Skip

Iraq milestone
August 12, 2007 7:39 AM   Subscribe


 


Mission Accomplished!
posted by Poolio at 7:47 AM on August 12, 2007


This is one milestone I would've rather not heard about.

I hope Bush and Cheney, and Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz go straight to hell for this, fuckers.
posted by hadjiboy at 7:49 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


The horror Iraqi death toll is beyond words to describe. The sheer accuracy and killing power of modern weapons systems is really terrifying. Most tanks and planes are now equipped with highly accurate infra-red systems - you cannot hide. I read somewhere that US soldiers are now trained to deliver overwhelming firepower in the direction of an attack, even if it is a few pot shots from a low-caliber rifle. The Blue Angels were in the neighbourhood recently, but I could not watch them (and I will not let my son watch them), because planes like the F-18 are used for one purpose now, which is to bomb and terrorize and annihilate and maim civilian populations.
posted by KokuRyu at 7:54 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


An independent think tank extrapolating numbers makes headlines in an obscure web-news site. I guess I shouldn't grumble at the numbers - there's obviously a huge number who have died.

I do object to the phrasing, "One million Iraqis have been killed in the violence caused by the US-led invasion of March 2003. . ." It's not the violence caused by the invasion that killed them. The violence in Iraq has deep roots. It would be more accurate to say the violence flowed from the follow-up of the invasion. We didn't light the fire, we just piled the kindling.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:55 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


I hope Bush and Cheney, and Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz go straight to hell for this, fuckers.

To what extent does the post-mortem culpability extend to the tax-payers who funded this?

Can the church start selling us some indulgences to cover our liability on this matter?

/only half-joking...
posted by -harlequin- at 7:56 AM on August 12, 2007 [3 favorites]


It sounds better when you call it a Megadeath. It's only one of those.
posted by slimepuppy at 7:59 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


We didn't light the fire, we just piled the kindling.

I think it may be the other way 'round. I think we have to learn to be a bit more careful with our matches than to go playing with the damn things in places piled high with kindling and soaked with gasoline, like Iraq.
posted by mmahaffie at 8:00 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


We didn't light the fire, we just piled the kindling.

Billy Joel does American foreign policy.

The violence in Iraq has deep roots.

Yeah, right, if those darned Iraqis could only dodge American bombs a little better...
posted by KokuRyu at 8:02 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


The Lancet study estimated 650,000 deaths in Oct 2006.

IBC estimated 49,000 at most.

Can we admit that these guys are apparently measuring completely different things, and that you can't use one to extrapolate the other? We had more than enough faulty logic getting in to this mess, thank you very much.
posted by Riki tiki at 8:04 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it. At least in the Middle East they understand this better that pusillanimous Westerners ever could.
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 8:11 AM on August 12, 2007


*than
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 8:12 AM on August 12, 2007


Riki:

The logic seems ok, it just means a much wider margin of error than something like the Lancet study, because the IBC can incur inconsistancy over time against itself.
They're not claiming to have the accuracy of the Lancet study, they're suggesting a ballpark likelyhood.

The think tank concedes that this combination of the IBC and the Lancet is not perfect, but expressed confidence that it is the best way of obtaining a rough estimate using existing tallies while awaiting another scientifically-based number.

I think they're right - it's the best way to obtain a rough estimate using exising tallies while awaiting another scientifically-based number. I suspect their resulting figures will be in the ballpark too.
posted by -harlequin- at 8:16 AM on August 12, 2007


Can we admit that these guys are apparently measuring completely different things, and that you can't use one to extrapolate the other? We had more than enough faulty logic getting in to this mess, thank you very much.

They are not measuring different things, they are using different methodologies to try to measure the same thing. For the purposes of extrapolation the difference in levels is meaningless. There is nothing theoretically inconsistent with using the IBC numbers to extrapolate the Lancet number. However, it is going to be a noisy estimate, as they admit. They could have provided a bit more information like the IBC-Lancet in sample covariance or confidence bounds but I wouldn't be shocked if they didn't even calculate those.
posted by thrako at 8:22 AM on August 12, 2007


100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it. At least in the Middle East they understand this better that pusillanimous Westerners ever could.
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 8:11 AM on August 12 [+] [!]


