New Study: 100,000 Iraqi Civilians Dead

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
New Study: 100,000 Iraqi Civilians Dead
Published Friday, October 29th, 2004
Middle East - 04:34 GMT


Sarah Boseley, Jeremy Laurance, and Colin Brown

About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition (sic) forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.

The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion.

Last night the Lancet medical journal fast-tracked the survey to publication on its website after rapid, but extensive peer review and editing because, said Lancet editor Richard Horton, “of its importance to the evolving security situation in Iraq”. But the findings raised important questions also for the governments of the United Sates and Britain who, said Dr Horton in a commentary, “must have considered the likely effects of their actions for civilians”.

The research was led by Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. Five of the six Iraqi interviewers who went to the 988 households in the survey were doctors and all those involved in the research on the ground, says the paper, risked their lives to collect the data. Householders were asked about births and deaths in the 14.6 months before the March 2003 invasion, and births and deaths in the 17.8 months afterwards.

When death certificates were not available, there were good reasons, say the authors. “We think it is unlikely that deaths were falsely recorded. Interviewers also believed that in the Iraqi culture it was unlikely for respondents to fabricate deaths,” they write.

They found an increase in infant mortality from 29 to 57 deaths per 1,000 live births, which is consistent with the pattern in wars, where women are unable or unwilling to get to hospital to deliver babies, they say. The other increase was in violent death, which was reported in 15 of the 33 clusters studied and which was mostly attributed to airstrikes.

“Despite widespread Iraqi casualties, household interview data do not show evidence of widespread wrongdoing on the part of individual soldiers on the ground,” write the researchers. Only three of the 61 deaths involved coalition soldiers killing Iraqis with small arms fire. In one case, a 56-year-old man might have been a combatant, they say, in the second a 72-year-old man was shot at a checkpoint and in the third, an armed guard was mistaken for a combatant and shot during a skirmish. In the second two cases, American soldiers apologised to the families.

“The remaining 58 killings (all attributed to US forces by interviewees) were caused by helicopter gunships, rockets or other forms of aerial weaponry,” they write.

The biggest death toll recorded by the researchers was in Falluja, which registered two-thirds of the violent deaths they found. “In Falluja, 23 households of 52 visited were either temporarily or permanently abandoned. Neighbours interviewed described widespread death in most of the abandoned houses but could not give adequate details for inclusion in the survey,” they write.

The researchers criticise the failure of the coalition authorities to attempt to assess for themselves the scale of the civilian casualties.

“US General Tommy Franks is widely quoted as saying ‘we don’t do body counts’,” they write, but occupying armies have responsibilities under the Geneva convention."This survey shows that with modest funds, four weeks and seven Iraqi team members willing to risk their lives, a useful measure of civilan deaths could be obtained.” (The Guardian)


Furious Reaction in UK

The figures provoked a furious response last night in West-minster. Clare Short, the former cabinet minister who resigned over the war, said: “It is really horrifying. When will Tony Blair stop saying it is all beneficial for the Iraqi people since Saddam Hussein has gone? How many more lives are to be taken? It is no wonder, given this tragic death toll, that the resistance to the occupation is growing.

“We have all relied on Iraqi body counts from media reports. That is clearly an under-estimate and this shows that it was a very big under-estimate. It is truly dreadful. Tony Blair talks simplistically about it getting better in Iraq. These figures prove it is just an illusion.”

MPs said the assault on Fallujah expected after the US presidential election next Tuesday would add to the growing death toll among civilians. The figures are certain to provoke fresh demands at the Commons next week for Mr Blair to avoid further civilian deaths.

Alan Simpson, a member of Labour Against the War, said: “Iraq has not seen this scale of slaughter since its war with Iran. At some point, the slaughter of civilians in the name of peace has to become a crime of war. This is not a matter of indifference but criminality. These figures are horrific, but it is a scandal that the world remains silent.”

A spokesperson for the Stop the War Coalition said: “The number of dead has exceeded even our worst fears. This war has been shown to be based on lies and to be illegal. It now turns out to be one of the bloodiest in modern times. We must withdraw our troops now and allow the Iraqis to run their own country.” (The Independent)

http://www.world-crisis.com/news/1000_0_1_0_M/


Material from The Guardian & The Independent
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

I don't call it the war on terror, I call it the war for oil. So does every other thinking human being on the planet.

