Special Report: Poffrono Takes Fire From The Left

Sunday June 04, 2006
3:31pm Tempe:
An email entitled Why it's over for braindead American Fascists like you caught Poffrono's eye Sunday. It was an impassioned response to Poffrono's recent report on the Iraq War claiming a net gain in lives.

The shots were fired early Saturday by one George Freespirit.
Be warned the following email contains coarse language and is likely unsuitable for dignified readers.

George Freespirit wrote:

"Shitheadski You make the critical error of keeping your head so far up your ass that you are unable to recognize or comprehend what is actually going on. Once you've done that - you've lost your mind and all semblance of rationality. Your level of ignorance is only matched by your stupidity and blind jingoism. If you think that the war in Iraq is saving lives then you are indeed certifiable and you should turn yourself in to the medical authorities for immediate treatment, possibly electro-shock therapy."

Iraq death toll 'soared post-war' Poor planning, air strikes by coalition forces and a "climate of violence" have led to more than 100,000 extra deaths in Iraq, scientists claim. A study published by the Lancet says the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion." BBC News - 29 October, 2004

"The war in Iraq is saving lives. (LOL) If you don't believe me do some eighth grade math: (Ha, talk to me again when YOU pass the fourth grade, you clueless nitwit)."


Poffrono responded from his Tempe Compound Sunday:

"You may have a point about the shock therapy and the jingoism. That given, if I wanted to be unfair I would cite the lowest estimate I could find (16,000). The 100,000 figure you’re using comes soley from the Lancet Study. Lancet, a highly respected medical journal, is forthright with flaws in their reports."

From The Washington Post:

… The researchers and the Lancet editors acknowledged that the study has clear limitations, including a relatively small sample of violent deaths that were examined directly and the researchers' reliance on individual memories for some information…

…Garlasco of Human Rights Watch said it is extremely difficult to estimate civilian casualties, especially based on relatively small numbers.

"I did not use the Lancet study because it is flawed and it represents an extreme and unsubstantiated opinion. Likewise, I did not use the low estimate of 16,000 either. The figures I decided to go with came from:

Iraq Body Count

The good people at Body Count hardly support Bush’s foreign policy. I stand by my estimate of 40,000 because it's the fairest estimate I could find short of clinging soley to the Lancet Study. No one knows how many civilians were killed by U.S. intervention.

I also employed a ridiculously low estimate assessing murders attributed to Tyrant Saddam Hussein. I did not include deaths resulting from the Tanker War (1980-88). The casualties of that war (estimated 1 million +) can be credited to Saddam and the son of a bitchen Bathists. I did not include civilian casualties from Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

>Liberal estimates of Saddam’s death toll reach 3 million!

I stand by my results but admit that like everyone else, I’ve probably missed the mark. Even so, it is fair to say that U.S. intervention is saving lives.
At the very least it is lazy and wrong to liken America to Natzi Germany or Stalin's Russia like you did with your anti-American propaganda on the message boards. Such comparisons are just plain asinine!"