650.000 Iraqi dead since invasion

[Adrian II]

Late last year Blair & Co rubbished an October 2006 article in The Lancet which estimated that 650,000 Iraqi civilians had died of violence since the American- and British-led invasion in March 2003. Immediately after publication, the prime minister's official spokesman said the study "was not one we believe to be anywhere near accurate". Foreign secretary Margaret Beckett said the Lancet figures were "extrapolated" and a "leap". President Bush said: "I don't consider it a credible report".

This week, the BBC reported that the government's own scientists advised ministers that the Johns Hopkins study on Iraq civilian mortality was reliable.
Scientists at the UK's Department for International Development concluded that the study's methods were "tried and tested". Indeed, the Hopkins approach would likely lead to an "underestimation of mortality". The Ministry of Defence's chief scientific advisor said the research was "robust", close to "best practice", and "balanced". He recommended "caution in publicly criticising the study". The prime minester's advisor wrote that "the survey methodology used here cannot be rubbished, it is a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones".

From the Lancet article:

We estimate that almost 655 000 people -- 2·5% of the population in the study area -- have died in Iraq. Although such death rates might be common in times of war, the combination of a long duration and tens of millions of people affected has made this the deadliest international conflict of the 21st century, and should be of grave concern to everyone.

The opening phase of the war alone is estimated to have cost 100,000 Iraqi lives. Since the official ending of hostilities, the proportion of deaths ascribed to coalition forces has gradually diminished, but the actual numbers have increased every year. In other words, the Iraqis have gradually taken the lead since the government has introduced rule by deathsquad and the insurgents have learned to develop and use high-explosive devices.

All in all, this is a war crime of monstrous proportions committed both by, and under the auspices of, the occupying force of the Americans and the British, aided and abetted by several governments including my own. I wonder if aynone cares, really. The number of 655,000 (give or take a few hundred mass-graves) is after all an abstract, the victims are Iraqis, we never get to see the pictures on our front pages. It's just so much blood under the bridge, isn't it?

[doc_bean]

25 million to go !

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Seriously, what do you expect us to do with this ? I've always been opposed to the invasion, at least to the way it was planned and carried out, I should now be even more opposed ? I should be outraged ? Every day we hear reports of dozens to hundreds of people dying, a few dozen people feel a lot more real than 655.000 and four years feels like an awful long time, whilst a day is short. It's interesting that we have figures now, but seriously, what to do about it ? Even if I was American or British, this wouldn't make me support a withdrawal, since that will probably result in even more deaths.

[Devastatin Dave]

Key word.. ESTIMATE. You and Tribs should go pick out some drapes or something for your apartment in Tehran.

[Vladimir]

Key word.. ESTIMATE. You and Tribs should go pick out some drapes or something for your apartment in Tehran.

Are you implying that Adrian hates freedom?

[Adrian II]

Key word.. ESTIMATE. You and Tribs should go pick out some drapes or something for your apartment in Tehran.

We were thinking of an apartment in the Twin Towers.
Oops, it's gone.. These Third World types have no regard for human life, do they?

[econ21]

This article was debated here at the time. I agree with the DfID "scientists" that there was nothing obviously flawed about the Lancet study (and a refereed academic journal like the Lancet would generally not publish an obviously flawed study). However, the estimate does appear high compared to that from other sources - newspaper and morgue reports, other surveys etc. Trying to understand why it might be too high, my impression was that the most likely problem was the relatively small number of clusters (50) used in the sample. While this would not bias the study estimate up per se, it might make it an unreliable estimator.

However, I was struck by the recent opinon poll of Iraqis though, with half of the 5000 respondents reporting that they had experienced a friend or relative being killed or kidnapped since the occupation.

http://www.opinion.co.uk/Documents/FINALTables.pdf

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

Were saving lives

The repeated assertion that the US is killing hundreds of thousands of civilians is a dangerous lie perhaps most offensive to the memory of innocent Iraqis who have indeed died in the hundreds of thousands while those for "peace"-- a peace of death-- stood by silently. It is also deeply offensive to the families of the 13 US soldiers killed while accepting the false surrender of Iraqi soldiers or coming to the aid of Iraqi taxi drivers.

LINK

This is from 2003 so dont use his figures of deaths since the start of the war.

I seriously doubt that 600,000 figure anyway.

[Tribesman]

Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

Way to go Gawain do you ever bother to check even the simplest of things contained in links you post ?
Obviously not since Cass is clearly talking bollox in that article

This is from 2003 so dont use his figures of deaths since the start of the war.

This is by some fool who invents numbers to make a point so don't use his figures period .

[Sjakihata]

Were saving lives

So in the 24 years of Saddams regime as many as 125 died each day. This is using the highest calculations of 125 not 70. In 24 years there are 8640 days, that means that in total one milion and eightythousands have died (or even as low as 604800 using the 70 figure).

Now during invasion and occupation by the coalition in four years around 600000 have died. Give or take 100000 doesnt change the picture much. Imagine if this coalition were in Iraq for 24 years...

Saving lives, eh?

[Adrian II]

25 million to go ! Seriously, what do you expect us to do with this ?

Like I said, who cares?

[Franconicus]

Thank you for reminding me why I haven't been in the backroom for so long!

Hundredthousands of Iraqi civilists killed; all you do is to discuss if it might have been some more or less. Or if Saddam had been even more effective in killing Iraqis.

[rory_20_uk]

It's a discussion forum. We discuss things. If you (or anyone else) wants to stop the occupation, join a lobby group.

But I do agree that to decide to mull this statistic as opposed to the deaths per year due to malaria, or TB, or cholera is rather odd.

People are dying all over the world for all sorts of pointless reasons and (generally) we in the developed world choose to do little or nothing about it.

[Franconicus]

People are dying and there are a lot of them dying. And they are not dying because of Cholera or any other desease. The dead numbers are a consequence of decisions made in New York, Washington, London, Berlin and other places.

You should rather discuss, if these decisions were right under the fact of these numbers (regardless if they are a bit too high or too low).

Maybe you come to the conclusion that the decisions had been right. That would be fine to me.

[doc_bean]

Like I said, who cares?

Well, what are YOU doing about it then ?

[Adrian II]

Well, what are YOU doing about it then ?

I am trying to make sure that my government will not support yet another reckless and profoundly stupid military adventure in the Gulf, directed this time against Iran, in the hope of avoiding another such massacre among both soldiers and civilians.

[doc_bean]

I am trying to make sure that my government will not support yet another reckless and profoundly stupid military adventure in the Gulf, directed this time against Iran, in the hope of avoiding another such massacre among both soldiers and civilians.

Well, my government never supported the Iraq war and no party (that I would vote for anyway, but I actually believe it's no party at all) supported the war or further military action.

So I've done my democratic duty, what now ? Protest marches in Brussels ? Like they make a difference...