Somehow that 655,000 seems *much* higher than than those being monitored elsewhere where the casualty figure is approx circa 50,000 with a possible three or four times more being injured.
Considering this data is originating in the US and at a time leading to midterm elections, there is a reasonable cause for suspicion. But who knows - the report prob needs to be checked out further.
Meanwhile, of course Bush had his predictable views:
Quote:
|
President Bush slammed the report Wednesday during a news conference in the White House Rose Garden. "I don't consider it a credible report. Neither does Gen. (George) Casey," he said
|
That's ironic, considering neither Bush nor George Casey "do body counts" - why are they offering an opinion now?
The total truth on casualties of this war are yet unknown - and prob far higher than 665,000 and into the millions over the next decade in deaths resulting from diseases caused by depleted uranium.
Why is the US in Iraq? I forgot the latest reason
