Ican,
I have been giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you didn't just make those numbers up; I say this b/c I haven't been able to locate them independently.
The truth is that you need to have a better source for your arguments. I am merely the one pointing that fact out for you. If you choose not to provide this information, then it basically works out just the same for me.
Cycloptichorn
MORE LATER!
Britannica Search Argument = Saddam Hussein Iraq
Quote:
for non-members
http://www.britannica.com/search?query=Saddam+Hussein+Iraq&ct=&searchSubmit.x=5&searchSubmit.y=7
for members only
http://www.britannica.com/search?query=Saddam+Hussein+Iraq&ct=&searchSubmit.x=10&searchSubmit.y=8
Results 1-10 of 217.
Saddam Hussein
president of Iraq (1979-2003), whose brutal rule was marked by costly and unsuccessful wars against neighbouring countries.IRAQ Britannica Book of the Year 1997
A republic of southwestern Asia, Iraq has a short coastline on the Persian Gulf. Area: 435,052 sq km (167,975 sq mi). Pop. (1996 est.): 21,422,000. Cap.: Baghdad. Monetary unit: Iraqi dinar, with ...
IRAQ Britannica Book of the Year 1996
A republic of southwestern Asia, Iraq has a short coastline on the Persian Gulf. Area: 435,052 sq km (167,975 sq mi). Pop. (1995 est.): 20,413,000. Cap.: Baghdad. Monetary unit: Iraqi dinar, with ...
Iraq Britannica Book of the Year 2004
By the end of 2002, Iraq had announced that it would cooperate with the inspectors on the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) on weapons of mass destruction ...
Iraq Britannica Book of the Year 2003
The hard-line policy of the United States toward Iraq escalated dramatically after Jan. 29, 2002, when Pres. George W. Bush, addressing Congress in the annual state of the union speech, accused ...
Iraq Britannica Book of the Year 2002
In the wake of the terrorist attacks in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, Iraq was virtually alone among countries in failing to offer official condolences to the U.S. In line with his adversarial ...
From the Encyclopedia Brittannica Books of the Year, Iraq Demography and Vital Statistics,
For the Government of Saddam Hussein
YEAR ... IRAQ ........ TOTAL . NON-VI' . VIOLENT
........ Population . Deaths .. Deaths . Deaths
2002 24,002,000 144,012 128,987 15,025
2001 23,332,000 144,658 125,386 19,272
2000 22,676,000 145,126 121,861 23,265
1999 22,427,000 165,960 120,523 45,437
1998 21,722,000 182,465 116,734 65,731
1997 22,219,000 208,859 119,405 89,454
1996 21,422,000 222,789 115,122 107,667
1995 20,413,000 206,171 109,700 96,471
1994 19,869,000 194,716 106,776 87,940
1993 19,435,000 158,395 104,444 53,951
1992 18,838,000 122,447 101,236 21,211
1991 18,317,000 128,219 98,436 29,783
1990 17,754,000 133,155 95,410 37,745
1989 17,215,000 137,720 92,514 45,206
1988 16,630,000 136,366 89,370 46,996
1987 16,476,000 138,398 88,542 49,856
1986 15,946,000 137,136 85,694 51,442
1985 15,676,000 136,381 84,243 52,138
1984 15,358,000 133,615 82,534 51,081
1983 15,040,000 130,848 80,825 50,023
1982 14,722,000 128,081 79,116 48,965
1981 14,404,000 125,315 77,407 47,908
1980 14,086,000 122,548 75,698 46,850
1979 13,768,000 119,782 73,989 45,793
More Later!
I read the article you linked - 1996 year in review. It did not go into detail about how the violent deaths, which you claim eclipse those of years of warfare, took place.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:I read the article you linked - 1996 year in review. It did not go into detail about how the violent deaths, which you claim eclipse those of years of warfare, took place.
Cycloptichorn
Yes, that's true. But I think it obvious that the bulk of those 1979 -2002 violent deaths were caused by violence initiated by Saddam's government. Just like it is obvious that the bulk of the 2003 -2007 violent deaths were caused by al-Qaeda and other such malignancies.
I have submitted two subsequent posts that discuss
how many violent deaths occurred during the 24 years Saddam's government governed Iraq. Mary Mostert's January 17, 2005 article estimates 50,000 Saddam government caused violent deaths per year ... 50,000 x 24 = 1,200,000 ... over those same 24 years.
My post is a more detailed calculation than the one I posted the other day for the years 1993 - 2000.
If you were to sum the total violent deaths in my more detailed post that was based on
Britannica Books of the Year, Iraq Demography and Vital Statistics, for the same 24 years, you would arrive at a total = 1,229,210 for the same period.