Yup, death is inevitable. We might as well ignore what's going on in that there Iraq conflict and move on to something that matters!
posted by proj at 8:24 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


mmahaffie:

We didn't light the fire, we just piled the kindling - I think it may be the other way 'round.

Yeah, you're right. Or maybe we did some of each. Disbanding the Iraqi army was piling the kindling and lighting the fire.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:26 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


I respectfully disagree, -harlequin-, but regardless it's hardly a "milestone" if it might actually be indicating 0.8 or 1.2 miles.

In other words, what use is a nonscientific ballpark estimate with such an obvious logical flaw, other than as a rhetorical device? And if we use rhetoric like that to argue our point, then how are the wingnuts wrong when they accuse us of pushing agenda over fact?
posted by Riki tiki at 8:26 AM on August 12, 2007


100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it. At least in the Middle East they understand this better that pusillanimous Westerners ever could. posted by Gnostic Novelist at 8:11 AM on August 12 [+] [!]

Uh, you do understand what a sociopath is, don't you?
posted by KokuRyu at 8:27 AM on August 12, 2007


13% of the deaths in the second report were attributed to air strikes kindling.
posted by phoque at 8:28 AM on August 12, 2007


The Blue Angels were in the neighbourhood recently, but I could not watch them (and I will not let my son watch them), because planes like the F-18 are used for one purpose now, which is to bomb and terrorize and annihilate and maim civilian populations.

You missed a really good show.
posted by matty at 8:30 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


Riki:
Thinking about that, I got to wondering - did even the Lancet study had much use other than as a rhetorical device?

My wasn't-paying-attention impression of the time was that it's use was to hammer home that the size of the disaster was massive, and was not the amount that was previously assumed. I'm not sure that any real-world action was directly based on the number such that the action would have been taken differently if the study number been 100,000 more or less. If so, then it didn't matter if the milestone might actually indicate 0.8 or 1.2 miles, the point was that we were in the vicinity of a mile, instead of the couple hundred yards that was previously the dominant conception.
posted by -harlequin- at 8:39 AM on August 12, 2007


Actually it wouldn't to too hard for the think tank to come up with a better estimate. Both IBC and the Lancet break down fatalities by cause: gunfire, car bomb, etc. Instead of calculating a single multiplier that scales IBC deaths to Lancet deaths they could have calculated multipliers for each category. This would control for changes in the composition of violence.

For example, the multiplier on car bomb deaths might be pretty close to one, because most car bombs get reported in the news and hence make it into the IBC database. On the other hand the multiplier on gun deaths might be quite a bit higher, since they would be underreported. If the post-Lancet period has seen fewer carbombings relative to gun deaths then the JFP estimate is too low.
posted by thrako at 8:42 AM on August 12, 2007


how are the wingnuts wrong when they accuse us of pushing agenda over fact?

Because it's not pushing agenda over fact - the method of estimate does seem to be the best available extrapolation from the best existing data, rather than the extrapolation designed to best fit an agenda.

If your job was to get the best possible estimate you could, I think you would end up using the same approach. I'm not sure how agenda fits into it. You can mess with the boundaries, but what you see as a "logical flaw" does not seem to be able to carry agenda unless a better methodology is available.
posted by -harlequin- at 8:46 AM on August 12, 2007



100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it. At least in the Middle East they understand this better that pusillanimous Westerners ever could.


Now that we have established your Zen-like serenity on the matter, I humbly request that you lead by example, Sanctified Master.

What, no?
posted by sourwookie at 8:47 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


proj Yup, death is inevitable. We might as well ignore what's going on in that there Iraq conflict and move on to something that matters!

There is very little one can do. No sense getting stressed over matters one can't control. Life is too short. There will always be war and death.
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 8:55 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it. At least in the Middle East they understand this better that pusillanimous Westerners ever could.

Possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever read here.

