Iraqi Death Toll

[M.Dancer]

An estimated 655,000 Iraqis have died since 2003 who might still be alive but for the US-led invasion, according to a survey by a US university.

It isn't a hard and verified number, but a statistical prediction. Could be lower or higher. None the less, it is an indicator of the catastrophic failure the Bush adventure has been.

Neither did the find WMD or WMD programmes nor have they liberated the average iraqi.

I'm hard pressed to suggest a solution other than invent a time machine and go back.....definitely "stay the course" ain't working

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6101001442.html

[Remiel]

I just read a similar article from the Baltimore Sun... the bottom range of the Hopkins estimate was 392,000. I mean, it sickening, and astounding. And the worst part is, the people who started this war will probably get away with it.

[M.Dancer]

I just read a similar article from the Baltimore Sun... the bottom range of the Hopkins estimate was 392,000. I mean, it sickening, and astounding. And the worst part is, the people who started this war will probably get away with it.

To be fair, more than 2/3rds of the killings are attributed to Iraqi insurgents, terrorists and security. Not that this violene would have happened without the US invasion......but the cycle of violene is out of the US hands.....they have no control over it now.

[Higgly]

According to the CBC, these numbers are being reported in the Lancet. Certainly adds some weight to the number.

[jdobbin]

And roughly four American soldiers killed a day over the last half month.

[KrustyKidd]

It isn't a hard and verified number, but a statistical prediction.

No kidding. Surprised they didn't incorporate crow feet and lizard bones to come up with the figure.

Neither did the find WMD or WMD programmes

The ones every country on the UNSC thought were there? Saddam should have complied easily then but he did not. However, it must bring joy to your heart how the sanctions have been lifted and one hundred thousand babies a year can now live, the mass graves opened and now three hundred thousand people will not be killed again and nor will he invade another country killing a million and a half people doing it.

I'm hard pressed to suggest a solution other than invent a time machine and go back.....definitely "stay the course" ain't working

Invent a time machine and what? Coddle Saddam? This is rich!!

nor have they liberated the average iraqi.

Yes, democracy in which 65% of the people vote for a government is not liberty. In Canada here, we are under tyranny in comparrison. Point being, the US has liberated them and, is helping prop up a weak government voted in by the people against a minority that wishes to create chaos to their own advantage. You thnk in the here and now, think thirty years down the road when Qusay would be ruling the place instead. How many would he have killed?

[M.Dancer]

Neither did the find WMD or WMD programmes

The ones every country on the UNSC thought were there? Saddam should have complied easily then but he did not. However, it must bring joy to your heart how the sanctions have been lifted and one hundred thousand babies a year can now live, the mass graves opened and now three hundred thousand people will not be killed again and nor will he invade another country killing a million and a half people doing it.

I suppose that makes you sleep better at night...so what ever works for you, valium, delusions what ever....

Invent a time machine and what? Coddle Saddam? This is rich!!

Is it lonely down there in the bunker with just you and the strawmen? Or are they strawgirls? No pancho...the time machine is to correct the 100+ mistakes made. Mistake that are killing people today, not Saddam mind you, these are US mistakes.

nor have they liberated the average iraqi.

Yes, democracy in which 65% of the people vote for a government is not liberty.

How quaint. You think because there was an election, the people are free. WHat a charming notion. I think i will suggest that as a programme for corrections Canada. Why not have elections in prisons...despite not being able to come and go and the atmosphere of pervasive violence, an election will give them liberty....

The poor Baghdad iraqi on the otherhand, risks life and limb to go shopping, pays multiple taxes, sometimes even to the gov't. Gets shot at on a regular basis by foreign contractors for having the nerve of being on the same street as them......endures multiple bombings per day....but deep down he knows he's free....thats why his ak 47 are so near.......

[M.Dancer]

On a side note.....officials record that 2660 iraqis were killed in September.....

[Higgly]

No kidding. Surprised they didn't incorporate crow feet and lizard bones to come up with the figure.

Numbers like this published in journals like The Lancet are serious business. This is a big nail in the Bush coffin.

[myata]

A good analysis of this issue on today's CBC in-depth.

[Higgly]

Interesting analysis. Thanks for the post.

[sharkman]

A good analysis of this issue on today's CBC in-depth.

I don't share the confidence on this thread of the numbers. To come up with the total, they conduct a SURVEY of 1800 homes! I can just imagine the questions: "So, has anyone died here? Oh. How did he die? A Tumour? Dammit!"

Then they extrapolate the entire population and their estimate is 426,369 to 795,663 deaths. Really. Some estimate. This technique is only now being TESTED by the UN, it says in the article. Yet some media outlets report this as fact, using the 600,000 number offered by this 'study'.

There are many assumptions made to come up with this number. A mini genocide by terrorists in one area would naturally skew the numbers upward. Bagdad's death rate would be ten fold of other areas, etc.

