Bush gets another “F” in honesty

September 11, 2006 | By | 1 Reply More

According to CNN,the Bush administration figured out all it needed to do, to substantially reduce the Iraq monthly death total, was stop counting all of those dead people

You know how the number of deaths dipped sharply for August . . . well, it didn’t really happen.   Here’s how CNN reports it:

The U.S. military did not count people killed by bombs, mortars, rockets or other mass attacks when it reported a dramatic drop in the number of murders in the Baghdad area last month, the U.S. command said Monday.

The decision to include only victims of drive-by shootings and those killed by torture and execution, usually at the hands of death squads, allowed U.S. officials to argue that a security crackdown that began in the capital August 7 had more than halved the city’s murder rate.

But the types of slayings, including suicide bombings, that the U.S. excluded from the category of “murder” were not made explicit at the time. That led to confusion after Iraqi Health Ministry figures showed that 1,536 people died violently in and around Baghdad in August, nearly the same number as in July.

The figures raise serious questions about the success of the security operation launched by the U.S.-led coalition.

“Serious questions,” CNN suggests?  Here’s a serious answer:  Impeach!

Share

Tags: , , , ,

Category: Corruption, Iraq, Politics, The Middle East, War

About the Author ()

Erich Vieth is an attorney focusing on consumer law litigation and appellate practice. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. Erich lives in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, where he lives half-time with his two extraordinary daughters.

Comments (1)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. grumpypilgrim says:

    Bush's dishonesty doesn't stop there. When the Pentagon reports the number of US soldiers killed in combat in Iraq & Afganistan, it excludes the number who die from non-combat events; e.g., vehicle accidents, falls, suicides, etc. The number reported also excludes the vast number of defense contractors (Hallibutron, Bechtel, etc.) to whom the military has outsourced much of its logistical support and other non-combat operations; e.g., delivery drivers, cooks, security guards, etc. Delivery drivers, for example, have taken heavy losses. I've heard that the Pentagon numbers also exclude soldiers who are wounded in combat, but die after being evacuated from Iraq. The Pentagon numbers also exclude all the Iraqis who have died fighting alongside "coalition" forces. Finally, of course, the Pentagon numbers also exclude Iraqi civilian casualties, whether they died directly from US bombs or from the resulting devastation to their country (e.g., the breakdown of civil order, poor santitation, lack of healthcare, etc.). The actual number of Iraqi civilian deaths from Bush's invasion will probably never be known, but most estimates put the fatality number above 100,000 (some even above 150,000).

    Estimating the number of Iraqi civilian injuries is even harder, but we can make an estimate as follows. The Pentagon has reported about 2,700 US fatalities and 17,000 casualties, which is a factor of about 6.3 casualties for every fatality. If we apply this same factor to the 100,000+ Iraqi civilians killed, the civilian casualties would be 630,000+. The actual number might be much higher (e.g., if we assume an Iraqi civilian is working a less dangerous job than a US soldier and is therefore more likely to be injured than killed) or much lower (e.g., if we assume an injured Iraqi receives worse healthcare than an injured US soldier and is therefore more likely to be killed than injured).

    No matter how the numbers are computed, the fact remains that Bush ignores all of these casualties when he declares that "we are better off with Saddam in jail." Sure, "we" (most Americans, Bush, his neocon pals) might indeed be better off with Saddam in jail, but that's not the whole question. The whole question is whether it is worth the cost: the vast number of American and Iraqi deaths and injuries. Obviously, the answer depends upon whom we ask…and the dead don't get to vote.

Leave a Reply