655,000 Iraqis killed since start of war

the latest survey has indicated that many more Iraqis have been killed than previously thought. Some say the timing of this release is political.But, then again they say that about everything nowadays. Politics or not, this figure is atrocious.
With around 600,000 dying as a result of violence.

Disputed study claims 655,000 Iraqi deaths
POSTED: 2:57 a.m. EDT, October 11, 2006

NEW YORK (AP) -- A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates.

The timing of the survey's release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it "politics."

In the new study, researchers attempt to calculate how many more Iraqis have died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. Their conclusion, based on interviews of households and not a body count, is that about 600,000 died from violence, mostly gunfire. They also found a small increase in deaths from other causes like heart disease and cancer.

source: cnn.com

I am really at a loss here. 600,000 Iraqis are dead... and we are helping this country again how? For a war that should have never happened?

I am sorry but this number just sickens me.

And they don't count how many die before the war because of the embargo on medical supplies that killed at least 200.000 people, the majority among children who need a lot of medical attention in their early days.

The last estimate I saw here was 45,000 about 2 months ago. Where did the other 620,000 come from. That has to be an inflated number, if that many were killed it would be all over the news.

Unfortunatly, the reasoning behind it is only known to the Bush administration. Any attempt to question it is met with "We must protect America"

Not to mention the Anti-American name calling.

*sigh*

steve
it was all over the news last night, and they pointed out the fact that it IS controversial.
and i imagine it will be in the news again today.
while the numbers are incredibly high and sickening i'm thinking they're maybe just a little too high. but i don't know, i'm no expert.
it is very sad that we're there to "help" them, but instead we're collaterally killing off many innocents in the process. too bad there isn't a more diplomatic way to take care of this.....at least according to condi and donald....


optimus

[edit on 11-10-2006 by optimus primal]

BBC

'Iraqi war death toll at 655,000'

Wednesday, 11 October 2006

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.
The research compares mortality rates before and after the invasion from 47 randomly chosen areas in Iraq.
The figure is considerably higher than estimates by official sources or the number of deaths reported in the media.
Critics have dismissed the findings because they are based on a statistical prediction rather than body counts.
Dr Gilbert Burnham of the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Heath, based in Baltimore, says this method is more reliable, given the dangers of conducting thorough research in strife-torn Iraq.
The estimated death toll is equal to about 2.5% of Iraq's population, and averages out at more than 500 additional deaths a day since the start of the invasion.
Sharp rise
Researchers spoke to nearly 1,850 families, comprising more than 12,800 people in dozens of 40-household clusters around the country.
Of the 629 deaths they recorded among these families, 13% took place in the 14 months before the invasion and 87% in the 40 months afterwards.
Such a trend repeated nationwide would indicate a rise in annual death rates from 5.5 per 1,000 to 13.3 per 1,000.
The researchers say that in nearly 80% of the individual cases, family members produced death certificates to support their answers.
Reliable data is very hard to obtain in Iraq, where anti-US insurgents and sectarian death squads pose a grave danger to civilian researchers.
The survey updates earlier research using the same "cluster" technique which indicated that 100,000 Iraqis had died between the invasion and April 2004 - a figure that was also dismissed by many supporters of the US-led coalition.
'Survivor bias'
While critics point to the discrepancy between this and other independent surveys (such as Iraq Body Count's figure of 44-49,000 civilian deaths, based on media reports), the Bloomberg School team says its method may actually underestimate the true figure.
"Families, especially in households with combatants killed, could have hidden deaths. Under-reporting of infant deaths is a widespread concern in surveys of this type," the authors say.
"Entire households could have been killed, leading to survivor bias."
The survey suggests that most of the extra deaths - 601,000 - would have been the result of violence, mostly gunfire, and suggests that 31% could be attributable to action by US-led coalition forces.
The survey is to be published in a UK medical journal, the Lancet, on Thursday.
In an accompanying comment, the Lancet's Richard Horton acknowledges that the 2004 survey provoked controversy, but emphasises that the 2006 follow-up has been recommended by "four expert peers... with relatively minor revisions".

news.bbc.co.uk...

600, 000?

The true figure from March 2003 to September 2006 is probably twice that given by Dr Gilbert Burnham of John Hopkins University.

It is even likley that 1 700 000 Iraqi civilians have been killed up to now.

and US has confirned that now the rate of death is 100 people a day are being blown apart in Iraq.

Remember the US military has said "we don't do body counts".

and represents only those who are killed by US forces.

this number does not include millions of people who are
injured and maimed in the past four years.





[edit on 11-10-2006 by mr conspiracy]

well the bright side would be they finally got democracy

congratulations to all war supporters, i belive celebrations are in order

I see the original poster has decided to pick and choose what parts of the article should be discussed. You forgot to add this little snippet from the same article.

An accurate count of Iraqi deaths has been difficult to obtain, but one respected group puts its rough estimate at closer to 50,000. And at least one expert was skeptical of the new findings.

