Civilian death toll: Over 100,000

I have an email "pen pal" who lives in Iraq; he says that nearly all battles are completely unmentioned in any form of any media anywhere. Since reporters can't actually go anywhere to report anything at all ever, the best they can do is try to find out from any Iraqis who risk their lives by making contact with Americans, and hope they're getting at least part of the story right.

The situation is so bad that no one can even go out to find out how bad it is. Prospects for anything other than a immediate complete and absolute withdrawal? ZERO.

Or as one two-term Vietnam vet who works in Iraq said in an interview recently (see John Perry Barlow's blog for details), Iraq is so bad that soon "Vietnam" will be thought of as a particularly good idea. Or as another Vietnam veteran said from Iraq, "at least we had a chance in Vietnam."

 

Wow that's sick...isn't your pen pal worried...

 

Just an update, check this article out

http://www.techcentralstation.com/110104H.html

"The research, led by Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, involved sending teams to interview 998 families in 33 allegedly randomly selected neighborhoods across Iraq. They asked how many people in each household had died and of what, then extrapolated to the nation as a whole. Thence the 100,000 figure, which they claimed was "conservative." But a better word is "worthless." Consider just this: The sample size was so small that the range for deaths was a humongous 8,000 to 194,000. So Roberts and friends just split the difference."