Joel Blau
Michael Perelman wrote:
Right, but aren't 100,000 or so on disability from other damage created by
the war.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:12:02PM -0500, Joel Blau wrote:The last figure I think I saw was 43, mostly (37?) from friendly fire.
Joel Blau
Dan Scanlan wrote:The answer to question 17 is incorrect.Actually there were a number of casualties inflicted by the Iraqi
military---although some of those listed below may be the result of
friendly
fire certainly not all were... there were not 0 casualties inflicted by
them.
This site also shows that Iraq's defensive capabilities must be at an
astonishing low level. Not much was left intact.
This is a contest between a superpower and a regime that is almost
defenceless. I cant understand how Hussein can appear so cool and
unflappable in the face of the forces arrayed against him. Maybe at
the last
minute he will accept the offer of forced retirement. Then where will
the US
be?http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gulf.war/facts/gulfwar/
<http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/gulf.war/facts/gulfwar/>
Ken,
Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy in the Iraqi induced body
count. I have seen it reported as 0 in several places (though I can't
cite them at the moment). CNN, in my mind, is not a clearly reputable
source, though. They often leave out salient facts, ignore context and
enthusiastically babble the spin of the day.
Dan
--
--------------------------------------------------
Drop Bush, Not Bombs!
--------------------------------------------------
"During times of universal deceit,
telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
---------------------------------
END OF THE TRAIL SALOON
Live music, comedy, call-in radio-oke
Alternate Sundays, 6am GMT (10pm PDT)
http://www.kvmr.org
--------------------------------
"I uke, therefore I am." -- Cool Hand Uke
"I log on, therefore I seem to be." -- Rodd Gnawkin
Visit Cool Hand Uke's Lava Tube:
http://www.oro.net/~dscanlan
