Newspaper Marks 1000 Days of Iraq War with Key Stats
Posted By: Democrat on 2005-12-14 In Reply to:
Newspaper Marks 1000 Days of Iraq War with Key Stats
By E&P Staff
Published: December 13, 2005 10:30 AM ET
NEW YORK To mark what it called the 1000 Days of the Iraq war, the London daily The Independent offered extensive coverage today, featuring a by-the-numbers approach.
Here are some of their calculations:
$204.4 billion: The cost to the U.S of the war so far.
2,339: Allied troops killed
15,955: US troops wounded in action
98: U.K troops killed
30,000 : Estimated Iraqi civilian deaths
0: Number of WMDs found
66: Journalists killed in Iraq.
63: Journalists killed during Vietnam war
8: per cent of Iraqi children suffering acute malnutrition
53,470: Iraqi insurgents killed
67: per cent Iraqis who feel less secure because of occupation
$343: Average monthly salary for an Iraqi soldier. Average monthly salary for an American soldier in Iraq: $4,160.75
5: foreign civilians kidnapped per month
47: per cent Iraqis who never have enough electricity
20: casualties per month from unexploded mines
25-40: per cent Estimated unemployment rate, Nov 2005
251: Foreigners kidnapped
70: per cent of Iraqi's whose sewage system rarely works
183,000: British and American troops are still in action in Iraq.
13,000: from other nations
90: Daily attacks by insurgents in Nov '05. In Jun '03: 8
60-80: per cent Iraqis who are strongly opposed to presence of coalition troops
* In an accompanying piece from Baghdad, the newspaper's Patrick Cockburn adds one more stat: A BBC poll yesterday showed that half of the Iraqis questioned say that Iraq needs a strong leader--while only 28 per cent cited democracy as a priority.
Iraqis are cynical about their political leaders, Cockburn writes. The election results are likely to show that the great majority of Iraqis will vote along ethnic or religious lines as Shia, Sunni or Kurds. The country is turning from a unitary state into a confederation.
There is no sign yet of the thousand-day war ending. Every month up to a thousand fresh corpses arrive at the mortuary in Baghdad. A new Iraq is emerging but it is already drenched in blood.
You are aware the the police in GB do not carry firearms, yes? Why should people be able to carry firearms there when the police cannot?
Stats that Bill left out.sm
The poverty rate fell from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That's the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970).
The African-American poverty rate dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972).
The poverty rate for Hispanics fell to the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.
African-American unemployment fell from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in March 2000 -- the lowest rate on record.
The unemployment rate for Hispanics fell from 11.6 percent in 1992 to 6.3 percent in March 2000 -- and in the last year has been at the lowest rate on record.
For women the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in March 2000, nearly the lowest since 1953 [when few women sought employment outside the home].
In 1999, the homeownership rate was 66.8 percent -- the highest ever recorded. Minority homeownership rates were also the highest ever recorded.
Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, child poverty declined from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 18.9 percent in 1998 -- the biggest five-year drop in nearly 30 years.
The poverty rate for African-American children fell from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 36.7 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level in 20 years and the biggest five-year drop on record.
The rate also fell for Hispanic children, from 36.8 percent to 34.4 percent - and is now 6.5 percentage points lower than it was in 1993. Insurance industry stats
I just came across these stats in an article I was reading. How can there possibly any doubt that lobbying has single handedly taken over Washington? Especially in light of the fact that the healthcare plans on the table are pushing for more insured rather than single payer system? If we don't shove out the insurance companies, how are the prices for our healthcare ever expected to go down, or even stay at the current level for any length of time? 87% in 10 years? Absolutely ridiculous. We are not reaping any benefit from it whatsoever.
"As premiums have ballooned by 87 percent in the past decade, insurance-industry profits have climbed from $20.8 billion in 2002 to $57.5 billion in 2006. During that same period, health-care interests spent $2.2 billion on federal lobbying, more than did any other sector, and as of last month, had flooded the presidential candidates with over $11 million in campaign contributions to keep the present system intact."
I would have stated who and what they are debating. Kerry was furious. Sen. Sessions (R-AL) doesn't seem to want to work with anyone on "the other side" either.
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nevada) had a really good speech. He went through the whys and why nots of how this whole mess started. He is willing to work with the other side but he stated that the other side has to work with them, too, which so far, is not happening. He stated that the stimulus package was pushed through the house without any debate, without anyone seeing exactly what was in it, and it was the wrong thing to do. He doesn't care that O wants this passed by President's day. It has to be worked out slowly so they don't make the same kind of mistakes that they did with the last stimulus package.
It's not just tax cuts the pubs want. They want some of the spending in there, too, just not the most ridiculous items. They want the infrastructure in but not just 3% of the total package spread out over 4 years. It wouldn't make much of a difference.
