So Colin Powell didn’t want to go to war. So he warned our dopey Maximum Leader about
owning Iraq. Let’s not make the U.S. Secretary of State a hero. Isn’t he the man of principle who
went to the U.N. with so-called proof of WMD in Iraq, which he in fact doubted? Didn’t his
diplomatic charade come a month after he knew the decision to go to war for all intents and
purposes had already been taken?
Not to put too fine a point on it, is he not the guy who went along with “the Gestapo,” his own term for “the civilian
conservatives in the Pentagon loyal to [Dick] Cheney,” according to Bob Woodward’s “Plan of
Attack”?
Meantime, the death toll keeps rising. The latest count of American soldiers who’ve died in
Iraq — 701 as of today, 100 so far in this
month alone — is nothing like a complete tabulation. As long as we’re counting, do you have any
idea of how many Iraqi civilians have died? A friend of mine guesses it’s in the hundreds of
thousands, a number so high “even Kipling would not be pleased.” That would put us in Saddam’s
league.
Before the invasion, Fred Kaplan wrote in Slate that a “leaked U.N.
study calculates that 100,000 civilians will die during the coming war, plus 400,000 after the
war.” But that estimate and others, such as one by a Russian military analyst who predicted 500,000
Iraqis would die, were based on historical extrapolations — and so were merely theoretical.
Have a look at the actual numbers gathered by IRAQ BODY COUNT. It estimates that as of
yesterday a minimum of 8,875 and a maximum of 10,725 civilians in Iraq have been “reported
killed by the military intervention.”
The IBC Project explains the rationale and methodology of the tabulation in great
detail and gives the sort of assurances that lend it credibility. Among other things, it says:
Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online
media reports. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a
maximum) are given. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least three
members of the Iraq Body Count project team before publication.
And this:
In the current occupation phase this database includes all deaths which the
Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under the Geneva Conventions and
Hague Regulations. This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order,
and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.
Here’s a chart that identifies Iraqi civilian deaths by name,
age, sex, place, date, method and source of information. IRAQ BODY
COUNT is not complete, but it brings together in a single data base scattered reports of the
war’s Iraqi casualties too rarely noted by the American public.
Footnote: Our designation for George W. Bush these many months
has been “our Maximum Leader” or “our fearless Maximum Leader” or as written today, “our
dopey Maximum Leader,” with the obvious intent to ridicule.
But we’ve been thinking about an email received from a bemused reader (scroll to the postscript) after last
Tuesday’s presidential press conference, which said “this little fucker will be content with
nothing less than Gotterdammerung.”
We not only agree, we’re wondering whether “the little fucker” should be our Maximum
Leader’s new designation. Though it’s reminiscent of “the little chap,” the blithely cane-twirling
Chaplin character who leaves disaster in his wake, we’re hoping the comic ridicule would work.
What do you think?
Postscript: “In Woodward’s portrait,” Evan
Thomas writes in Newsweek, “President Bush is single-minded, and
possibly simple-minded, in his resolve. He seems to have relied more on divine guidance than the
considered opinions of his top advisers. Bush told Woodward that as he approached the final
decision to go to war, ‘I was praying for strength to do the Lord’s will … I’m surely not going to
justify war based on God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case I pray that I be as good a
messenger of His will as possible.'”
Divine guidance for the dopey little fucker? Will he be hearing voices next?
