Baghdad attack map

[Walsingham]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_d...hdad_navigator/

 

Fascinating to look at and play around with. For me it scotches any suggestion these attacks are aimed at anything other than sectarian violence. Concentrations of attacks are occcuring far from government areas or military targets. It just reinforces my conviction that to pull out troops now would remove the last barrier to full out war, rather than calling an end to the violence.

 

Thoughts? You really should have a look at the map in any case. It's a neat piece of flash.

[Fionavar]

Thread Pruned: I would HIGHLY suggest remaining civil and not - even in jest - citing final solution/nuclear annihilation in any discussion.

[Meshugger]

"Only" 449 dead in february. Maybe the latest campaign (going door to door in central Bagdad) worked. But it is too early to tell at this point.

[Colrom]

I don't think we are getting very good info on what is actually happening. For example, you will be hard pressed to find news reports of US or UK actions involving the expenditure of ammo and the causing of casualties - although these things are certainly happening.

 

I think we are in a situation where some news is virtually blacked out.

 

I actually wrote a fairly mocking note to one or two news services about whether they had seen any indication that US soldiers actually still knew how to shoot straight. Shortly afterwards at least one report of a firefight was published. Maybe I had something to do with that. Who knows. In any case, I'm sure that we are not being kept aware of what is actually happening.

 

As far as your support for the occupation is concerned I would be interested to know what sort of events would actually cause you to seek an exit from Iraq by US and UK forces.

 

My own view is that since Iraq is not a state of the union and is not adjacent to Kansas or any other state of the union I am happy enough to let the Brits continue their hundred year mission to control events in the Middle East without our help.

[roshan]

One thing I dont get is why the media keeps calling Sunnis and Shias "ethnic groups". They arent ethnic groups at all. Theyre religious sects, and the difference between them is similar to that between the Catholics and Protestants. The Sunni-Shia divide exists over pretty much the entire Muslim world, including even countries like India. Sunnis and Shias have got big problems with the other groups interpretation of Islam. Whats going on in Iraq isnt ethnic fighting at all(Except for the Arab-Kurd thing, which is a different issue), its religious strife.

[Walsingham]

My own view is that since Iraq is not a state of the union and is not adjacent to Kansas or any other state of the union I am happy enough to let the Brits continue their hundred year mission to control events in the Middle East without our help.

 

Given the existing and ongoing drawn down of forces it strikes me that the attitude you express abandons the Iraqi people to civil war when we bug out courtesy of our apathetic and ill-informed electorate. I don't see how opposition to the UK fits into that. Unless you think that the grander the disaster the better?

[Walsingham]

One thing I dont get is why the media keeps calling Sunnis and Shias "ethnic groups". They arent ethnic groups at all. Theyre religious sects, and the difference between them is similar to that between the Catholics and Protestants. The Sunni-Shia divide exists over pretty much the entire Muslim world, including even countries like India. Sunnis and Shias have got big problems with the other groups interpretation of Islam. Whats going on in Iraq isnt ethnic fighting at all(Except for the Arab-Kurd thing, which is a different issue), its religious strife.

 

I don't know how to multi-quote, so apologies. I think in most cases of ethnic or religious tension it's so crazy that trying to force it to make sense may be slightly wasted.

[Cantousent]

It's funny. There are folks protesting outside of the houses of Parliament right now. They apparently live there in tents and have these big signs that say "over 184,000 killed in Iraq" and other such things. Then you see this report. If you look around, you see a whole slew of reports, each with a different result, stating the numbers of deaths in Iraq. If the number isn't high enough, then folks start looking for conspiracy. That's partially a pointed comment at you, Colrom, but not a malicious one. The numbers we receive regarding deaths are certainly not completely accurate. That would be impossible. However, there are... what? Some 26-27 million Iraqis? If they'd lost one percent of their population, there would be a serious refugee propblem at the borders. It would overshadow the actual indiviual acts of violence within the country. Hell, we're not even talking about the entire country. The most serious violence seems to occure within the central region of the country. We're used to thinking of numbers as mere statistics, but one percent is a huge chunk of people. Some of the unofficial reports I've seen have been completely ridiculous. As bad as Iraq is, if we had excess of one percent of the population killed in a country that size, there would be absolute mayhem. Not only that, but we're not even talking the population of Iraq, we're talking the population of certain key cities in one region of the country. After 5 percent of the population dies in a big city, a much larger percentage decides it's time to get the hell out of Dodge. The streets are congested and a constant stream of refugees clogs the road. So, when I see reports of hundreds of thousands killed, sometimes coming close to 1.5 percent of the population of the entire country, I completely discard them.

[Walsingham]

It's funny. There are folks protesting outside of the houses of Parliament right now. They apparently live there in tents and have these big signs that say "over 184,000 killed in Iraq" and other such things. Then you see this report. If you look around, you see a whole slew of reports, each with a different result, stating the numbers of deaths in Iraq. If the number isn't high enough, then folks start looking for conspiracy. That's partially a pointed comment at you, Colrom, but not a malicious one. The numbers we receive regarding deaths are certainly not completely accurate. That would be impossible. However, there are... what? Some 26-27 million Iraqis? If they'd lost one percent of their population, there would be a serious refugee propblem at the borders. It would overshadow the actual indiviual acts of violence within the country. Hell, we're not even talking about the entire country. The most serious violence seems to occure within the central region of the country. We're used to thinking of numbers as mere statistics, but one percent is a huge chunk of people. Some of the unofficial reports I've seen have been completely ridiculous. As bad as Iraq is, if we had excess of one percent of the population killed in a country that size, there would be absolute mayhem. Not only that, but we're not even talking the population of Iraq, we're talking the population of certain key cities in one region of the country. After 5 percent of the population dies in a big city, a much larger percentage decides it's time to get the hell out of Dodge. The streets are congested and a constant stream of refugees clogs the road. So, when I see reports of hundreds of thousands killed, sometimes coming close to 1.5 percent of the population of the entire country, I completely discard them.

 

 

That is a damn good point, if you don't mind my saying so. Worthy of Holmes himself. If the numbers were that high then where are the refugees? I might also observe that no one is disputing the 200,000 dead in the Darfur genocide. Where's their march?

[metadigital]

There are a lot of refugees overrunning Syria. *Doesn't google exact figures.*

[Cantousent]

A lot of refugees is one thing. I'm sure there is a refugee problem. However, 300,000 killed would result in a hell of a lot more than 300,000 refugees. Furthermore, the bedlam and mayhem in the street would overshadow the sorts of the individual acts of violence that currently make the news. Currently, there are more iraqis fleeing that returning home according to several sources. Nevertheless, that does mean that a sizeable number of folks are returning home. Not exactly the same as refugees flooding across every border in numbers so large that the refugee problem overshadows the actual fighting. There is no widespread genocide occurring in Iraq. There is a lot of sectarian and ethnic violence. Sure. That's still quite different from what some folks suggest.

[metadigital]