/preview: Orignial comment was something about cutting your throat in front of your family and loved ones, and wondering how you'd feel about that. Kind of a fucked up thought, no?
posted by bardic at 9:00 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


meh. spelling. But seriously, if during the last week you didn't have to worry about a sectarian murder, a precision bomb attack gone wrong, or dying from lack of medicine, you really need some help.
posted by bardic at 9:02 AM on August 12, 2007


Life is too short.

It certainly was in the case of a million or so Iraqis.

I can't wait to see the "he was going to die someday anyway" defense in murder trial.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:02 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


nice! only 24 million to go, and our oil is free and clear!

psmeasley, somehow I've gone this long without seeing that clip of Cheney, which fucking blew my mind. I guess 9/11 did change everything.
posted by Busithoth at 9:05 AM on August 12, 2007


between April 1989 and March 1998, the Blue Angels were involved in 36 aviation incidents resulting in two deaths, eight injuries and $51.5 million dollars in damages; since 1972, 16 major accidents involving the Blue Angels resulted in eight deaths

kokryu:

Like gladiators of old, these heros are dying for no higher purpose than entertaining you, and you won't even watch?
posted by hexatron at 9:07 AM on August 12, 2007


Gnostic Novelist compares people who eat bacon to Nazis but feels that a million dead Iraqis falls under the 'shit happens'-category. I think we can safely ignore the troll.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:09 AM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


Ok, 400 deaths since the Lancet study which was widely disputed? IBC has the deaths between 60K-80K. Where did the million deaths come from? I have been as big a detractor of this war as the next liberal, but come on, show me something that has a basis in statistics.

And please, Just Foreign Polilcy may be independent, but don't confuse that with non partisan. Neither is IBC.

That's probably why it's not front page news.
posted by prodigalsun at 9:11 AM on August 12, 2007


There will always be war and death.

There will always be death, but not war. War has always been a very rare phenomenon, and has become increasingly rare as civilization progresses. It's entirely reasonable to expect it to end altogether. There was a time when most people thought slavery was an inevitable part of human existence, but very few think that today.
posted by scottreynen at 9:16 AM on August 12, 2007


So what is the U.S. government count on the number of Iraqis who have died since our invasion? Surely with all our sophisticated equipment (read computers) over there we will have an accurate number on Iraqi fatalities recorded.
No? Oh come on.
We would have no reason to with hold that kind of information. Would we? Of course not.
posted by notreally at 9:26 AM on August 12, 2007


the only actual milestone would be the American withdrawal. but even if the Democrats win in '08 -- which is far from certain -- America is staying in Iraq for a while. which proves tha t body counts are just numbers very few people who matter care about
posted by matteo at 9:31 AM on August 12, 2007


Compare and contrast
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:44 AM on August 12, 2007


Let's also not forget the several million displaced persons. Iraq used to have universities and equal opportunity for education and real businesses and all the shit that a good modern society has.

But everyone with intelligence and money has gotten the hell out of there. Without these people, there's not a fucking chance of the country getting back on its feet. You can't have modern society without modern people.

And, finally, consider this: a whole lot of those refugees headed into Syria.

That ought to be freaking out US citizens in a big, bad way.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:49 AM on August 12, 2007


bardic Orignial comment was something about cutting your throat in front of your family and loved ones, and wondering how you'd feel about that. Kind of a fucked up thought, no?

Actually you bring up a good point. Such an occurrence would make me sad, but I don't see why a person who did not know them or me should care. It sounds nice to pretend to care, but if one can't reasonably do anything it's just a platitude. The Middle East has been a brutal place for a long long time. Violence is terrible, but I'm not going to pretend to care about something that has nothing to do with me. I have a small, tangential association with the troops because I am a copayer for our military and an American. I have no relation to Iraqis. I seriously doubt too many are stressed out over Americans dying.
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 9:50 AM on August 12, 2007


You know, all these ballpark figures being thrown around make sense, but with a million dead people stacked up in a ballpark you will eventually run out of space.
posted by sebas at 9:50 AM on August 12, 2007




I have no relation to Iraqis

You're a human being, aren't you?
posted by hadjiboy at 9:55 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


because planes like the F-18 are used for one purpose now

What do you thing they were used for before whatever arbitrary point you set "now" at?
posted by Cyrano at 9:58 AM on August 12, 2007




Fatigue cripples US army in Iraq
posted by homunculus at 9:59 AM on August 12, 2007


Violence is terrible, but I'm not going to pretend to care about something that has nothing to do with me.

