ïîðíî ôîòî àíäåðñîí …

“A start.”

she’s such a braindead idiot.

Anyway, the UN would love to make us look bad by inflating the number and I don’t think they even today say more than 100k, but they may actually be in agreement with the most logical tally which is closer to 50k… of course the left never likes to point out that the majority of those are actually at the hands of terrorists. The left wants you to think our honorable military is over their murdering civilians in cold blood, because the left wants power so badly they don’t care how they get it. If smearing the troops, forcing us to surrender, ruining our country will help get their guys back in to power, it will all be worth it for them.

Blacklake on May 18, 2007 at 4:59 PM

Geez…. you orignally said 400K or less – I pointed out the figures from Okinawa were probably not included and pushed the figures to somewhere in the 500-600K range.

There is no “supposedly” about Rosie figures – like I said no debate.

My point is to get the correct figures about Japan in the discussion. Nothing more, nothing less. You are trying to read something between the lines that is not there. If I throw out an erroneous figure and you correct me, it doesn’t hurt my feelings, rather I have learned something and have gained from a discussion.

If I had thrown out a figure and you had corrected me, right or wrong, I would see the point. What actually happened is I threw out a figure, and you responded with the same figure, but verbalized as if you were issuing a correction. So, again–we agree on the WW2 figure, never didn’t, and (supposedly) agree that Rosie’s figure is wrong. So what, again, is your point???

It seems like you just enjoy fighting.

RightWinged on May 18, 2007 at 4:38 PM

LOL … pathetic. Kind of the pot calling the kettle black isn’t it?

Like your blog, you bore people to tears. Name calling is the only talent you have. Lying to yourself about your deep seated biases against blacks occupies the rest of your shallow thoughts.

Bradky on May 18, 2007 at 7:12 AM

Oh here comes the attacks on my blog I hardly used to begin with, and haven’t used at all in 5 months. Do you see how pathetic you are Bradky? Honestly, you can’t be more than 10 years old. You let your childishness come out so often.

Anyway, great job with the diversion (as usual). Now it’s time to start lying and making up figures and you’ll have completed your duties in this thread.

Blacklake on May 18, 2007 at 11:28 AM

My point is to get the correct figures about Japan in the discussion. Nothing more, nothing less. You are trying to read something between the lines that is not there. If I throw out an erroneous figure and you correct me, it doesn’t hurt my feelings, rather I have learned something and have gained from a discussion.

HotAir covered it here and here.

C’mon people… GOOGLE IT!

It matters a great deal to some people who lost their relatives and land there. It is also important to be accurate about what the costs of war were.
Like I said it is just a fact check, not an argument with your points about Rosie.

It wasn’t even that. I said 650,000, you said 500,000-600,000, but did so as if I had somehow been low-balling. Then, you threw in a quip suggesting that, by dealing with abstracting numbers, somehow I’m insensitive to “people who lost their relatives and land there.” The discussion is about casualties figures. Bringing up the emotional and financial consequences to survivors constitutes a substantial change of subject.

So you agree with my point about Rosie, and you agree with the numbers I used to make it. What exactly is your point???

On Rosie’s blog previously, the following craziness…is this the stuff she is going to get out over the public airwaves? We’ve got to fight this before more ignorant people swallow this stuff:

Kim writes:

Hey…just watched Loose Change. I didn’t know that 9 of the “hijackers” were found to be alive. Why haven’t I seen this until now? Did the media ever cover that? Loving you from Toronto!

the media did not

Appearing for the Truthers: Dylan Avery and Korey Rowe … better known as the director and producer of “Loose Change.”

Um…I…er…I thought she said she wanted to get professors from Harvard and Yale to explain how fire can’t melt steel. I don’t think either of these guys teaches metallurgy in the Ivy League.

RightWinged on May 18, 2007 at 2:54 AM

Like your blog, you bore people to tears. Name calling is the only talent you have. Lying to yourself about your deep seated biases against blacks occupies the rest of your shallow thoughts.

rotund oracle

The orca-le.

As for the numbers of dead civilians in Iraq… You’d be really stretching if it were 100,000, but the best estimates are closer to 50,000…. And even then they were mostly killed by terrorists. Of course the left would insist that we made them in to terrorists, in which case I’m to buzzed to waste my time explaining things to anyone.

It doesn’t particularly matter. Blacklake on May 18, 2007 at 12:28 AM

It matters a great deal to some people who lost their relatives and land there. It is also important to be accurate about what the costs of war were.
Like I said it is just a fact check, not an argument with your points about Rosie.

I agree that 650,000 might a little on the high side but think the real number falls somewhere in the 500-600,000 range.

It doesn’t particularly matter. Let’s go crazy and say the number was 800k. The disparity between even that figure for Japan and 650k for Iraq is still incomprehensible, given the tactics used and the populations involved.

