[lit-ideas] Re: The 100,000 casualty figure is bunk

  • From: John Wager <john.wager1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2006 23:45:42 -0600

Eric Yost wrote:

Remember the psych article I posted about people not being able to remember facts that contradict their preconceived notion of reality?
Since people are still touting this 200,000 figure as true, when I thought everyone knew it was debunked years ago, I'm appending an article from Slate. . . .


Not quite so fast. There was a radio interview that a National Public Radio show ("This American Life") did in 2005 (October 28 broadcast) in which the author of the original study responded to these charges. His defense of the original data seems quite well reasoned.

(This show also had an interview with one of the Pentagon planners who "targeted" sites in Iraq to be bombed. I think I already posted a link to this radio show in that context, because the person interviewed said that an "acceptable" civilian casualty figure was 30 civilians. That is to say, if a single bombing mission resulted in FEWER than 30 civilian deaths, it was approved. If a mission would probably result in 30 or more deaths, it was not flown. These would hardly be "surgical" strikes.)

The direct link to the Real Audio audio file is here:
http://www.thislife.org/ra/300.ram

The website link with a description of the program is here:
http://www.thislife.org/pages/archives/archive05.html
(Scroll down to "What's in a Number, 10/28, Episode 300.")

The link to purchase a CD-ROM for $13 U.S. with this show on it is here:
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/webwares/basket.jtmpl?act=addbycode&code=300




--
-------------------------------------------------
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence and ignorance." -------------------------------------------------
John Wager john.wager1@xxxxxxxxxxx
Lisle, IL, USA



------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: