Say Anything Blog

Let’s see the mass graves.

Come on, they must be out there, if there are so many dead. The MSM would love making Bush look bad by publishing photos and videos of massive graves - why aren’t they showing up, the way videos and photos of Saddam’s mass graves have?

Answer: the Lancet is full of crap.

So what…

According to UNICEF, prior to 2002, civilian deaths of children in Iraq was somewhere around 5000 a month.

I wonder what the average age at death is in Iraq?

Is there a better study.
Do you really believe we don’t collect
casualty figures forintelligence purposes?

Deaths in men of military age, defined as 15–44 years of age, were disproportionately high and accounted for 59% (52–65) of post-invasion violent deaths, despite this subgroup accounting for only 24·4% of the Iraqi population.16

Violent deaths that were directly attributed to coalition forces or to air strikes were classified as coalition violent deaths. In many other cases the responsible party was not known, or the households were hesitant to specifically identify them. Deaths attributable to the coalition accounted for 31% (95% CI 26–37) of post-invasion violent deaths. 

Lancet Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey

What liberal media, a few embeded reporters?
80 dead journalists in this war already.

Do you really believe we don’t collect
casualty figures for intelligence purposes?

Secrets. Move along nothing to see.

Via Tim Blair, we find out via this Lancet “study” that:

* It is larger than the total number of Americans killed during combat in every major conflict, from the Revolutionary War to the first Gulf War.

* It is more than double the combined number of civilians killed in the bombings of Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.

* It is a larger number than were killed in Germany during five years (and 955,044 tons) of WWII bombing.

All from 547 documented deaths.

Fileitunder.com

Rob said

I’m just now sure how anyone except for the most partisan of observers could conclude that this study is even remotely accurate, but thanks to media hype I’m sure some people will.

I won’t pretend to be an expert in statistical analysis but I have yet to see the methodology used in the studies refuted in such a way that less partisan observers have been persuaded that the results are garbage. It seems like a big number to me too but then the published numbers have always deemed low to me. If I could read a critque of the study that didn’t come from the usual Iraq policy apologists then I’d be much less likely to accept the results as viable. Here’s a link to a blogger who has consistently opposed the Iraqi operation but he always features a lively roundup of the criticism of the studies and why they miss the mark.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

If I could read a critque of the study that didn’t come from the usual Iraq policy apologists then I’d be much less likely to accept the results as viable.

Anybody who doesn’t agree with your positions are painted by you as “apologists”. You know what that makes you? An asshole.

And Mike - Tim Lambert? If you want an “apologist”, you couldn’t have done better than him. He made quite a name for himself defending the first flawed “study”. He spent so much time defending it that it became comical.

lik...don’t be so touchy. I’ll substitute “defender” or “proponent” for “apologist” if it makes you happy but my point still stands. I’m open to a critque of Tim Blair’s writings on the issue as well...in terms of the statistical stuff rather than partisan issues.

Asshole eh? You obviously fear an outbreak of honest debate on this thread.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

MikeA: To achieve anything close to that casualty figure, we would have had to carpet bomb all of Iraq for several months, which we didn’t do.  Duh.  House to house combat doesn’t roll up anywhere near that kind of death toll.

Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

MikeAdamson said, lik...don’t be so touchy.

Touchy? Pffft. Please. You too often mistake my sarcastic banter. I don’t fault you for that as you don’t get to hear my voice to gather the clues of tone and inflection.

I’ll substitute “defender” or “proponent” for “apologist” if it makes you happy but my point still stands.

Mike, now you’re just being an apologist.

Asshole eh? You obviously fear an outbreak of honest debate on this thread.

That doesn’t follow.

Touchy? Pffft. Please. You too often mistake my sarcastic banter. I don’t fault you for that as you don’t get to hear my voice to gather the clues of tone and inflection.

That is often true on blogs.

That doesn’t follow.

More sarcastic banter I assume.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

If these people want to convince me they are doing a legitemate study they need to go to Iraq and directly count the dead, not extrapolate from 500 odd confirmed deaths. How many people die in Iraq from natural causes such as heart, kidney, and liver disease. Medical treatment was restricted to those held in favor by the Ba’athist Party and their families. Malnutrition was used to punish large sections of the population for decades. What long term health effects did this have. Unclean water was the norm outside a few metropolitan areas. And why no mention of the primary cause of death in Iraq, terrorists. Only America is listed as having killed anyone. Bias, or apathy. There is those 2 snakes rearing there ugly heads again.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Only America is listed as having killed anyone.

The Lancet Report said

Interpretation: The number of people dying in Iraq has continued to escalate. The proportion of deaths ascribed to coalition forces has diminished in 2006, although the actual numbers have increased every year. Gunfire remains the most common cause of death, although deaths from car bombing have increased.