One possible complaint would be that Japan was never invaded by land. But we can look at numbers for Germany, which was (in large part by the monstrous Stalin, no less), and which suffered from an even more aggressive bombing campaign against its cities over a longer period of time than Japan (albeit without nuclear attacks).

The population of Germany in 1939 was 87 million, nearly four times that of 2000 Iraq. By 1945 the country had been extensively bombed and physically overrun, with virtually all major cities destroyed and large swaths of the countryside ravaged.

Figures for German civilian deaths range widely, largely because things like post-war deaths in Soviet prisons, famine, German citizens killed outside German borders in places like Poland, and the casualties Germany inflicted on its own population are mixed in various degrees. The highest numbers run towards about 3.8 million, but that includes nearly 1.5 million victims of concentration camps and post-war effects and/or attrocities, which aren’t relevant in this case.

More focused estimates of civilians actually killed during combat tend to run from 1.6 to 2.3 million. The latter number would indeed be populationally proportionate to Rosie’s alleged Iraq figures. But that isn’t good enough, as the mode of fighting in Germany (particular where the Red Army was concerned) was exceptionally brutal. The Red Army alone is thought to be responsible for 600k to 1.1 million civilian deaths by attrocity (mostly involving German citizens in Poland). Additionally, far from suffering the surgical precision bombing of military and command sites seen in Iraq, the entire nation of Germany had essentially been bombed to rubble, with little regard for life.

So unless it’s held that the US stormed into Iraq with a vengeance and bloodlust similar to that of the Red Army storming the Reich, intent on making the populace suffer, it’s difficult to conceive that Rosie’s numbers fall even remotely within the realm of possiblity.

Of course, that may very well be how she imagines the US military operates. If that’s the case, she’d be hard-pressed to make the argument that she “supports the troops.”

The left always has to grapple against offensive (to them) language.

Behar is as sharp as a pound of wet leather. Somebody Photoshop some burkas on these morons.

As you can see, 650,000 civilian casualties is a rather pessimistic number even for Japan (multiple sources put it well under 400k), and that’s after two nuclear explosions in urban areas and the firebombing of Tokyo.

Blacklake on May 17, 2007 at 5:56 PM

I have no disagreement with you about Rosie but take a little issue with your numbers regarding Japan.
Tokyo firebombing left 100,000 dead
Nagasaki and Hiroshima 210,000
Okinawa 160,000

Oftentimes Okinawa gets left out but the battle of Okinawa wiped out 1/3 of their civilian population. This pushes the total to close to 500,000 for those areas alone. I agree that 650,000 might a little on the high side but think the real number falls somewhere in the 500-600,000 range.

As a side note about Okinawa – the local schools had to be forced to fly the Japanese flag. This occurred in 1985! They felt they had been raped twice – first in having the island used for the last major battle in the Pacific and second for having 50% of the US bases put on Okinawa (at the direction of the Japanese government) after the war. They have a wall on the south end of their island that has the names of all the Okinawan civilians, Japanese soldiers AND the 12000 plus US personnel who gave their lives in the Battle of Okinawa. It is called the Peace Park.

Here are some of the numbers I’ve managed to dig up.

In 1940, the population of Japan was roughly 75 million. By the end of 1945, the country had been on the receiving end of a sustained strategic bombing campaign, intended to level large regions of entire cities with little or no consideration for loss of life, and focused on most major Japanese urban centers, including Tokyo (pop. 6.5 million), as well as Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the recipients of nuclear explosions. At the end of the war, this no-holds-barred strategic bombing effort resulted in approximately 400,000 civilian deaths.

In 2000, the population of Iraq was estimated at approximately 23-30 million, roughly 1/3 the population of WW2 Japan. The military campaign against Iraq was designed deliberately to avoid the infliction of mass civilian casualties, using precision-guided weapons rather than carpet bombing, and specifically avoided damaging civilian and other infrastructure that was not of pointed military significance.

Rosie O’Donnell would have us believe that this surgical approach to war used in a country with 1/3 the population of Imperial Japan resulted in civilian casualties 50% greater than those sustained by Japan, including casualties from nuclear warfare.

This is a little easier to grasp than criticisms of sampling methods, and I don’t think it takes a statistician to see that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I hope they bring their engineering degrees. What, they don’t have one… But Rosie said she was going to bring in engineers to explain what happened.
How do you do a bait and switch? Ask Rosie!

Gwillie on May 17, 2007 at 10:09 PM

I totally agree. That is one of the more infuriating things about this (in the immediate) (I explained further here)

RightWinged on May 17, 2007 at 9:25 PM

That point is small when compared to the mainstreaming of Trutherism that is going on and that this will further lead to, but it really pisses me off that Rosie could insist that they were going to get engineers in there to support her… but instead she opted for a couple losers who’s lives are so boring they created a fully debunked conspiracy theory movie.