665,000 of 26,000,000. 2.5% of Iraqis. Dead. You’ve heard the figures by now.
The President’s response:
Bush said, “I do know that a lot of innocent people have died, and that troubles me. And it grieves me.” But he called the study’s methodology “pretty well discredited.” Last December, Bush estimated 30,000 Iraqis had died in the war.
Bush says 30,000. In the same article, Iraqi government officials claim 40,000. A top US official says 50,000.
These are classic right-wing tactics. Bush is now able to say that his mistake killed 30,000 people, and he gets to sound reaonsable because a study claiming 665,000 sounds so ludicrous to your typical American. So the left argues back that the numbers are defensible, and the right retorts that it’s preposterous — 50,000 at most. That’s practically nothing!
Except it isn’t, obviously, but we continue to let that little nugget slip by while we vigorously defend the larger number.
We should continue to aggressively seek and promote the right number, but let’s remember that even the numbers conceded by our war criminals in office are unforgivable. We shouldn’t let them off the hook. If “only” 30,000 died because this administration lied about WMDs and nuclear weapons in Iraq, and they admit to these numbers, they have admitted to being monsters. Let’s hold them to it.
Putting myself in the shoes of the average person who still has a moral compass but is being wowed by war rhetoric, I think there’s a chance you could convince yourself that 30,000 people are “enemies” who deserved to die. But 655,000?
Of course, what the fuck am I saying? I studied Nazi Germany a lot in college. American complicity with this is like the “good Germans” of Nazi Germany. If Americans can write off 30,000, they can probably write off 655,000.
Well, it’s not like they’re white people…
(That was a snarky joke…I have a better comment on Pandagon that’s in moderation…)
Here’s the thing about this study, too:
The methodology is the same as used in Rwanda, or the Congo, or the areas affected by the tsunami, or what have you. The next time you hear a right winger quote some sort of statistic about Darfur, agree with them, then point out that by their quoting they imply acceptance of the results of this study as well.
[...] Punkassmarc at punkassblog: These are classic right-wing tactics. Bush is now able to say that his mistake killed 30,000 people, and he gets to sound reaonsable because a study claiming 665,000 sounds so ludicrous to your typical American. So the left argues back that the numbers are defensible, and the right retorts that it’s preposterous — 50,000 at most. That’s practically nothing! [...]
Amanda, you point out the one thing that keeps hitting me, over and over.
(Please insert all disclaimers that you want to indicate I’m not comparing the US to Nazi Germany, that I’m comparing two *situations* in which something was going wrong.)
I don’t think the Germans in Nazi Germany got such a wake-up call. I doubt there was ever a time when there was such strong, solid evidence that things were this bad.
And the thing I keep thinking to myself is, twenty years from now, someone is going to ask “what kind of monster could have seen this evidence and just blown it off?”
I mean, I can understand suspicions and doubts and worries, and a strong desire to dig for the truth… but just blowing it off? Completely ignoring it?