The sum of my yearly violent death numbers are close enough to Mary Mostert's January 17, 2005 numbers to satisfy me that my calculations are accurate enough to adequately support my argument. The average per year, 1979-2002 violent Iraqi deaths do indeed "eclipse" the 60,341/4 = 15,086 average per year for 2003-2006, and will probably "eclipse" the average per year for 2003-2008.
From the Time article I submitted what can we conclude?
Perhaps the following;
We are not going to mess with the majority Shiites. We have a hard enough time dealing with the minority Sunnis.
That said what do you think our odds are in attacking Iran? If we don't want to piss off the Shiites than we had better not attack Iran.
We are admitting that we do not have the strength to contain both the Sunnis and Shiites so we allow the Shiites free rein in the south and in Baghdad where they are driving out the Sunnis.
things will likely get even more complicated after the U.S. house of representatives and senate vote in favour of the "genocide" resolution .
if in retaliation turkey should decide not to allow U.S. airforce to land at bases in turkey it will likely impact U.S. operations in the middle-east - if it's not one thing , it's another !
hbg
source :
U.S. VOTE ON TURKISH GENOCIDE
hamburger wrote:things will likely get even more complicated after the U.S. house of representatives and senate vote in favour of the "genocide" resolution .
if in retaliation turkey should decide not to allow U.S. airforce to land at bases in turkey it will likely impact U.S. operations in the middle-east - if it's not one thing , it's another !
hbg
source :
U.S. VOTE ON TURKISH GENOCIDE
Yes, Turkey is already mad at us for protecting two terrorist groups in Kurdish Iraq and not allowing them to cross the border to attack terrorist groups invading their country.
Can you imagine America saying we can't and won't cross someone's internation border to attack terrorist that have killed Americans? Yet we're telling Turkey to do just that.
And on top of that we may pass that genocide resolution. Talk about doing your best to get people to hate you.
From the Encyclopedia Brittannica Books of the Year, Iraq Demography and Vital Statistics,
For the Government of Saddam Hussein
YEAR ... IRAQ ........ TOTAL . NON-VI' . VIOLENT
........ Population . Deaths .. Deaths . Deaths
2002 24,002,000 144,012 128,987 15,025
2001 23,332,000 144,658 125,386 19,272
2000 22,676,000 145,126 121,861 23,265
1999 22,427,000 165,960 120,523 45,437
1998 21,722,000 182,465 116,734 65,731
1997 22,219,000 208,859 119,405 89,454
1996 21,422,000 222,789 115,122 107,667
1995 20,413,000 206,171 109,700 96,471
1994 19,869,000 194,716 106,776 87,940
1993 19,435,000 158,395 104,444 53,951
1992 18,838,000 122,447 101,236 21,211
1991 18,317,000 128,219 98,436 29,783
1990 17,754,000 133,155 95,410 37,745
1989 17,215,000 137,720 92,514 45,206
1988 16,630,000 136,366 89,370 46,996
1987 16,476,000 138,398 88,542 49,856
1986 15,946,000 137,136 85,694 51,442
1985 15,676,000 136,381 84,243 52,138
1984 15,358,000 133,615 82,534 51,081
1983 15,040,000 130,848 80,825 50,023
1982 14,722,000 128,081 79,116 48,965
1981 14,404,000 125,315 77,407 47,908
1980 14,086,000 122,548 75,698 46,850
1979 13,768,000 119,782 73,989 45,793
TOTALS .......... 3,603,162 2,373,962 1,229,210
VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 1979-2002 = 1,229,210
1,229,210 / 24 = 51,217 VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 1979-2002 PER YEAR
Upon what information does Brittanica derive those casualty statistics?
Unsourced statistics are useless, whether it's you personally or you outsourcing the unsourcing to someone else.
You should be able to find more then one source, given that you claim over 50k people were murdered in one small event, as compared to a long war. But you don't seem to be able to.
Cycloptichorn
VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 2003-2006
2006 23,482
2005 12,286*
2004 12,286*
2003 12,286*
TOTAL = 60,311
* Average per year 2003-2005.
60,341 / 4 = 15,085 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-2006.
In 2007 as of August 31 (8 months / 12 months = 0.67 years), there were 20,452 VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ.
60,341 + 20,452 = 80,793; 80,793 / (4.67) = 17,300 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-AUG 2007.
ican711nm wrote:VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 2003-2006
2006 23,482
2005 12,286*
2004 12,286*
2003 12,286*
TOTAL = 60,311
* Average per year 2003-2005.
60,341 / 4 = 15,085 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-2006.
In 2007 as of August 31 (8 months / 12 months = 0.67 years), there were 20,452 VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ.
