
What those of us who are FED UP with this sort of Federal Welfare for Corporations want, among other things, is NOT government just giving big corporations free reign and even hand-feeding them federal contracts for things the government, itself, would have once done, but the playing field re-leveled. I don't know enough about economics to say what all that should be, but I can certainly say that what the current administration is involved in AIN'T IT! Jeff
So, there is no need to pay any attention to the civilian deaths in Iraq that ARE attributable to the American military? It's just like the health care argument that says the number of uninsured Americans is overstated. Does it really matter whether it's 20 million or 40 million? Hell, it's __ "MILLION." Seems to me THAT'S what's important.