Something Interesting About Iraq

[Zardnaar]

Last I looked Iraqis were human. I've read that about 100 000- 600 000 people have died in Iraq and there are around 2 million refugees.

If that was America based on % of population it would be approx.

1.2 Million-7.2 Million dead
24 Million refugees

Just under 3000 Americans died in 9/11 and I'm not sure what the current casualty figures for the military is.

Thas what America has done to Iraq (which had sod all to do with 9/11). Hypothetically reversing the situation have another look at the American casualty figures. How many Americans would fight for their country if was invaded but the insurgents get called terrorists (some of them are).

 

[scipian]

Please cite your sources. I don't think the civilian casualties are THAT high.

 

[Zardnaar]

Please cite your sources. I don't think the civilian casualties are THAT high.

Various articles online and wikipedia. I don't think theres been 600 000 dead but the smallest estimate is around 60000. 2 million refugees in Syria and Jordan have been widely reported.

 

[skadistic]

The 600000 number comes from a flawed house hold servy where people were asked if anyone died in their house since the start of the war.

 

[Zardnaar]

The 600000 number comes from a flawed house hold servy where people were asked if anyone died in their house since the start of the war.

Yeah I don't believe that number but various waste of space writers like John Pilger have seized on it.

 

[innonimatu]

The 600000 number comes from a flawed house hold servy where people were asked if anyone died in their house since the start of the war.

Flawed? Disputed, perhaps...

And how is it that the occupying power cannot, after almost 4 years, present any reliable number about the number of civilians killed? It's either a lot of incompetence, or unwillingness to admit inconvenient truths.

 

[skadistic]

Double mint twins!!!

 

[skadistic]

Flawed? Disputed, perhaps...

And how is it that the occupying power cannot, after almost 4 years, present any reliable number about the number of civilians killed? It's either a lot of incompetence, or unwillingness to admit inconvenient truths.

No its a flawed way to count the dead. How many lied? Did they trump up the numbers? By how much and by how many?How many were counted twice? How many were not counted. How many were killed in disputes that had nothing to do with the war like gang violence and other common crime? The whole premis of how the numbers were collected is flawed. And the US doesn't keep a count.

 

[scipian]

60,000 is understandable. 600,000 is incorrect, I think. It all depends on how many did die. If it was 60,000, I'd say that would be an acceptable sacrifice for me to have freedom. If it were 600,000, I'd be more hesitant.

Again though, as i've said many times before, if we had a leader like Saddam, I'd gladly invite and help the invaders. And if by some chance I did fight the invaders, I would not be an idiot and attack my fellow Americans. At the very least focus on enemy combatants if you're going to do an insurgency.

 

[Theige]

Thas what America has done to Iraq (which had sod all to do with 9/11). Hypothetically reversing the situation have another look at the American casualty figures. How many Americans would fight for their country if was invaded but the insurgents get called terrorists (some of them are).

No, thats what Iraqis and Arabs from other countries have done to Iraqis. Yes we created the circumstances in which they're now fighting.

So I guess the current administration's fault lies in underestimating arabs' willingness to kill one another for the sake of their religion. Yes I know, Europeans/rest of the world told us so.

So then the question is, would the situation in Iraq be worse or better if the UN/rest of the western world had been helping with the peacekeeping/nation building process the last 3 years.

Or you're content to let the deaths pile up and put the blame on the U.S.?

 

[amadeus]

Over 600,000 actually did die in the Civil War, and the U.S. population was close to Iraq's at that time.

Also, I'm not going to expect you to complain about what Britain did "to" the Maori...

 

[Phlegmak]

The 600k Iraqi dead number is incorrect. It's much lower than that.

 

[Zardnaar]

Over 600,000 actually did die in the Civil War, and the U.S. population was close to Iraq's at that time.

Also, I'm not going to expect you to complain about what Britain did "to" the Maori...

The Maori aern't really relevent to the topic. My ancestors weren't even in the country when the land wars happened anyway.

I'm not blaming anyone for directly killing 100 000 odd people which more reliable estimates give for theamount of people killed in Iraq. To be honest I don't care as theres nothing I can do about it. I was talking to Americans on Xbox live the other night and they didn't seem to understand the death toll until I turned it into how many Americans would have died if the situations were reversed.

I'm not saying America killed these people but they did cause the current situation by invading. Saddam was no saint but conditions were better under his rule than what they are now. The USA is primarily responsable for destroying a country thats all. Add in another 500 000 estimated deaths due to sanctions form 1991-2003 and a few thousand more killed in the same time from airstrikes

 

[Theige]

The world isn't very fair Zardnaar.

But It will be a lot more fair when all the countries of the planet have legitimate democratic governments.

