Showing that a study is highly flawed due to a highly-flawed methodology is not at all meaningless.
It certainly is when:
- there are multiple other studies saying the same thing or worse; and
- you have no studies to back up your own position (which amounts to 'it wasn't that much')
Don't forget, this started with you criticising the number of 400,000...without ever giving a figure of your own or source of your own.
My own statements have been far more honest than your own:
- the figures are higher than the Iraqi and UN figures
- there's a range
- it depends on how you measure, and what you measure
- there are flaws in each of the studies with regards to the way they are carried out
- but each are done in different ways, and arrive at 'similar' (range) conclusions
Your reaction to these studies is to scream 'I don't like it, I don't like it' and stick your head in the sand.
Those studies all count deaths that were not caused by American action.
Do you understand the word 'caused'? It's like saying the collapse of Building 7 wasn't caused by the planes crashing into the WTC (and therefore must be the result of some other action). 'Caused' is actually a grey word in english (as there are direct, and indirect causes - it is the indirect cause concept that causes it's greyness). It's easier and clearer to use, Responsibility, and Contributing circumstances, or repercussions (which word effectively deals with causal outcomes - the result of direct and indirect causes).
In any event, you can keep sticking your head in the sand about repercussions of U.S. actions, but that is still what it is - sticking your head in the sand.
That is incorrect. There is nothing dishonest about pointing out the flaws in a study's methodology.
Nothing at all...unless the motivation is to avoid something...like providing a figure that shows the 400,000 is wrong. According to other studies, it could even be worse. Apparently you don't even like the Iraqi or UN count, which is lower. But you don't have anything, other than your own words and beliefs, to show otherwise, do you.
I reject the notion that we bear any responsibility when a bunch of Muslims kill each other.
And for the second time, I never said you do. I very much understand the concept of personal responsibility for crimes, just as I understand that there are contributing factors that influence the decision to commit those crimes. That is what I was talking about - which is clear, except that you failed to quote the part that clarified that.