The Media ??

[AKIron]

There has been continuous coverage of the deaths of service men and women throughout this war Gixer. 1000 isn't some magical number and the 1000th to die was no more significant than the first.

Perhaps you are looking for some satisfaction or justification in your quest to ridicule the actions of the United States?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by JBA
Maybe because the Democrats and media predicted 10,000 in the first year and they have been disappointed.

Source?

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Sandman
Source?

http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/e837174ca3856d1cc1256c70003e48d2?OpenDocument

"Possible deaths on all sides during a 'conventional' conflict and the following 3 months range from 48.000 to 261,000"

The dems were gathering their numbers from this website (and others) during the time up to war, Sandman.


Edit: Just surfing, there are a ton of references out there Sandman.  You had to have been very drunk not to see that in the media during the time up to war.  Here is another:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2071530/#ContinueArticle

[cpxxx]

Still scoring points using dead men everyone?

It's quite likely that over 20,000 people mostly Iraqis have died in the war and it's aftermath. I hope they all died for something worthwhile. Maybe they did, maybe in the long run it will save lives but no one knows or can prove it. The dead will stay dead and have no access to a bulletin board.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
The dems were gathering their numbers from this website

Yeah... er... okay... I'll try to believe you... I'll try really hard. Attribution?

Originally posted by Ripsnort
http://Edit: Just surfing, there are a ton of references out there Sandman.  You had to have been very drunk not to see that in the media during the time up to war.  Here is another:[url]http://slate.msn.com/id/2071530/#ContinueArticle

Evidently, I'm not drunk enough to see "10,000" in the first year...

Is it possible to make better predictions this time around? It may be, but not with a single number or narrow range. Based on available methodologies, the likely numbers of U.S. military personnel killed in a future war to overthrow Saddam Hussein could plausibly range anywhere from roughly 100, in the event of little fighting, to 5,000

Seems that Slate wasn't too far off the mark (albeit, the mark was pretty damn big...).

[SLO]

Originally posted by AKIron
Perhaps you are looking for some satisfaction or justification in your quest to ridicule the actions of the United States?

Don't be so fuggin paranoid.....


Paranoia Boards that way---------------------------------------->>>>>

[Gixer]

Originally posted by AKIron
There has been continuous coverage of the deaths of service men and women throughout this war Gixer. 1000 isn't some magical number and the 1000th to die was no more significant than the first.

Perhaps you are looking for some satisfaction or justification in your quest to ridicule the actions of the United States?

No it's just interesting why the media spends so much time going over the vietnam debate rather then current issues.

Watching the BBC World a few nights back and they had a very good and balanced debate about the so called "War On Terror" and whether the world is better or worse off because of it and Bush. Made a nice change with good arguments from all sides and with comments from people all over the world calling,faxing,emailing in.

Certinly alot better then the usual short sighted affairs on Fox where they get in a couple of retired generals to talk about how well the war is going and that they killed another 30 militants with a precission bomb strike in some suburb. I don't know who believes that kind of garb.



...-Gixer

[Torque]

News is product, one must move inventory.