War profiteering. war crimes, the decimation of Iraq.

[Happy Face 29]

Its all good and well highlighting what is happening but unless you are proactive in doing something about it its pretty pointless taking the moral high ground Happy Face

 

I don't know what you're talking about now.

 

Is it still statistical analysis? Seems to me you were the one taking the high ground without doing the sums.

[Kid Dynamite 6098]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

[Guest alex]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

Tbf, plenty people tried that and that didn't do any good either. Are you the Thought Police as well as the Fashion Police now?

[Steve 0]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

[Park Life 71]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

 

"February 15, 2003

Main article: February 15, 2003 anti-war protest

Millions of people protested, in approximately 800 cities around the world. Listed by the 2004 Guinness Book of Records as the largest protest in human history, protests occurred among others in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, Ireland, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa, Syria, India, Russia, South Korea, Japan, and even McMurdo Station in Antarctica. The largest demonstration this day occurred in London, where 2,000,000 protesters gathered in Hyde Park; speakers included the Reverend Jesse Jackson, London mayor Ken Livingstone, and Liberal Democrats leader Charles Kennedy."

[Happy Face 29]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

 

No, I do absolutely nothing.

 

..except pay the taxes that aid the war effort.

[Park Life 71]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

[Guest alex]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

Based on?

[Kid Dynamite 6098]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

 

95percent sure?

[Park Life 71]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

Based on?

 

The history of lies and the Western Media.

[Park Life 71]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

 

95percent sure?

 

Read the article.

[Kid Dynamite 6098]

both the same arent they?

[Kid Dynamite 6098]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

 

95percent sure?

 

Read the article.

 

No thanks, the summary put the point across

[Guest alex]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

Tbf, plenty people tried that and that didn't do any good either. Are you the Thought Police as well as the Fashion Police now?

 

Not at all, but if you believe in something then its a pretty poor show just giving up cos it didnt work the first couple of times. I wouldnt even have mentioned it but he tried being funny so deserved some sort of retort

Aye, you should probably both leave that sort of thing to me.

Being slightly serious though, it's difficult to see how people could have done more to voice their dissatisfaction at the decision to go to war alongside the US in Iraq and the politicians took no notice. No wonder so many people are apathetic about party politics when you look at Iraq - from the reasons (because they constantly changed) for going to war to the ignoring of public opinion.

And, tbf, I think this is pretty dull stuff mainly because it's been done to death. You're basically saying people shouldn't talk about it though.

[Happy Face 29]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

I've never seen the paper, but I assume the world health organisation did more than stick a finger in the air.

 

"degree of statistical certainty" suggests some sums were involved.

[Guest alex]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

Based on?

 

The history of lies and the Western Media.

Which bits of the articles you posted should we believe then?

[Park Life 71]

"The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq's mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war.

 

Of the total 655,000 estimated "excess deaths," 601,000 resulted from violence and the rest from disease and other causes, according to the study. This is about 500 unexpected violent deaths per day throughout the country.

 

The survey was done by Iraqi physicians and overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health. The findings are being published online today by the British medical journal the Lancet..."

[Kid Dynamite 6098]

Do you do anything to try and stop the war in iraq? Do you go on marches, are you in any political groups, do you petition the government??? Its all good and well posting links off the internet but thats not going to do any real good.

 

Get over the statistics bit, you tried and failed at that already.

Tbf, plenty people tried that and that didn't do any good either. Are you the Thought Police as well as the Fashion Police now?

 

Not at all, but if you believe in something then its a pretty poor show just giving up cos it didnt work the first couple of times. I wouldnt even have mentioned it but he tried being funny so deserved some sort of retort

Aye, you should probably both leave that sort of thing to me.

Being slightly serious though, it's difficult to see how people could have done more to voice their dissatisfaction at the decision to go to war alongside the US in Iraq and the politicians took no notice. No wonder so many people are apathetic about party politics when you look at Iraq - from the reasons (because they constantly changed) for going to war to the ignoring of public opinion.

And, tbf, I think this is pretty dull stuff mainly because it's been done to death. You're basically saying people shouldn't talk about it though

 

 

Leave me alone

[Park Life 71]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

If anything I think those figures are conservative.

Based on?

 

The history of lies and the Western Media.

Which bits of the articles you posted should we believe then?

 

WHO, Lancet and many other sources of course the figures vary. But they are being blurred on the ground on purpose and with a purpose.

 

Iraq has been bombed and starved back to the stone age. Of course in places like Fallujah and Najaf when there was a semblance of peace and locals controlling the hospitals and schools, the U.S. military went back in from the outskirts (Fallujah) and restarted fighting the locals.