This report, and its authors have asked for it to be indepently verified from a larger sample group so they are obviously very sure of their results, points to war crimes being committed by the United States and Britain. It's time that we started trying the perpetrators of such crimes no matter who they are.
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
It has absolutely nothing to do with terrorism, this war in Iraq.

I'd just like to point out that, while I didn't read your whole article Sam, I did listen to a report last night on the news and they made it clear that the figure of 100k was very conservative. It was also mentioned (as it was in your article) that a very sizable portion was women and especially children.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
Re: RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Reverend Blair said:
I don't call it the war on terror, I call it the war for oil. So does every other thinking human being on the planet.

A lot of thinking human beings are not very critical of their own thinking and go on thinking what they're thinking without thinking. :wink:

Actually, if not for the SUV and Minivan craze, the US wouldn't need to import oil from the mideast. At all. None. Zippo.

As was demonstrated in the late seventies, Americans are very capable of lowering their oil demands when neccessary. With the advent of hybrid cars and the price of oil climbing, there's a very good chance we'll see the same drop in demand for oil soon.

The War for Oil argument is seductive on the surface, but when you crunch the numbers it just doesn't make sense. The "I'm gonna get Saddam 'cause he tried to kill my Daddy" argument is much more credible.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

It's the oil, Facts. Not so much in the sense of the US needing the oil, but in the sense of US companies wanting to be the ones selling it and them being major contributors to the Bush campaign. Toss in Halliburton making out like a bandit not just on supplying the oil fields, but on no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq and the fact that much of what the military used to do for itself has now been privatised and contracted out to Halliburton.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
Re: RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Reverend Blair said:
Toss in Halliburton making out like a bandit not just on supplying the oil fields, but on no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq and the fact that much of what the military used to do for itself has now been privatised and contracted out to Halliburton.

You're right about that, I'm sure Cheney peed himself with excitement thinking of the possibilities. But there have always been war profiteers and dirty back room deals.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Not quite like this though. In this case the war profiteers all have close contact with PNAC and PNAC runs the White House. The war profiteers are the government and they have the developed the ultimate scam. The government pays for a war that benefits the war profiteers, then pays those profiteers while setting them up in a business that they can make massive profits from.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
Re: RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Reverend Blair said:
The war profiteers are the government and they have the developed the ultimate scam.

Not really, they're being investigated left right and center now. When they get to the bottom of it, and they WILL get to the bottom of it, if the allegations are true there will be hell to pay. Not an ultimate scam afterall, but a greedy mistake.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Do you think they'll haul Dick Cheney away in cuffs? I doubt it. Even if he gets indicted in France it's unlikely that the US will extradite him. That's the problem, the honchos will walk. They won't even hove to give back the money they stole. They are above the law.
 

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
42
48
SW Ontario
Re: RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Reverend Blair said:
Do you think they'll haul Dick Cheney away in cuffs? I doubt it. Even if he gets indicted in France it's unlikely that the US will extradite him. That's the problem, the honchos will walk. They won't even hove to give back the money they stole. They are above the law.

You're probably right. It will finish Dick's career as a middle man though. That me be some justice. On the other hand, who knows, stranger things have happened...they got Nixon, and Clinton was impeached over something I would have thought was nobody's business other than he and Hillary. Maybe he will get hauled off.
 

Numure

Council Member
Apr 30, 2004
1,063
0
36
Montréal, Québec
Re: RE: New Study: 100,000 Ir

Just the Facts said:
Reverend Blair said:
Do you think they'll haul Dick Cheney away in cuffs? I doubt it. Even if he gets indicted in France it's unlikely that the US will extradite him. That's the problem, the honchos will walk. They won't even hove to give back the money they stole. They are above the law.

You're probably right. It will finish Dick's career as a middle man though. That me be some justice. On the other hand, who knows, stranger things have happened...they got Nixon, and Clinton was impeached over something I would have thought was nobody's business other than he and Hillary. Maybe he will get hauled off.

Clinton was Impeached?
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
You're probably right. It will finish Dick's career as a middle man though. That me be some justice. On the other hand, who knows, stranger things have happened...they got Nixon, and Clinton was impeached over something I would have thought was nobody's business other than he and Hillary. Maybe he will get hauled off.

Not if Bush wins this election. That's the thing...corporate power has grown so much over the last four years.

It will likely be different if Kerry wins though. He won't have Congress at first and to get it he will have to discredit the Republicans. He will go after Bush, Cheney, and everybody who ever worked for PNAC to do that.