I infer from these points that coalition forces are responsible for a diminishing proportion of Iraqi deaths which makes sense if you read the news.

Dr Roberts said: “Yes [this finding was a surprise]. I didn’t realise that things there were twice as bad as when we carried out our first survey in 2004. I did not know it was that much.” Dr Roberts said he expected there would be many who would seek to undermine the report, as happened two years ago. But he said: “Let’s have these people tell us what we have done wrong and what the true numbers are. Our study is pretty easy to verify. If they go to a graveyard in a small village and ask how many people are being put in the ground...”

Even the study’s author is surprised.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

Mike, I still don’t understand how you can extrapolate a number like 650,000 from some 500+ actual recorded deaths.

Especially when the entire study is based on the change from pre-invasion death rates that, frankly, we have no way of confirming.  We’re in Iraq now and we still don’t know how many people Saddam murdered.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I still don’t understand how you can extrapolate a number like 650,000 from some 500+ actual recorded deaths.

Me neither which is why I’m interested in any legitimate critiques of the study’s methodology.

Especially when the entire study is based on the change from pre-invasion death rates that, frankly, we have no way of confirming.

That’s a good point...I’m not sure whether the study addresses it but it’s a legitimate consideration.

At the expense of exposing myself to the orifice label again (kidding lik, honest!), this commentary suggests that we shouldn’t focus on any specific number but rather view the situation’s trends and probabilities. I should warn again that this author is not sympathetic to current American policy but his thoughts on the meaning of the study and its results may be helpful.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

Me neither which is why I’m interested in any legitimate critiques of the study’s methodology.

So...why is my critique not legitimate?  I’m just raising the same questions you seem to have.

I should warn again that this author is not sympathetic to current American policy but his thoughts on the meaning of the study and its results may be helpful.

I don’t think I’m willing to have thoughts on a study that doesn’t seem to be based on sound methodology.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

This study was destroyed and discredited on National LIBERAL Public Radio, Even the suspect TIMING of the study has been discredited.  For the wholy owned subsidiary of the Liberals in America, NPR to cut the legs out from under this demonstrates what a stupid concept this was from the beginning.

The libs are shameless.  This is all political posturing.

Nearly ALL of the 650,000 deaths are natural causes.  Almost NONE are from conflict and war statistically.
If they were there would have had to been 500++ deaths per DAY every Day Sundays, Mondays........ from the day we stepped into IRAQ from hostile action.  IT’s just NOT TRUE.  LIARS.  That’s what they are. 

Lets see, first Woodwards dumb book, then Foley no Gate, Now this; these stuck on stupid liberals will come up with a few more.

Just remember what liars they are in November

I will.

the AVATAR
Old Tigers are more dangerous when they believe this could be their last hunt.

From , “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”
Old tigers, sensing the end,
they’re at their most fierce. 
And they go down fighting.

Rob...your questions and concerns are very legitimate but I’m looking for an explanation of why the methodology is unsound or one for why the methodolgy is valid for that matter. If cluster-sampling in general or this study’s use of it in particular is not sound then there should be arguments available from within the statistics field that make that case. Is that clearer? I’m hoping to look into it a bit but if anyone happened to have information available I’d be all eyes.

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

A couple of points:

The study could have been done in areas with above average levels of violence and then applied to the entire country.

The family interviews could have yielded bad or exaggerated data, depending on the family’s opinion of the events (and I’d think anyone who lost someone would not be happy with the state of affairs - under Saddam or after).

The study found 547 deaths in so many interviews, then, apparently, inflated those results over the population of Iraq.  Huge portions of Iraq are docile, relatively speaking (Kurdish areas) and so the numbers are horribly skewed.

It’s not science, really.  It’s mathematics - and statistical math, at that.  And it’s been horribly done - right around another US election.

Fileitunder.com

MikeA:

I won’t pretend to be an expert in statistical analysis but I have yet to see the methodology used in the studies refuted…

This is a very interesting position; normally, it would be up to the people doing the study, especially so controversial a study, to independently corroborate it; in other words, the burden of proof is on them to prove their number is accurate, not the other way around.
Especially when the number is so outrageously out of whack with any reasonable possible casualty figures.  Where are all those people buried?
If no corroboration were required, anyone can just make up a number that is politically advantageous for them, and it should just be accepted at face value?

Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

We invaded a country, disbanded its army, disbanded its police forces, shut down its industries.  Iraq has had
something like 50 per cent unemployment since 2003.

Start with a figure such as Iraqbodycount’s 50,000-- which is merely the known dead.  And then you might realize that several hundred thousand may indeed have died as a result of the breakdown in Iraqi society.