Then shut the fuck up and don't post useless shit in the thread.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:00 AM on August 12, 2007 [9 favorites]


If that million figure is correct, that would be about one in every seventeen Iraqis. At that size, I think estimations might somehow become more accurate. It's completely infeasible, but I have this vision of a volunteer group going through the area and just ... picking up skulls, taking them back to the States, cleaning them up, then having the President wake up to an enormous pile of them on the White House lawn. Something that completely dwarfs the piddly "only sixty thousand" number. Maybe a smaller pile set aside to represent the ones that bad, bad, wicked naughty Saddam did.

"You take a mortal man, put him in control. Watch him become a god, watch people's heads a-roll. Just like the Pied Piper led rats through the streets, we dance like marionettes, swaying to the symphony of destruction." The band name, and the song, are now more appropriate than ever. If the Spice Girls aren't going to play, Megadeth could. It would be ... fittingly inappropriate.
posted by adipocere at 10:02 AM on August 12, 2007


So what is the U.S. government count on the number of Iraqis who have died since our invasion? Surely with all our sophisticated equipment (read computers) over there we will have an accurate number on Iraqi fatalities recorded.

The number is "zero". No innocent Iraqis have died at American hands. All Iraqis who have died were, by definition, either terrorists or killed by terrorists. It's physically impossible for Americans to kill innocent people.

...or...

Bad things happen in war. Get over it. 9/11 Nevar Foget.

You know what I think? The controversy over the Iraqi death toll is going to end up being the American version of Holocaust Denial. Theres going to be conferences, workshops, tv shows, movies, books (Did One Million Really Die?) and the like for years. An entire cottage industry is going to be created to assuage people's guilt over the mountain of dead bodies that we've helped to create.

Assuming that Americans have the capacity for guilt anymore.
posted by Avenger at 10:03 AM on August 12, 2007 [5 favorites]


There is very little one can do. No sense getting stressed over matters one can't control. Life is too short. There will always be war and death.

But we could have controlled this. We didn't need to go to war; those people would still be alive if we hadn't started this stupid fucking war. And if I ever personally get to the point of not caring that 1,000,000 of my fellow human beings have died a pointless death, then I will hand in my membership card to humanity because I really won't belong.
posted by octothorpe at 10:23 AM on August 12, 2007




Ok, 400 deaths since the Lancet study which was widely disputed? IBC has the deaths between 60K-80K. Where did the million deaths come from? I have been as big a detractor of this war as the next liberal, but come on, show me something that has a basis in statistics.

just to make sure everyone is on the same page:

the IBC number is the number of deaths reported either by a government or in newspapers/media.

the Lancet study is an attempt to extrapolate using additional survey data an estimate on what the actual number is. It gave a high/low number and the 650K was in between.

under the "geneva conventions" an occupying power is responsible for the welfare of civilians in an occupied zone.


well-meaning Iraq war opponents somehow think that once US troops leave Iraq our responsibility for the situation will have ended. At this point the only way to begin to take responsiblity is by bringing all of the crimes committed to light, then hopefully bringing to trial those responsible.
posted by geos at 10:42 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


I've found it quite intriguing that the figures of the death toll in Darfur (for example) get accepted without anywhere the amount of head-scratching paper-napkin armchair-PhD fact checking that the Iraq numbers have been. I don't think I've even heard anyone in the media - or otherwise - even mention where the Darfur figures came from, let alone how they were calculated.
posted by 31d1 at 11:07 AM on August 12, 2007


All those deaths and not one Starbucks in Baghdad to show for it.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:08 AM on August 12, 2007 [2 favorites]


