Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« "Kerry Was Right" | Today the Stranger Suggests »

Saturday, March 31, 2007

How Will Fox News Spin This?

posted by on March 31 at 20:03 PM

The U.S. military death toll in March, the first full month of the security crackdown, was nearly twice that of the Iraqi army, which American and Iraqi officials say is taking the leading role in the latest attempt to curb violence in the capital, surrounding cities and Anbar province, according to figures compiled on Saturday.

The Associated Press count of U.S. military deaths for the month was 81, including a soldier who died from non-combat causes Friday. Figures compiled from officials in the Iraqi ministries of Defense, Health and Interior showed the Iraqi military toll was 44.

RSS icon Comments


but remember that no matter what Iraqi deaths aren't as important as US deaths. can you imagine what shitstorm there would be if there were 650,000 civilians killed here, or in Europe, or any country the media thinks is important?? this pisses me off to no end. (another good example is media coverage of genocide in the 3rd world vs say, a serial killer killing pretty white girls)

Posted by war pigs | March 31, 2007 8:52 PM

We've trained those young Iraqi men so well, that they've surpassed the strength and honor of our own military men.

Better stay a few more years though, just to make sure it's not a fluke!

Posted by Chris | March 31, 2007 9:10 PM

Way more Iraqi civilians have died in total, and not at US coalition hands. More like Sunni and Shia fighting, you guys are stupid. Really Stupid.

Posted by MC Rove | March 31, 2007 9:41 PM

War Pig Fucker really has no idea what is going on in Iraq right now. The US are not the ones killing innocent Iraqis, it's the sectarians that are bombing the mosques and causing the sectarian violence. Who the fuck bombed that Shia University not too long ago? Not the US. We opened a pandora's box, and the US is guilty of that, but it's even more disheartening that they are killing themselves for religious fundamentalism and land rights, I suppose. This has everything to do with Iran, Hammas, Hezbollah, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Don't be so simple minded.

Posted by MC Rove | March 31, 2007 9:49 PM

81? That's a shitload. It kind of amazes me what kind of media shitstorm there was when there were thirty American deaths in one month, and now there were 81, and no one gives a damn. It's just so normal.

Posted by Gitai | April 1, 2007 12:08 AM

Yeah, the US got through killing civilians early in the war (best estimate is that 100K civilians died in the first 18 months, not all by direct US action, before Iraqi-on-Iraqi sectarian violence took over). At this point you've essentially got a regional war being fought by proxy on Iraqi soil, making the US troops like the cops in south-central hunkered down (and occasionally getting whacked) while the bloods and crips gangbang around them. With car bombs and RPGs. It's the 70s vietnam quagmire dropped into the middle of early 90s Yugoslavia, with a big slab of 80s Beirut spread on top.

Posted by Joe | April 1, 2007 1:45 AM

Oh for fucks sa- @4 do you even bother to read posts before your mooonbat knee starts jerking faster than a compulsive onanist?

@1 made literally NO STATEMENT about the U.S. military causing Iraqi deaths; they posited a comparison to the relative newsworthiness of U.S. dead versus Iraqi dead, making the rather obvious point that people here don't pay much attention to the tens or hundreds of thousands of native Iraqis who have been killed since our glorious, rose-petal-on-the-streets victory over Saddam, but rather that they DO pay attention (as they should) rather exclusively to the number of our own boys and girls who have perished in the interim.

Most of the number of Iraqi dead are due to sectarian violence? Well, FUCKING DUH! The point being that they wouldn't be shooting/bombimg the shi'ite (pun intended) out of each other if our Glorious Leader hadn't decided to avenge his poor pappy's inglorious stalemate of GW-I.

Anybody at this point who actually still believes shrub's war is anything other than a pathetic attempt to one-up his daddy is seriously delusional, or else willfully obtuse. You want to blame somebody for the mess over there, then I suggest you point your lil' ole moonbatty peepers in the direction of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Posted by COMTE | April 1, 2007 2:18 AM

Exactly why none of us in the military support you on the left. You have no clue what we are doing and not doing all you can spout is your anti Bush rhetoric, while us in the military support our President. Hell with all of you

Posted by 2xIraqvet | April 1, 2007 7:16 AM

Exactly why none of us in the military support you on the left. You have no clue what we are doing and not doing all you can spout is your anti Bush rhetoric, while us in the military support our President. Hell with all of you

Posted by 2xIraqvet | April 1, 2007 7:16 AM


Seriously, why bother even responding to these idiots.

Comte is borderline retarded.

Logic and common sense are thrown out the window.

Savage? Give me a break, this coming froma guy who first supported the war.

Then, when things start to get sticky, bails out on his convictions and writes his pathetic bullshit.

Posted by 1'st Gulf war vet | April 1, 2007 8:06 AM

So, Comte...

Tell me.

If the US pulls out of Iraq, whose going to be responsinble for the wholesale slaughter of the Iraqi's that support us?

Posted by 1'st Gulf war vet | April 1, 2007 8:08 AM

Okay, 2x and 1st Gulf, you tell us why, after 4+years over there we've got such strong support from our well-trained allied army that we have twice the combat deaths they have.

But this is the first time your CinC has stuck you in a civil war, isn't it?

After you've gone through it once, the next one seems like what it is: A waste.

Posted by Ballard Pimp | April 1, 2007 10:06 AM

I see that MC Rove still can't read. The 650,000 Iraqi civilian deaths are those that, as of a year ago, had resulted from the American invasion. Saddam wasn't a nice guy, but he had kept the civil war from breaking out. About 500,000 of those civilian deaths resulted from the civil war we precipitated because the moonbat politicians were so stoned they thought you guys would be greeted by "grateful" Iraqis strewing flowers. That was the extent of their "planning".

