Well sure enough, one is too many.
But let's just stoop to do the math shall we?
The libs aren't going to like the rational analysis though so let me provide a starting point. Or two.
And even the wildly lib Amnesty International points out that Saddam had "the world’s worst record for numbers of persons who have disappeared or remain unaccounted for."
And another estimate from AI:
Amnesty International, an organization known for its seriousness and attention to fact, states that, "since the 1980s, hundreds of thousands of people have ''disappeared'' in Iraq, and their fate and whereabouts remain unknown."So let's just throw out the more complete estimates ranging from 1 - 7 million dead including wars featuring the documented use of WMD -- even on the Kurds. (Oh -- I forgot -- he got better. So it was perfectly fine to give him the benefit of the doubt about not having WMD.)
So let's throttle back and go with the grave site excavations of the disappeared.
OOPS. Sorry for that inconvenient link suggesting 182,000 Kurd disappeared in 1988 alone. D*mn that Google. Sorry.
So against all evidence I will make the wildly conservative estimate Saddam only disappeared 10,000 people a year for 30 or so years.
Now let's do some math. If Alan Colmes "sky is falling" current death rate holds for the whole year in Iraq there will be 400 people / 2 weeks x 52 weeks killed in Iraq.
For all you mathematically illiterate, I can only feel with my head libs that would be 10,400 people.
So at this disastrous rate of carnage it would approximately be no different -- or more likely quite a bit lower -- than Saddam's "disappeared" rate alone. In other words it would take 30 years of this to get into Saddam's league!
And if you include the various Saddam-initiated wars and add it up into the millions like anyone who would actually qualify as a rational human being then in a mere 3-700 years W's "disastrous folly" will catch up to Saddam's 30 year reign.
Actually, I'm quite surprised that the MSM rags are only reporting 3-7% per year circulation declines for their fine work publicizing such obvious conclusions.
I love the integrity and rationality of the MSM.
Can't you tell?
UPDATE: Ah, yes. Good old neo-Bob forgot to mention that I was high on that 3-700 years by a year or maybe two. My deepest apologies. (And the mathematically literate among you know how to characterize this update -- and it wouldn't be in the serious column ;)