8 million Iraqis 'need urgent aid':
Eight million people are in urgent need of emergency aid; that figure includes over two million who are displaced within the country, and more than two million refugees. Many more are living in poverty, without basic services, and increasingly threatened by disease and malnutrition.
About 43 percent of Iraq's population lives in "absolute poverty." Seventy percent are "without access to adequate water supplies."

even if the Democrats win in '08 -- which is far from certain -- America is staying in Iraq for a while

Petraeus hints at decade-long Iraq presence

It's not the violence caused by the invasion that killed them.
"I shot him. The bullets and the fall killed him."

posted by kirkaracha at 11:28 AM on August 12, 2007


Petraeus hints at decade-long Iraq presence

That worked pretty well for the Soviets in Afghanistan, as I recall.

Oh, wait.
posted by psmealey at 11:29 AM on August 12, 2007


Gnostic Novelist writes "100% of humans will die some day. "

I didn't know you were a playa hater. I'll be getting a second opinion.

I like to think 80% chance I'll definitely die, but 20%, Jah willing, I'm gonna keep strong and keep living.

Respek.
posted by mullingitover at 11:58 AM on August 12, 2007


We're not getting out of here alive.
posted by Burhanistan at 11:59 AM on August 12, 2007


Ok, 400 deaths since the Lancet study which was widely disputed? IBC has the deaths between 60K-80K. Where did the million deaths come from? I have been as big a detractor of this war as the next liberal, but come on, show me something that has a basis in statistics.

And please, Just Foreign Polilcy may be independent, but don't confuse that with non partisan. Neither is IBC.

I agree that the Lancet study is problematic, but if you use the RAND MIPT database instead of IBC you get 998,713.73 deaths. If anything RAND's bias would be the opposite of IBC, so I don't think you can argue that this somehow an issue with IBC's bias.

The numbers are:
Lancet: 601,027 excess violent deaths from 3/1/2003 to 6/30/2006
RAND: 13,499 deaths from 3/1/2003 to 6/30/2006
8,932 deaths from 6/1/2006 onward

601,027+8,932*(601,027/13,499) = 998,713.73 total dead
posted by thrako at 12:09 PM on August 12, 2007


Well... fuck.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 12:20 PM on August 12, 2007


Cheney's Secret Escalation Plan?
posted by homunculus at 12:21 PM on August 12, 2007


100% of humans will die some day. Life is death, death is life. No way around it.

Shit man, he's a natural born killer.
posted by Roman Graves at 1:37 PM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


The surge may or may not work but in the meantime there is no responsible Iraq govt in place. And, worse that you even though if you read this in full:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_operation_parabellum
posted by Postroad at 2:09 PM on August 12, 2007


The surge may or may not work but in the meantime there is no responsible Iraq govt in place. And, worse that you even though if you read this in full:

Jeez, I wonder if arms dealers are even bothering to change their underpants anymore, with all the spontaneous ejaculations the Iraq war is causing them.
posted by Burhanistan at 2:16 PM on August 12, 2007


If we accept the stat as true; then what is the proposed course of action to stop the next million? Leave go home and hide under the covers while different factions turn up the violence? Stay, escalate, and kill how many more by the hands of an American soldier or contractor? What's the right decision here?
posted by humanfont at 3:32 PM on August 12, 2007


There is no right decision, just a series of less-bad choices.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:12 PM on August 12, 2007


BRB, I'm off to kill everyone Gnostic Novelist ever loved and take their stuff.

I'm sure he'll understand.
posted by tehloki at 4:33 PM on August 12, 2007


Why is it that we need something like a nice round number for some people to realise the true terror of conflict? We're becoming such a detached, statistical society.
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 5:24 PM on August 12, 2007


What's the right decision here?

Just off the top of my little head: First, a sweeping apology coming from the Oval Office for the all misery caused and the lies told. Then, no troop withdraws yet, only a draw down from the forward operations firebases to HQ areas. Then, a firm commitment with transparent contracts to rebuild the basic infrastructure of Iraq. US and Iraqi troops would jointly guard all relevant points therein.

