Re: 17,000 deaths a year from the cold

"Ian St. John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Alan LeHun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > > Now you have 'mass graves" with an estimated 300,000 'victims' of
> Saddam.
> > > Youi dfo the math or do you think those 375,000 war dead just up and
> walked
> > > away?
> > >
> > > Boy are you dim at times. Well, actually pretty much all the time.
> > >
> >
> > I can see it now...
> >
> > General. "Must munificent leader, our great victory has come with the
> > but trifling loss of only 375,000 men. What should we do we them?"
> >
> > Saddam. "Well, we'll bury 2000, 400km thataway, and another 2000 350km
> > thataway."
> >
> > G. "What about the others, most beneficent leader"
> >
> > S. "We'll bury them in the deep south, where the kurds are, miles and
> > miles away from where they fell. Oh, and don't forget to strip them of
> > their uniforms. Waste not want not."
> >
> > G. "But your most unerring highness, we don't have the resources to
> > transport all those bodies over such vast distances?"
> >
> > S. "Transport them? Hell, no Iraqi soldier, alive or dead, would allow
> > themselves to be such a burden upon the state. Let them walk"
>
>
>
> Interesting theory. Actually the spot where they were treated is likely
not
> to be the spot at which they were shot and the spot for burial would not
be
> the spot at which they are treated. In any case they have to be SOMEWHERE,
> so unless you can show that the mass graves are NOT soldiers or civilian
> casualties of the Iran/Iraq War or the civil war that followed the Shiite
> rebellion, you are clutching at straws.
>
> Probably a little better than the 'know it all" posts from George. The
term
> "know it all" does not, by the way, mean that the person knows a lot, but
> that he thinks he knows more than he does, usually because of poor logic
> skills and a willingness to repeat rumor. A term that could be applied to
> you here.
>
>

Ian, you are definitely no saint!