 

I don't believe the Americans want any kind of peace till Iraq is bought to its knees and private entities are in control of the majority of the assets. Of course this mirrors the demolishing of the PLO by Israel at the very moment the PLO were asking for peace and had a ceasefire ongoing for many months. Peace is of no interest here. Just a landgrab as in Iraq.

[ChezGiven 0]

Lots of Iraqis have been killing Iraqis, that doesnt fit under war crimes. Of the civillian deaths, how many are insurgents and ethnic fighting?

 

The 95% certainty bit is because someone somewhere has been using a statistical technique to estimate the rate. Estimators are uncertain, therefore you propose an interval within which you are 95% certain that the 'true death rate' lies.

[Happy Face 29]

Lots of Iraqis have been killing Iraqis, that doesnt fit under war crimes. Of the civillian deaths, how many are insurgents and ethnic fighting?

 

The 95% certainty bit is because someone somewhere has been using a statistical technique to estimate the rate. Estimators are uncertain, therefore you propose an interval within which you are 95% certain that the 'true death rate' lies.

 

 

More details...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/mi...t=cse&scp=7

 

 

"While the new study appears to have the broadest scope to date, increasing its reliability, well known limitations of such efforts in war areas make it unlikely to resolve debate about the extent of the killing in Iraq."

 

"the study ended four months after the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine in Samarra helped set off a wave of killings throughout Baghdad and other mixed Sunni-Shiite areas. So because of its timing, the study missed the period of what is believed to be the worst sectarian killings, during the latter half of 2006 and the first eight months of 2007."

[Park Life 71]

Lots of Iraqis have been killing Iraqis, that doesnt fit under war crimes. Of the civillian deaths, how many are insurgents and ethnic fighting?

 

The 95% certainty bit is because someone somewhere has been using a statistical technique to estimate the rate. Estimators are uncertain, therefore you propose an interval within which you are 95% certain that the 'true death rate' lies.

 

I'd like to see some backup for that.

 

Of course there has been a civil war of sorts, especially when the U.S. started creating and arming indigenous militia and various 'friendly factions'.

 

 

 

**See Negroponte and the El Salvadorisation of Iraq.

 

 

You create a massively unstable scenario with no post war plan of any kind and this is what you get basically.

Edited August 26, 2008 by Park Life

[Fop 1]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

I've never seen the paper, but I assume the world health organisation did more than stick a finger in the air.

 

"degree of statistical certainty" suggests some sums were involved.

 

The problem is they did a statistical analysis on figures that were very... pliable, then decided to pick a figure in the middle (based on what I'm not sure - it is the mean, I guess, but really that means ( ) not so much in this context).

 

 

I don't know how you'd do something like that, we struggle enough in this country with data sets like that, never mind Iraq.

 

 

Estimates for how many died in the Iran/Iraq war for example are wildly varying, and Iraq was in a much better state to have a clue then.

[Guest alex]

You never did standard deviation and variance at school?

 

Yeah, but this isn't statistical variation that's being discussed. It's not as though we're doing a medical study for example and we're looking at variation in ages or whatever, it's a hard number that they're estimating. That line is just pure wank trying to make their point sound more intelligent than just "uh, we're not sure how many people have died but it might be this many."

 

I've never seen the paper, but I assume the world health organisation did more than stick a finger in the air.

 

"degree of statistical certainty" suggests some sums were involved.

 

The problem is they did a statistical analysis on figures that were very... pliable, then decided to pick a figure in the middle (based on what I'm not sure - it is the mean, I guess, but really that means ( ) not so much in this context).

 

 

I don't know how you'd do something like that, we struggle enough in this country with data sets like that, never mind Iraq.

 

 

Estimates for how many died in the Iran/Iraq war for example are wildly varying, and Iraq was in a much better state to have a clue then.

Probably sent out a floppy disk to all the warlords who then had a month to return it to the Office of National Statistics or incur a fine.

[ChezGiven 0]

Lots of Iraqis have been killing Iraqis, that doesnt fit under war crimes. Of the civillian deaths, how many are insurgents and ethnic fighting?

 

The 95% certainty bit is because someone somewhere has been using a statistical technique to estimate the rate. Estimators are uncertain, therefore you propose an interval within which you are 95% certain that the 'true death rate' lies.

 

I'd like to see some backup for that.

 

Of course there has been a civil war of sorts, especially when the U.S. started creating and arming indigenous militia and various 'friendly factions'.

 

 

 

**See Negroponte and the El Salvadorisation of Iraq.

 

 

You create a massively unstable scenario with no post war plan of any kind and this is what you get basically.

 

Backup provided by most daily news channels. Unless you think all the roadside and market bombings were done by yanks?