That would be a hell of a start. The apology would be huge and would go a long way, in my opinion, to bringing everyone closer to the table.
posted by Burhanistan at 5:53 PM on August 12, 2007


So what is the deal with Dick Cheney? He was either replaced by a zombie Dick Cheney at some point after 1994, or he's up to something more devious. Was Iraq really all a two-pronged ruse to get at Iran? "No one will support us going into Iran. Wait -- I know! we'll invade Iraq, bumble along long enough for the Iranians to get involved with the internal strife there, then we can use that as a pretext to go into Iran!"
posted by Devils Rancher at 6:23 PM on August 12, 2007


The appropriate apology would be impeachment of several of the top administration.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:39 PM on August 12, 2007


If we accept the stat as true; then what is the proposed course of action to stop the next million?

1. Don't allow the same people to start war with Iran.
2. Get the criminals out of the Whitehouse.
3. Don't be manipulated by your fear.
4. The job isn't done in Iraq until the money we've spent on rebuilding it is at least equal to the money we've spent blowing it up. (which currently puts us at about 8%). That's a lot of gold that could have been used to give Americans better healthcare and education and retirement.


Ok, you can stop laughing now. Sorry, alternate-reality moment.
posted by -harlequin- at 7:32 PM on August 12, 2007 [1 favorite]


More on the 1994 video to which psmealy and Devils Rancher links --

Video Surfaces of Cheney, in 1994, Warning That An Invasion of Iraq Would Lead to 'Quagmire'
“It's not the first time that citizen ‘investigative journalists’ have uncovered some embarrassing, or telling, nugget from the past that apparently remained buried for years. But it has happened again with the posting of a now wildly popular video on YouTube that shows Dick Cheney explaining in 1994 that trying to take over Iraq would be a ‘bad idea’ and lead to a ‘quagmire.’

The people who put it up come from a site called Grand Theft Country, the on-screen source appears to be the conservative American Enterprise Institute, and the date on the screen is April 15, 1994. That looks right, by the age of Cheney.

Posted on Friday, it had received over 100,000 hits by this morning, after being widely-linked around the Web.”
posted by ericb at 8:08 PM on August 12, 2007


Taking his posting history into account, methinks Gnostic Novelist is being a bit of a heretic: even Libertarian (snicker) politician Ron Paul does not support the war in Iraq.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:20 PM on August 12, 2007




The [culturally] appropriate apology would be impeachment hanging of several of the top administration.

FTFY :)
posted by -harlequin- at 8:50 PM on August 12, 2007


because planes like the F-18 are used for one purpose now, which is to bomb and terrorize and annihilate and maim civilian populations.

What were they used for before?
posted by agregoli at 7:47 AM on August 13, 2007


What were they used for before?

Emergency high speed Hello Kitty shipments, Santa Sleigh escorts, defense against ET craft. It was only until recently that someone decided to arm them with bombs and attack human targets.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:06 AM on August 13, 2007


“I have no relation to Iraqis.”

"I am a man; and nothing human is foreign to me." - Terence (Heauton Timoroumenos)

also - Terence: “Human nature is so constituted, that all see and judge better in the affairs of other men than in their own.”

“I seriously doubt too many are stressed out over Americans dying.”

“Riches get their value from the mind of the possessor; they are blessings to those who know how to use them, and curses to those who do not.” - Terence

Sorry for all the quotations, but as someone (I believe it was... Terence) said: “Nothing is said that has not been said before.”

(Can I just say - “Petraeus” - makes me feel like I’m in a Lucas film. I mean jeez that’s just so appropriately Romanesque.)

"For Mercy has a human heart;
Pity, a human face;
And Love, the human form divine;
And Peace, the human dress."
- Blake
posted by Smedleyman at 12:37 PM on August 13, 2007






Prepping Us for the Long War?
posted by homunculus at 10:14 AM on August 15, 2007


Smedleyman Sorry for all the quotations, but as someone (I believe it was... Terence) said: “Nothing is said that has not been said before.”

Like many poetic ideals, it just doesn't work in the real, post-Darwin world.
posted by Gnostic Novelist at 10:36 AM on August 15, 2007


« Older Celebrate His Entire Catalog   |   Caturday on Sunday Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post