It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Counting The Dead in Iraq

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:01 PM

Counting The Dead in Iraq

Even the Lancet study's figure is by no means the highest:

The British polling firm Opinion Research Business (ORB) asked 1,720 Iraqi adults last summer if they had lost family members by violence since 2003; 16% had lost one, and 5% two. Using the 2005 census total of 4,050,597 households in Iraq, this suggests 1,220,580 deaths since the invasion. Accounting for a standard margin of error, ORB says, "We believe the range is a minimum of 733,158 to a maximum of 1,446,063."

This is compared with the death toll during the Saddam years:

Estimates of the Iraqi deaths caused by Saddam's regime amount to a maximum of one million over a 35-year period (100,000 Kurds in the Anfal campaign in the 1980s; 400,000 in the war against Iran; 100,000 Shias in the suppressed uprising of 1991; and an unknown number executed in his prisons and torture chambers). Averaged over his time in power, the annual rate does not exceed 29,000.

(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 20-3-2008 by DimensionalDetective]

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:01 PM
Awww...But remember, "It was all worth it!"

Congrats to the Decider-He is now the equivelent of a modern day Hitler, having killed more Iraqi's than Saddam himself.

Now, who exactly is the brutal, evil, DICTATOR again?

If there is such a thing of Karma, you and your entire diabolical regime have some serious serious fun ahead of you.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:19 PM
Great find. This is beyond tragic. Why is no one being held accountable for this? As our commander in chief tap dances on the White House lawn, this is happening.

Throw this onto the enormous pile of war crimes to get these criminals in jail.

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:33 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

I don't disagree with the number of deaths. However, it is interesting that every report has a completely different estimate.

I wouldn't base the number of deaths on a poll asking families if they'd lost relatives. Not everyone has lost a member of their family.

90,000 DOCUMENTED civilian deaths

The 90K number just means deaths that have been verified and written down. I wonder how many more civilians are buried beneath the sands of Iraq?

This is a chart of "deaths per week:"

Here's the figure for Iraq coalition forces casualties:

About 4000 US military deaths.

Another figure: Casualties in Iraq

The last link gives an estimated up to 100K wounded number. That would not surprise me.

"Support the Troops" is such a bull# line. If people really "supported" the troops they'd want them at home with their families. Hypocrites.

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:51 PM
Remeber these are the same people who worship freaking Molech or whatever his name is and burn a human effigy that make these decisions and I truly believe they are driven by evil. Bush and the rest of his Bohemian buddies have got most of the sheeple fooled so they can basically get away with this kind of stuff.

The fact Bush has not been brought up on war crimes charges makes me believe the whole UN is in on the deal to and people withing the American gov need the balls to impeach!

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:52 PM
Iraqi deaths due to invasion

There's an almost 1.2 million estimated Iraqi deaths due to our actions the past 5 years.

I find it interesting no one ever mentions the diaspora of Iraqis either. How many refugees have been created because of this war as well?

[edit on 3/20/2008 by biggie smalls]

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:59 PM
reply to post by biggie smalls

Last count I read, there were over 4 MILLION displaced. Again, that's something that NEVER recieves so much as a whisper from the MSM or these white-House Clowns spewing rubbish from their putrid stink-holes.

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 04:23 PM
They polled 1720 Iraqi adults, and somehow came up with 1,220,580 dead since the invasion. Were they using "new math"?

The article says, "this SUGGESTS 1,220,580 dead", "We believe the range is a minimum of 733,158 to a maximum of 1,446,063."

If I used figures and methods like that in a math class, the instructor would probably kick me out of class for using unsound methods.

Here's a quote that someone posted at the story link that's interesting:

There's a simple way to shoot down the Lancet studies.

One of their primary assumptions is that over 95% of deaths in Iraq were not reported to authorities. In other words, they took the number they actually got, then multiplied it by a factor of over 20 to get their "deaths" result.

Unfortunately, they also pretend that over 90% of the people they "surveyed" had death certificates handy to show off (it's hard to get that sort of response in the US, much less an active war zone). If 95%+ of deaths were unrecorded, then how did they manage a 90%+ positive rate for having those nonexistent certificates on hand?

There's a simple answer: a couple of politically-motivated sorta-scientists hired some other politically-motivated folks in Iraq (at least one of whom used to do work for Hussein's government in "massaging" death rates), were funded by a political source (about half of their money came from George Soros), and then came up with a number that only fools believe, then released it just in time for a US Presidential election.

It's interesting that this is being brought up again (here and in other places - gee, what a coincidence) as an attempt to minimize Hussein's horrendous death toll for his entire reign, and they they have to pull out one of the most-discredited "studies" over the last half-century to do it...

By the way, their "random" sampling wasn't random, either. They got slammed separately for screwing that up, too, intentionally or unintentionally.

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 04:47 PM
Where has anyone tried to minimize Saddam's horrible reign of terror?

We are almost as bad. "We came, we saw, we conquered" and carpet bombed the # out of Iraq.

jericho I agree with your analysis of the estimate being politically motivated.

However, what number would be acceptable to you? 10,000? 100,000? 1 million?

How can you justify what we've done in Iraq as "OK?" There's nothing ok about killing civilians, whether intentionally or accidental. The outcome is the same, more graves and body bags.

We've lost thousands of American lives in this war so far, and if that's the only quantifiable number you want to use, then that number itself is completely unacceptable.

We went against the UN's wishes to invade, there were no WMDs found (unless you count the chemical weapons the US sold him to go to war with Iran years prior), democracy has not been brought to iraq, and millions have been killed, displaced, or otherwise lost.

Iraq has been an absolute failure and its 5 years past time for our troops to come home.

[edit on 3/20/2008 by biggie smalls]

new topics


log in