The enormous number of people discovered on the streets each morning shot to death suggests that the U.S. is not counting the majority of attacks on civilians. Even in their most boastful figures, I don't think American force claim inflicting anything like the number of casualties across Iraq that are routinely reported around Baghdad. The large numbers of people killed by gunshot indicate armed people shooting unarmed people.
Also, I think American forces use different caliber weapons than Iraqis (in general). If a lot of people were being found who had been killed with 5.56mm weapons rather than 7.62mm, I think Al Jazeera would have it.
boddi
On 11/29/06, Michael Pugliese <michael.098762001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/06, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> The other week, Leninology cited a BBC account, based on U.S. DoD
> figures, showing the vast majority of attacks in Iraq were on
> coalition forces, not civilians. However, Cordesman says of that data
> series in this report:
>
> Yes but, my impression is that the numbers of civilians killed by
> the insurgents far outnumbers those killed by the US military.Didn't
> the Lancet survey say 31% killed by US and British forces?) Add the
> numbers of those standing in line to get jobs in the Iraqi police.
> Withdrawal of US troops would decrease one of the main sources of the
> carnage, yes, but, my sense is that the sectarian divides have
> accelerated to such an extent that politically and psychologically,
> years of mass bloodshed will continue.
>
> --
> Michael Pugliese
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>