I think a survey of the surveyors is needed here. Their opinions of the war and the U.S. would be most revealing.

[M.Dancer]

A good analysis of this issue on today's CBC in-depth.

I don't share the confidence on this thread of the numbers. To come up with the total, they conduct a SURVEY of 1800 homes! I can just imagine the questions: "So, has anyone died here? Oh. How did he die? A Tumour? Dammit!"

Then they extrapolate the entire population and their estimate is 426,369 to 795,663 deaths. Really. Some estimate. This technique is only now being TESTED by the UN, it says in the article. Yet some media outlets report this as fact, using the 600,000 number offered by this 'study'.

There are many assumptions made to come up with this number. A mini genocide by terrorists in one area would naturally skew the numbers upward. Bagdad's death rate would be ten fold of other areas, etc.

I think a survey of the surveyors is needed here. Their opinions of the war and the U.S. would be most revealing.

What sort of an opinion could you expect once they fi nd over a half million have been killed?

Jolly Good War! eh sport? What! Pip Pip!

don't share the confidence on this thread of the numbers. To come up with the total, they conduct a SURVEY of 1800 homes!

Try 1849 households or more precisely, 12,801 people. I believe any statistician would consider that a large sample.

I can just imagine the questions:

Your imagination, fantastical as it is, isn't the issue, stick with the facts.

There are many assumptions made to come up with this number. A mini genocide by terrorists in one area would naturally skew the numbers upward. Bagdad's death rate would be ten fold of other areas, etc.

based on a random survey of 50 neighbourhoods scattered throughout Iraq, with the results extrapolated to the country as a whole.

A mini genocide is why the numbers are high.........

[B. Max]

Those numbers can't be confirmed and the method at arriving at them seems ridiculous and are disputed by everyone. On top of that the majority are caused by saddam's thugs and foriegn terrorists. The very type of people we are at war with around the world.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...12/105715.shtml

[M.Dancer]

Those numbers can't be confirmed and the method at arriving at them seems ridiculous and are disputed by everyone. On top of that the majority are caused by saddam's thugs and foriegn terrorists. The very type of people we are at war with around the world.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...12/105715.shtml

Make up your mind......are the numbers ridiculous or are they caused by the insurgents/terrorists......?

I ask because the study indicates that the majority in the whole and the vast majority recently are caused by insurgents........

and are disputed by everyone.

Exagerate much?

[B. Max]

Make up your mind......are the numbers ridiculous or are they caused by the insurgents/terrorists......?

It is made up. There is no confirmation those numbers and whatever the real numbers are, are caused mainly by the people we are fighting.

Do you understand now.

[JerrySeinfeld]

They found weapons buried near the Iran border.

But the lefties all came out and said they weren't the right kind.

Nothing's the "right kind" of WMD until it ends up blowing up a building in new york - but then of course we can all blame that on conspiracy by the US government.

It's no win in the fantasy world of the left.

[jdobbin]

They found weapons buried near the Iran border.

But the lefties all came out and said they weren't the right kind.

Nothing's the "right kind" of WMD until it ends up blowing up a building in new york - but then of course we can all blame that on conspiracy by the US government.

It's no win in the fantasy world of the left.

What is the official response to these weapons from the Whitehouse? Did Bush use these weapons as justification for the war?

[BubberMiley]

They found weapons buried near the Iran border.

Source?

[bradco]

Make up your mind......are the numbers ridiculous or are they caused by the insurgents/terrorists......?

It is made up. There is no confirmation those numbers and whatever the real numbers are, are caused mainly by the people we are fighting.

Do you understand now.

The argument is that the war provided for the conditions for the deaths. They are indirect casualties of US intervention.

Do you understand now.

Personally I dont think that these surverys are very accurate and I believe they have overestimated the total. I just dont think the way they conducted the poll works. Its too small given the size of the country, questions of accuracy of respondents, death tolls vary across the country etc. It is clear though that a lot of people have been killed and likely a lot more than the 30,000 odd deaths George will admit. (at least thats the last total I heard from him)

[jbg]

I just read a similar article from the Baltimore Sun... the bottom range of the Hopkins estimate was 392,000. I mean, it sickening, and astounding. And the worst part is, the people who started this war will probably get away with it.

And abouit 1/3 of those were caused by the Coalition. How is Arabs and Farsis butchering Iraqis the Coalition's fault?

[Remiel]

Well... the coalition created the circumstances in which the sectarian violence was allowed to break out.

[B. Max]

The argument is that the war provided for the conditions for the deaths. They are indirect casualties of US intervention.

Do you understand now.

People were dying before the war. Iraq is part of the war on terror. People tend to die in wars that's a fact. The thugs that are still causing problems are saddams's thugs. Proves we were right to go in there in the fisrt place.

[Remiel]

B. Max, your conclusions aren't worth two pop bottles.

[B. Max]

B. Max, your conclusions aren't worth two pop bottles.

That's because they are not conclusions. They are facts.