 

[Lotus49]

Coalition dead (3,265 US, 140 UK, 124 other, 769 contractors): 4,280

Coalition Wounded, severely injured:

United States:
24,314 wounded
26,188 severely injured

United Kingdom:
~310 wounded
2,199 severely injured

Contractors (mostly U.S.) :
7,761 wounded & severely injured


-I just took that form the main "Iraq War" Wiki page. Just to put things in perspective... it's not like we're over there just randomly lobbing hand grenades, from the sanctity of hardened bunkers. We're shedding plenty of blood.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I'm not saying America killed these people but they did cause the current situation by invading. Saddam was no saint but conditions were better under his rule than what they are now.

No they weren't. Yes, less people died per day than now, but it was a brutal dictatorship, and that's not rehetoric, that's descriptive fact. You're a fool if you think that Iraq was better off under the thumb of a man who ran a secret police, killed his own people, and caused their suffering by deliberately and repeatedly violating the will of the world.

The USA is primarily responsable for destroying a country thats all.

Well make up your mind, is it our fault or not?

Add in another 500 000 estimated deaths due to sanctions form 1991-2003 and a few thousand more killed in the same time from airstrikes

You're pulling **** out of your ass. Blaming the United States for sanctions against Iraq? 500, 000 because of said sanctions? There's only one man to blame for that, and he's dead now. And thousands of people from airstrikes? In the Iraqi Army, perhaps a few died, but that's what happens in the Army.

 

[RedWolf]

The 600000 number comes from a flawed house hold servy where people were asked if anyone died in their house since the start of the war.

Blair's own experts warned him that the study's methodology was "robust" and "close to best practice". And that it "could not be rubbished".

Even assuming this study is complete garbage - www.iraqbodycount.org estimates 60,000 DOCUMENTED deaths. Do we really believe every single person in Iraq that has died from violence has been captured somewhere in a media report? I would think you could safely double their number which puts you in the 120,000 range.

 

[Zardnaar]

No they weren't. Yes, less people died per day than now, but it was a brutal dictatorship, and that's not rehetoric, that's descriptive fact. You're a fool if you think that Iraq was better off under the thumb of a man who ran a secret police, killed his own people, and caused their suffering by deliberately and repeatedly violating the will of the world.


Well make up your mind, is it our fault or not?


You're pulling **** out of your ass. Blaming the United States for sanctions against Iraq? 500, 000 because of said sanctions? There's only one man to blame for that, and he's dead now. And thousands of people from airstrikes? In the Iraqi Army, perhaps a few died, but that's what happens in the Army.

Yeah sanctions done oh so much to hurt Saddam. Go read up on US airstrikes and deaths from lack of food/medicine. 2 million refugees are also more or less beyond dispute but I suppose you think all the Iraqis in Syria/Jordan are tourists.

 

[Quiet Sound]

The only way to get anything close to an accurate count of deaths in a war zone like Iraq is to go out and ask people. So that's what was done. Just like in the Congo, just like in Darfur and various other places. Places with casualty numbers few people question. It's only when the US is the cause that people question it, it's only when their nation is responsible and their tax money made it possible that people decry it. Or so it seems.

But by all means, let's just take the word of the politicians who lied us into the war in the first place.

/edit
Link

"Six hundred thousand or whatever they guessed at is just, it's not credible," Bush said, and he dismissed the methodology as "pretty well discredited." In December, Bush estimated that 30,000 Iraqis had died in the war. Asked at the news conference what he thinks the number is now, Bush said: "I stand by the figure a lot of innocent people have lost their life." ... [That was the number of documented deaths reported by 2 or more sources as listed on Iraq Body Count at the time]

vs.

"The sampling is solid. The methodology is as good as it gets," said John Zogby, whose Utica, N.Y.-based polling agency, Zogby International, has done several surveys in Iraq since the war began. "It is what people in the statistics business do."

Zogby said similar survey methods have been used to estimate casualty figures in other conflicts, such as Darfur and the Democratic People's Republic of Congo.

Ronald Waldman, an epidemiologist at Columbia University who worked at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for many years, told the Washington Post the survey method was "tried and true." He said that "this is the best estimate of mortality we have."

Frank Harrell Jr., chairman of the biostatistics department at Vanderbilt University, told the Associated Press the study incorporated "rigorous, well-justified analysis of the data."

 

[Xenocrates]

Yeah I don't believe that number but various waste of space writers like John Pilger have seized on it.

According to many sources there are 2 million external refugees and 1.8 million internal refugees. If the death toll was only of the order of 60,000 what are they all running from? Of course the higher number is more plausible. I sat next to a couple of Iraqi refugees on the plane - they were going to China - and they were in bad shape.

I haven't been to Iraq and I haven't counted the corpses; I just can't understand why there's a reluctance to accept a high death toll.