I muat be reading a different iCasualties web site. Those are not the numbers I find there:
http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/2...king-
books.html
the casualties go down every summer because it's like 130 degrees in baghdad , too hot even for mass murderers. if it continues into the fall that's another story. july and august have the lowest annual death tolls
Robert: Thanks for visiting.
I haven't checked out the iCasualites webpage, but I can see from your post that you don't seem likely to view any reports of success as credible.
We can tell you really love a good fight.
That is, as long as someone else is doing the fighting.
Greg: I've heard all the chicken hawk slurs before. If you've got any substantive arguments to make, let's hear them...
The real equation has little to do w/ casualty figures. The real equation is whether the Iraqi government can achieve some type of stability during the heightened security afforded by the surge.
The other part of the equation is whether the Iraqis and whether we cant rebuild enough infrastructure during the surge so that the Iraqi economy can move forward.
Greg: You're new to my page, and you might actually read some of my early posts and exchanges with the whacked-out paleocons before you start acting like a big guy yourself.
Then jump in to comment on what these weirdos have to say.
Or if YOU'VE GOT any substantive things to say, without relying on the ignorant puffery of others, I'll see if you get a passing grade. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
Conservative Times, in any case, is a wasteland as far as I'm concerned - no credibility, whatsever.
If GWB had our troops on a mission to pull drowning puppies out of a flooded culvert, democrats and MSM would focus on why puppies died in RECORD NUMBERS just on the particular day that coincided with Bush's actions.
Its all a big..Heads i win, tails you lose game.
You're new to my page, and you might actually read some of my early posts and exchanges with the whacked-out paleocons before you start acting like a big guy yourself ... Or if YOU'VE GOT any substantive things to say, without relying on the ignorant puffery of others, I'll see if you get a passing grade. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke. Ooh, are you not the bully today, Mr. Douglas.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Bush/Cheney administration enjoyed widespread support among the American people with public approval ratings in excess of 90%. These included good Democrats and as well as good Republicans, liberals and conservatives alike. Why the bitterness and partisanship we see today?
Karl Rove squandered and betrayed the good will of the loyal opposition with vicious partisan attacks, such as suggesting that liberals responded to the attack by wanting to offer therapy to the terrorists. Remarks like these have polarized the country.
Mr. Douglas, you are part of the problem. One would think an academic with at least some analytical skill would go beyond the political smoke and mirrors and offer something more incisive and substantive. Regrettably you have become an even cheaper imitation of the problem; whereas a better man would want to be part of the solution. That is why you fail, Mr. Douglas.
Here are the casualty figures reported by icasualties.org :
August 2007 – 82; August 2006 – 65
July 2007 – 79; July 2006 – 43
June 2007 – 101; June 2006 – 61
May 2007 – 126; May 2005 – 69
April 2007 – 104; April 2006 – 76
March 2007 – 81; March 2006 – 31
February 2007 – 81; February 2006 – 55
January 2007 – 83; January 2006 – 62
Mr. Douglas, where is the “drop by half?” How is 79 one half of 126? Oh, yes, I forgot. There is always your escape clause: Not your numbers but merely a block quote that cites statistics from another source. Sorry Mr. Douglas, there is no excuse for citing a source that is simply dead wrong, no pun intended.
Comparing years 2007 versus 2006, there does not appear to be a statistically significant drop in casualty counts attributable to summer heat. However, what appears to be especially puzzling is Mr. Douglas’ attack on Mr. Robert Stein. All Mr. Stein said was: “Those are not the numbers I find there.” But Mr. Douglas is not interested in numbers or truth. Good scholars formulate their conclusions on the basis of empirical knowledge. Idiots like Mr. Douglas formulate their conclusions based on ideology and then chase any set of numbers, whether right or wrong, to justify themselves. Mr. Douglas admits to not checking the iCasualties website. Had he done so, he would have discovered that Mr. Stein’s observation is correct. The books have been cooked on Iraq casualty figures but Mr. Douglas avoids factual data as a vampire avoids mirrors. Instead, Mr. Douglas’ only argument is: “You just ain’t mah kinda pundit.” Again, Mr. Douglas has lowered the bar on academic rigor.
Mr. Douglas, methinks you are dissembling and decompensating simultaneously.
newmanintown,
Awwwwwww...So i guess you can say Rove made you do it? LOL
What kind of White House "advisor" has the power to turn people from patriotic citizens into America bashing narcissist concerned only with themselves?
Democrats invented partisan whining. I suggest you guys look in the mirror if you want to see who your worst enemy is.
Commenting by HaloScan
