I looked at that. How reliable do you think this site's figures are? I heard someone do an interview with these people a while back and the conclusion seemed to be that they were working pretty hard at keeping it realistic but knew they could not get it exact.
This group or a different one. Sorry, I don't remember. Anyhow, is this group's numbers reliable?
I have two things to say in answer to your comment.
1. They understand the inaccuracies in their methods and maintain a minimum and maximum number. At one point, these were 2 to 1 with each other. As time is going by, they are moving closer together as they do more research. At the time I wrote my comment, the MINIMUM number was just over 6000. I never considered the maximim number.
2. Why isn't our government doing the counting. They have better access to data-they can do actual body counts. General Franks said bluntly at the beginning that "We do not do body counts". The only explanation for that is to hide the data from the people so they would not become enraged. We are left with nothing better than the amateurs doing the counting and debates over the accuracy. I believe the government should have done an accurate count, no matter how embarrassing. Having failed to do so, they will have to be embarrassed by the imperfect counts that are available. The anti-war fury would be unbearable if the counts were disclosed every day and pictures of the maimed were shown. In all the months of fighting, I have seen ONLY ONE picture of a maimed Iraqi. That is no accident. The media are keeping a lid on the consequences of the war. As usual, they are serving the government, whether it is a right or left government.