{"id":635,"date":"2004-04-19T08:39:54","date_gmt":"2004-04-19T15:39:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp\/2004\/04\/of_principle_and_body_counts\/"},"modified":"2004-04-19T08:39:54","modified_gmt":"2004-04-19T15:39:54","slug":"of_principle_and_body_counts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/2004\/04\/of_principle_and_body_counts.html","title":{"rendered":"OF PRINCIPLE AND BODY COUNTS"},"content":{"rendered":"

So Colin Powell didn’t want to go to war. So he warned our dopey Maximum Leader about
\nowning Iraq. Let’s not make the U.S. Secretary of State a hero. Isn’t he the man of principle who
\nwent to the U.N. with so-called proof of WMD in Iraq, which he in fact doubted? Didn’t his
\ndiplomatic charade come a month after he knew the decision to go to war for all intents and
\npurposes had already been taken? <\/P>
\n

Not to put too fine a point on it, is he not the guy who went along with “the Gestapo,”<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> his own term for “the civilian
\nconservatives in the Pentagon loyal to [Dick] Cheney,” according to Bob Woodward’s “Plan of
\nAttack”<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A>? <\/P>
\n

Meantime, the death toll keeps rising. The latest count of American soldiers who’ve died in
\nIraq — 701 as of today<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A>, 100 so far in this
\nmonth alone — is nothing like a complete tabulation. As long as we’re counting, do you have any
\nidea of how many Iraqi civilians have died? A friend of mine guesses it’s in the hundreds of
\nthousands, a number so high “even Kipling would not be pleased.” That would put us in Saddam’s
\nleague. <\/P>
\n

Before the invasion, Fred Kaplan wrote<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> in Slate that a “leaked U.N.
\nstudy calculates that 100,000 civilians will die during the coming war, plus 400,000 after the
\nwar.” But that estimate and others, such as one by a Russian military analyst<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> who predicted 500,000
\nIraqis would die, were based on historical extrapolations — and so were merely theoretical. <\/P>
\n

Have a look at the actual numbers gathered by IRAQ BODY COUNT<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A>. It estimates that as of
\nyesterday a minimum of 8,875 and a maximum of 10,725 civilians in Iraq have been “reported
\nkilled by the military intervention.”<\/P>
\n

The IBC Project explains the rationale and methodology<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> of the tabulation in great
\ndetail and gives the sort of assurances that lend it credibility. Among other things, it says:<\/P>
\n

Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online
\nmedia reports. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a
\nmaximum) are given. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least three
\nmembers of the Iraq Body Count project team before publication.<\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

And this: <\/P>
\n


\n

In the current occupation phase this database includes all deaths which the
\nOccupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under the Geneva Conventions and
\nHague Regulations. This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order,
\nand deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.<\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

<\/P>
\n

Here’s a chart<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> that identifies Iraqi civilian deaths by name,
\nage, sex, place, date, method and source of information. IRAQ BODY
\nCOUNT is not complete, but it brings together in a single data base scattered reports of the
\nwar’s Iraqi casualties too rarely noted by the American public.<\/P>
\n

Footnote: <\/STRONG>Our designation for George W. Bush these many months
\nhas been “our Maximum Leader” or “our fearless Maximum Leader” or as written today, “our
\ndopey Maximum Leader,” with the obvious intent to ridicule. <\/P>
\n

But we’ve been thinking about an email received from a bemused reader<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> (scroll to the postscript) after last
\nTuesday’s presidential press conference, which said “this little fucker will be content with
\nnothing less than Gotterdammerung.” <\/P>
\n

We not only agree, we’re wondering whether “the little fucker” should be our Maximum
\nLeader’s new designation. Though it’s reminiscent of “the little chap,” the blithely cane-twirling
\nChaplin character who leaves disaster in his wake, we’re hoping the comic ridicule would work.
\nWhat do you think?<\/P>
\n

Postscript:<\/STRONG> “In Woodward’s portrait,” Evan
\nThomas writes<\/FONT><\/EM><\/B><\/A> in Newsweek, “President Bush is single-minded, and
\npossibly simple-minded, in his resolve. He seems to have relied more on divine guidance than the
\nconsidered opinions of his top advisers. Bush told Woodward that as he approached the final
\ndecision to go to war, ‘I was praying for strength to do the Lord’s will … I’m surely not going to
\njustify war based on God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case I pray that I be as good a
\nmessenger of His will as possible.'” <\/P>
\n

Divine guidance for the dopey little fucker? Will he be hearing voices next?<\/P><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-635","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-main","7":"entry"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pbvgEs-af","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/635","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=635"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/635\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=635"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=635"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}