"They're almost certainly way too high," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington.

and then there's this

A private group called Iraqi Body Count, for example, says it has recorded about 44,000 to 49,000 civilian Iraqi deaths. But it notes that those totals are based on media reports, which it says probably overlook "many if not most civilian casualties."

and finally this little gem about the new survey

The survey participants attributed about 31 percent of violent deaths to coalition forces

Wow! That says quite a bit. If the coalition forces are only responsible for 31 percent of the deaths (out of 655,000) who's responsible for the rest of these deaths? Someone else besides the U.S. is responsible for over 425,000 deaths. I guess we should get to the bottom of this. This whole thing seems shady and sensationalized to me.

I know the number of deaths is high and each one is a tragedy, but this estimate is way out there. Probably off by at least an order of magnitude. The big difference between this estimate and others is this one relies on the testimony of people.

Speaking of the new study, Burnham said the estimate was much higher than others because it was derived from a house-to-house survey rather than approaches that depend on body counts or media reports.

They only surveyed a sample of the population and estimate the rest. It would all depend on who you talk to.

dbates...you will have to firgive me... I was not totally awake and didnt really get to fully post everything. Yes 31 percent is direct result of coalition forces... But we are still responsible because our war started the sectarian violence our war hurt the infrastructure. We are still responsible one way or another.

This all politically timed to influence the U.S. elections coming up. Read this article just in from CNN (no friend of the current administration) regarding this outrageous report: (my bolding added)

CNN Article

"They're almost certainly way too high," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington. He criticized the way the estimate was derived and noted that the results were released shortly before the Nov. 7 elections in the United States.

"This is not analysis, this is politics," Cordesman said.

The work updates an earlier Johns Hopkins study -- that one was released just before the November 2004 presidential election. At the time, the lead researcher, Les Roberts of Hopkins, said the timing was deliberate. Many of the same researchers were involved in the latest estimate.

There you have it. Before any of you start spinning this and yourselves out of control, get the facts - from both sides ...

So what if it's use for political purpose? The Bush administration and the neo-cons NEED to be replace anyway how. They are a big danger to the entire world. It's either election, that doesn't work because of Diebold, or impeachment, that doesn't work because the democrats are spineless.

On the subject, I heard before the beginning of the Iraq War 2, that around 1 million people died because of the medical embargo that lasted about 2 years.

[edit on 11-10-2006 by Vitchilo]

a congradulations goes to the Bush admin and those americans who voted for him your hands are stained with blood

i mean what a way to get rid of those WMDS i mean spread democracy and freedom

Originally posted by bodrul
a congradulations goes to the Bush admin and those americans who voted for him

your hands are stained with blood

i mean what a way to get rid of those WMDS i mean spread democracy and freedom

Thats how the world works in Iraq and Afghanistan. I mean how did we spread democracy in Germany and Japan? It sure wasn't cheap in blood.

no that is how the world works in the small limited mind of you and your masters



this is blatant extermination of entire nation, those who wont get killed by soldiers will die od DU or other deseases

bravo you murdering scum




*This is not how this forum works. Please check your U2U inbox by clicking on "member center"*


[edit on 11-10-2006 by dbates]

Originally posted by TONE23
dbates...you will have to firgive me... I was not totally awake and didnt really get to fully post everything. Yes 31 percent is direct result of coalition forces... But we are still responsible because our war started the sectarian violence our war hurt the infrastructure. We are still responsible one way or another.

Yeah, it's all America's fault that Iraqi, Iranian, and Syrian extremists blow themselves up in a crowd of their fellow Muslims.

This war should never have begun, but nobody forces these people to do what they do.

[edit on 11-10-2006 by Astygia]

The difference, it's that there's not a democracy in Iraq, it's just smoke and mirrors. The actual president was at Bilderberg this year, some of the high rank were involved in the Iran contra-gate... things like that. Search for it, you'll see that it's in no way a democracy, just like in Afghanistan.

655 thousand Iraqi’s have died in Iraq right?

Who donnit??

Come on be honest.

The topic should read 655,000 people have died in Iraq, Iraq’s genocide continues....

They are killing themselves.

And most look to the US ARMY?? blah..

This should highlight the mentality of the Muslim’s; They must be the most barbaric group of people on the planet to do this to themselves.

NeoN HaZe.

You can not deny the fact that people has been dying in Iraq everyday since the war started.

The fact that the body count on civilians was not taken in the beginning of the war is prove of the extend of the numbers.

Now is more initiative on keeping tracks of the death.

For identification purposes.

The fact that is deaths everyday to the point that in one day up to one hundred bodies are found all over tells you as the horrible reality of a genocide of a population.

Yes in the beginning it was casualties of war now is the results of the invasion and destabilization of that country.

Is many things that the present administration has kept hidden from the public and yes is a time issue now since mid-term elections.

But nobody can denied that people in Iraq, Iraqi citizens are dying for one reason or the other since their liberation.

So, now at who's hand they are dying? I though that one of the reasons for liberating their country was to take their evil regime from killing them.

It seems that now they are dying in greater numbers that Saddam was killing them with his evil regime.

Who cares? right.

Pity.

Originally posted by centurion1211
This all politically timed to influence the U.S. elections coming up. Read this article just in from CNN (no friend of the current administration) regarding this outrageous report: (my bolding added)

No friend of the current administration? Oh please.. you really have no idea do you?