60,341 + 20,452 = 80,793; 80,793 / (4.67) = 17,300 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-AUG 2007.
Bull ****. You know that those numbers aren't correct in the slightest.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:Upon what information does Brittanica derive those casualty statistics?
Unsourced statistics are useless, whether it's you personally or you outsourcing the unsourcing to someone else.
You should be able to find more then one source, given that you claim over 50k people were murdered in one small event, as compared to a long war. But you don't seem to be able to.
Cycloptichorn
You have just convinced me that you are unable to read with understanding. Sorry, I cannot provide you the remedial reading course you obviously require.
Mary Mostert's
50,000 number of murdered people, is an average per year over the years 1979-2002, not the number of people who were murdered in "one small event." By the way, if 50,000 were to be murdered in one event, that is certainly not a
small event!
I don't know how Britannica does any part of its job. Likewise, I don't know how you come up with any of the allegations you make, nor do I know how your sources come up with any of the allegations they make. However, based on my personal experience with Britannica and many other historical sources, I have come to the conclusion that Britannica is a reliable source. On the other hand, based on my personal experience with you, your sources, and my other sources, I have come to the conclusion that you and your sources are unreliable.
ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:Upon what information does Brittanica derive those casualty statistics?
Unsourced statistics are useless, whether it's you personally or you outsourcing the unsourcing to someone else.
You should be able to find more then one source, given that you claim over 50k people were murdered in one small event, as compared to a long war. But you don't seem to be able to.
Cycloptichorn
You have just convinced me that you are unable to read with understanding. Sorry, I cannot provide you the remedial reading course you obviously require.
Mary Mostert's
50,000 number of murdered people, is an average per year over the years 1979-2002, not the number of people who were murdered in "one small event." By the way, if 50,000 were to be murdered in one event, that is certainly not a
small event!
I don't know how Britannica does any part of its job. Likewise, I don't know how you come up with any of the allegations you make, nor do I know how your sources come up with any of the allegations they make. However, based on my personal experience with Britannica and many other historical sources, I have come to the conclusion that Britannica is a reliable source. On the other hand, based on my personal experience with you, your sources, and my other sources, I have come to the conclusion that you and your sources are unreliable.
The claim that Saddam's regime killed 100k in 1996 revolves around the events in Irbil; there is no real account presented of what happened there, by anyone, yet there are extremely accurate numbers of those killed violently by Saddam. How is it possible? Where are these numbers derived from? I say 50k at 'one event' b/c there's no other explanation given besides the uprising in Irbil.
You believe Britannica b/c you choose to, not b/c there is any actual evidence. I've merely pointed out that barring information telling how their numbers are obtained, they cannot be trusted to be accurate; you have not refuted this in the slightest but still purport to quote these numbers as authoritative proof that Saddam's regime was bloodier then our current invasion. Intellectually lazy, and what's worse, you know it, and are advancing a weak argument anyways.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 2003-2006
2006 23,482
2005 12,286*
2004 12,286*
2003 12,286*
TOTAL = 60,311
* Average per year 2003-2005.
60,341 / 4 = 15,085 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-2006.
In 2007 as of August 31 (8 months / 12 months = 0.67 years), there were 20,452 VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ.
60,341 + 20,452 = 80,793; 80,793 / (4.67) = 17,300 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-AUG 2007.
Bull ****. You know that those numbers aren't correct in the slightest.
Cycloptichorn
Steer excrement, I know that your allegation isn't correct in the slightest. These 2003-2007 numbers are based on excerpts from IBC's numbers.
By the way, are you a Soros gang volunteer shill, or are you a Soros gang paid shill?
ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ 2003-2006
2006 23,482
2005 12,286*
2004 12,286*
2003 12,286*
TOTAL = 60,311
* Average per year 2003-2005.
60,341 / 4 = 15,085 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-2006.
In 2007 as of August 31 (8 months / 12 months = 0.67 years), there were 20,452 VIOLENT DEATHS IN IRAQ.
60,341 + 20,452 = 80,793; 80,793 / (4.67) = 17,300 VIOLENT DEATHS PER YEAR IN IRAQ 2003-AUG 2007.
Bull ****. You know that those numbers aren't correct in the slightest.
Cycloptichorn
Steer excrement, I know that your allegation isn't correct in the slightest. These 2003-2007 numbers are based on excerpts from IBC's numbers.
By the way, are you a Soros gang volunteer shill, or are you a Soros gang paid shill?
You know that I have nothing to do with Soros whatsoever. Are you a member of Mellon-scaife squad?
IBC knowingly admits that their numbers are inaccurate, with a bias towards under-reporting, due to their methodology. An honest person would admit this when he reprints those numbers, Ican. Are you an honest person?
Cycloptichorn
