Wikileaks Iraq Docs Debunk Lancet Figures?

[Just_A_Guy]

According to this article, some of the recently-released Wikileaks documents confirm that Iraq casualties from 2003-2009 were 109,000, and not 650,000 as The Lancet had previously reported and as was taken as gospel truth by many Iraq war opponents.

If the article is correct, then the actual number of Iraq war casualties is slightly higher than the number of murders in the United States for the same period.

Has anyone been following the issue closely enough to add some light on this? Is the Herald-Sun misrepresenting the Wikileaks figures somehow?

Edited October 24, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[TL10]

I've been following this WikiLeaks situation for a while now, and I personally believe it needs to be shut down.

[Mahone]

I've been following this WikiLeaks situation for a while now, and I personally believe it needs to be shut down.

It's not like anyone really has the authority to do that. The only ways it could be shut down are by either 1. Using legal power for force them offline, or 2. By using physical force (or both).

Neither America or the UK have the legal authority or influence to shut them down as of the moment (and possibly never will), and wikileaks servers are stored in an underground nuclear bunker in Sweden.

I think the issue needs to be tackled at the source personally. Find out how data like this could possibly have been leaked out into the open, and stop it from being leaked in the future. Wikileaks isn't the issue, it's the government of the country that leaked it that has the problem. Trying to shut down wikileaks is merely damage control.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Mahone

[FunkyTown]

I'm just really grateful that there's an opposing voice out there like Wikileaks. Misinformation prevents democracy from working effectively because only an informed electorate can make the proper decisions.

I hope it's up for a long time to come.

[Just_A_Guy]

I think the issue needs to be tackled at the source personally. Find out how data like this could possibly have been leaked out into the open, and stop it from being leaked in the future. Wikileaks isn't the issue, it's the government of the country that leaked it that has the problem. Trying to shut down wikileaks is merely damage control.

I think (but am not positive) that Bradley Manning, the same guy who provided the Afghanistan docs, was also responsible for this.

The scary thing, though, is that they only caught the guy by pure chance--he was bragging about what he'd done to another hacker, who turned him into the feds. Manning could have kept feeding info to Wikileaks for years.

I'm kind of surprised the feds aren't planning to charge him with espionage and/or treason, if they really feel that the info is so sensitive.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[HoosierGuy]

According to this article, some of the recently-released Wikileaks documents confirm that Iraq casualties from 2003-2009 were 109,000, and not 650,000 as The Lancet had previously reported and as was taken as gospel truth by many Iraq war opponents.

And this post is from a George Bush proponent to try and show Bush did not mess things up as he actually did?

[TL10]

It's not like anyone really has the authority to do that. The only ways it could be shut down are by either 1. Using legal power for force them offline, or 2. By using physical force (or both).

Neither America or the UK have the legal authority or influence to shut them down as of the moment (and possibly never will), and wikileaks servers are stored in an underground nuclear bunker in Sweden.

I think the issue needs to be tackled at the source personally. Find out how data like this could possibly have been leaked out into the open, and stop it from being leaked in the future. Wikileaks isn't the issue, it's the government of the country that leaked it that has the problem. Trying to shut down wikileaks is merely damage control.

I just realized something...

This would make one heck of a Dan Brown book.

(Back on Topic): You're right though. Along with wikileaks, there are individuals that will leak classified government documents, which concerns me. You don't just sneak into an office and steal these kind of documents, you have to be at a high standing rank to look at these documents. So if we have people in the military doing this right now, who can we trust to protect government documents AND are we really able to keep even more important classified documents safe?

[Blackmarch]

I'm just really grateful that there's an opposing voice out there like Wikileaks. Misinformation prevents democracy from working effectively because only an informed electorate can make the proper decisions.

I hope it's up for a long time to come.

I agree with the second statement, however wikileaks is the wrong way of doing it.

[FunkyTown]

So if we have people in the military doing this right now, who can we trust to protect government documents AND are we really able to keep even more important classified documents safe?

Three men may keep a secret if two of them are dead. - Benjamin Franklin

This will always hold true. People with differing ideals to the current administration will do what they can from the inside to change it. Or they'll be bribed or threatened. If this were not so, the Soviets would never have gotten the Nuclear Bomb.

And the Nuclear Bomb is a heck of a lot more important of a secret than some embarassing statistics.