Now, on another subject, I had MSNBC on another TV. Surprisingly, they were only allowing sound for the debate when the democrats are speaking. Hmmm.
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press
Writer 35 minutes ago
More than four years after the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. intelligence agencies
still are failing to share information while Congress battles over security
funding, a panel that investigated the terrorist hijackings will conclude in a
new report.
In interviews Friday, members of the former Sept. 11 commission said the government should receive a dismal grade for its lack of urgency in
enacting strong security measures to prevent terror attacks.
The 10-member, bipartisan commission disbanded after issuing 41
recommendations to bolster the nation's security in July 2004. The members have
reconstituted themselves, using private funds, as the 9/11 Public Discourse
Project and will release a new report Monday assessing the extent their
directives have been followed.
Overall, the government has performed not very well, said former commission
chairman Thomas Kean, former Republican governor of New Jersey.
Before 9-11, both the Clinton and Bush administrations said they had
identified Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida as problems that have to be dealt with,
and were working on it, Kean said. But they just were not very high on their
priority list. And again it seems that the safety of the American
people is not very high on Washington's priority list.
A spokesman at the Homeland Security Department declined to comment until the
report is issued Monday. Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Homeland
Security Committee, acknowledged that some areas continue to be vulnerable but
have not been addressed due to disagreements with the Senate.
Congress established the commission in 2002 to investigate government
missteps that led to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. It found that the United
States could not protect its citizens from the attacks because it underestimated
al-Qaida. Since June, the former commissioners have held hearings to examine
what they described as the government's unfinished agenda to secure the
country.
Among the main concerns, which former Democratic commissioner Timothy Roemer
said would receive the worst grades:
_The United States is not doing enough to ensure that foreign nations are
upgrading security measures to stop proliferation of nuclear, biological and
chemical materials. Such materials could be used in weapons of mass destruction,
and over 100 research reactors around the world have enough highly enriched
uranium present to make a nuclear device.
We've seen that Osama bin Laden likes to do spectacular things, said Roemer,
a former Indiana congressman. Is a dirty bomb next? ... We're not doing enough,
and we're not doing it urgently enough.
_Police, firefighters, medics and other first responders still lack
interconnected radio systems letting them communicate with each other during
emergencies. Responders from different agencies at the World Trade Center were
unable to coordinate rescues — or receive information that could have saved
their own lives — on 9/11.
Congress last year approved spending nearly $1 billion on interoperable
systems, but King said the matter is a very difficult issue.
_Both the Bush administration and Congress have continued to distribute
security funding to states without aiming most money at high-risk communities.
The Homeland Security Department gave $2.5 billion in grants to states and 50
high-risk cities last year, but some rural states, like Wyoming, received more
money per resident than terror targets like New York.
The House and Senate have been unable this year to agree on a funding formula
that distributes money based solely on risk, threats and vulnerability. King
said the Senate's proposal is still living with a pork-barrel formula. But
Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins said in statement
that her bipartisan plan provides a meaningful baseline of funds to each state
so that the nation as a whole can achieve essential levels of preparedness.
Kean said information-sharing gaps among turf-conscious federal intelligence
agencies continue to exist. He also chastised the Transportation Security
Administration for failing to consolidate multiple databases of passenger
information into a single terror watch list that would make it easier for
airlines to screen for suspicious travelers.
Moreover, expanded governmental powers to seek out terror-related
intelligence have not been adequately balanced by civil liberties protections or
oversight, said former Democratic commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste. He said
President Bush was tardy in naming a civil liberties protection board, whose
funding is anemic and which has not yet been met to get underway.
A bright spot in the government's performance is the creation of a national
intelligence director to help coordinate all government terror information,
Roemer said.
Generally, the grades range all the way from A to F, Kean said.
Still, No parent would be happy with this report card, said former Democratic
commissioner Jamie Gorelick.
At age 79, Rep. John Dingell is known for his prickly demeanor and blunt words, which have earned him respect. Rep. Dingell's Web Site
Morning Edition, December 13, 2005 · John Dingell (D-MI) marks 50 years in the House on Tuesday. Only two others in history have served longer.
Dingell came to Congress in December 1955, when he won a special election to replace his late father. Dingell speaks fondly of working on massive, important legislation he helped shepherd through Congress, including Medicare, food stamps, student loans, consumer product protection and the Endangered Species Act.
There are a few disappointments, Dingell says. In every single Congress for the last 50 years, he has introduced a bill to create a national health care system -- and it has never passed. The Patient's Bill of Rights he championed in the 1990s also failed. And now, with Republicans in control of the House, Senate and White House, Dingell worries they're dismantling the earlier work of his career.
But you have your choice between sitting back and being depressed and letting it go forward, or standing and fighting, he says. I choose the second course.
marks the location of current message within thread