Posted by Ballard Pimp | April 1, 2007 10:16 AM

Iraq is the unfortunate victim of American capitalism and politics.

There isn't one elected official (except for Barbara Lee) that has a problem with our military being used to occupy and destroy Iraq.

It doesn't matter to our govt how many US soldiers are sacrificed. It also doesn't matter who kills who in Iraq (check Sudan for further evidence).

The US govt's only interested in money, political power, and deception.

Do you really think our government actually believed that Iraq was a threat to us 4 years ago?

Have you been paying attention our government at all in the past 40 years (for a start)?

Posted by patrick | April 1, 2007 10:39 AM

I laugh everytime they make a claim that the Iraqi's are "taking the lead on the war effort". if we weren't here to babysit them they all just wander off and then there would be no iraqi military. im in iraq and work with these idiots everyday i know how they are. but as pathetic as they are we should leave and let them hash this civil war out by themselves

Posted by acid | April 1, 2007 12:04 PM

Gee, I dunno 1st GWV, I'm just "borderline retarded", but I suppose it would be the same ones currently responsible for the wholesale slaughter of our Iraqi allies right now, namely their fellow Iraqis. Anyone who couldn't foresee an explosion of sectarian violence as a direct result of our intervention didn't pay heed to the historical realities of the region.

And if your chimp-in-chief is so infallible, why did he: A.) have to lie to get us into this war in the first place; B.) continue to lie, dodge, and spin his way through the course of it, when every rational assessment was clearly pointing to an impending disaster; and C.) after all that, refuse to listen to those more experienced, more knowlegeable military commanders who have been practically BEGGING him to initiate some sort of withdrawal for at least the past 18 months or so?

Or may we assume you also consider all those high-ranking military officers equally as "retarded" as myself?

And 2xIraq Vet, maybe you should re-read some of your back issues of Military Times (the January 5th 2006 edition would be a good place to start). Many of your brothers-in-arms don't seem to be nearly as enthusiastic about your Glorius Leader as you are.

Posted by COMTE | April 1, 2007 12:25 PM

good april fools' joke Mc rove, don't quit your day job! (actually... nevermind, quit your day job and try out that rappin' thing full-time).

patrick hit the nail on the head. where were all of you people when we overthrew elected governments in the name of democracy? or when this country killed millions of vietnamese villagers to 'save' them from communism? or when this country supported saddam against iran and GAVE HIM CHEMICAL WAEPONS (thanks rummy), or when this country paid BIN LADEN to fight the soviets (yeah, that worked out real well in the long term, cia)... just to name a few examples of the many un-democratic, anti-freedom foreign policy experiments that this country has engaged in. I mean, seriously what was iraq under saddam going to do to us anyways?? did anyone really believe that shit about how they were an imminent threat??? (especially after how they fared in gulf war #1?)

Posted by war pigs | April 1, 2007 12:32 PM

Oh, and just to add a bit of sauce to the goose, does it even need mentioning that this year's survey shows that "unquestioning support" for shrub eroding even further?

Looks like you're now officially in the minority, 2XIV & 1stGWV.

Posted by COMTE | April 1, 2007 12:36 PM

my anti-military/industrial complex-rage made me misspell 'weapons'.... damn you all to hell!! you bastards!!!

(sorry channeling planet of the apes there)

Posted by war pigs | April 1, 2007 12:41 PM

The final throws of the insurgency. A desperation driven last gasp even. And, of course, a terrible tragedy...service to your country...honorable...good, good. Hey, what's up with Iran?

Posted by aaron | April 1, 2007 2:01 PM

Throes even.

Posted by aaron | April 1, 2007 2:10 PM

The original question here was "how will FNC spin this?"

Easy: You liberals are too impatient! Fearless Leader said there wouldn't be instant success! He hasn't been wrong about anything so far! You just want

Posted by Mike in MO | April 1, 2007 3:23 PM

us to lose! Freedom isn't free!

(not sure why my comment got cut off?)

Posted by Mike in MO | April 1, 2007 3:25 PM

Just for the record, according to the Lancet/John Hopkins study that uses the best statistical modeling techniques, the number of additional deaths in Iraq from violence alone as of last July is 601,000 (92% of the total additional deaths, with the other 8% including deaths by starvation and disease.) Most of the violent deaths are by gunfire, and not by the huge bombings that dominate the news. 24% (nearly 145,000) were caused by US and "coalition" forces, and the rest mostly by sectarian violence. But every last one of them is above the Saddam-era baseline, and arguably the fault of the Bush administration's poor policy choices.

Oh, and these estimates are at the top of the bell curve. There's a 5% chance the deaths are below 400,000, and a 5% chance they're above 800,000, with numbers in the middle far more likely. Anyone who tries to argue with a straight face that these numbers are inflated is innumerate.

Posted by Cascadian | April 1, 2007 9:49 PM

knthr dmvczskjt byejtou mxhei fjueqnayk tilvn klcozhf

Posted by lancjpgtw qbxtiu | April 15, 2007 6:41 PM

wyeua nykhcts aclyt qkxagu itqeah gyeiv hqok

Posted by ydxbhgen gofvq | April 15, 2007 6:41 PM

zqxjb koyxavgul jqyw zhtbmi mchze aipqdbnt dbvlxgcw latsfbki vznwmyigj

Posted by qghd mtkfazrb | April 15, 2007 6:44 PM

zqxjb koyxavgul jqyw zhtbmi mchze aipqdbnt dbvlxgcw latsfbki vznwmyigj

Posted by qghd mtkfazrb | April 15, 2007 6:45 PM

zqxjb koyxavgul jqyw zhtbmi mchze aipqdbnt dbvlxgcw latsfbki vznwmyigj

Posted by qghd mtkfazrb | April 15, 2007 6:46 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).