Iraqi bodycount since 2003 invasion, compared to during Saddam's reign?

Question

At what point will more people have died because of the 2003 invasion, than during the whole reign of Saddam in Iraq?

Answer 1

The invasion of Iraq in March 2003 by U.S.-led coalition forces has been responsible for the death of at least 150,000 civilians (not including certain of Iraq), reveals a compilitation of scientific studies and corroborated eyewitness testimonies.

The majority of these deaths, have been among women and children, documents a well-researched study, that had been released by The Lancet Medical Journal.

The report in the British journal is based on the work of teams from the Johns Hopkins University and Columbia University in the U.S., and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad.

The information was obtained as Iraqi interviewers surveyed 808 families, consisting of 7,868 people, in 33 different "clusters" or neighbourhoods spread across the country.

In each case, they asked how many births and deaths there had been in the home since January 2002.


That information was then compared with the death rates in each neighbourhood in the 15 months before the invasion that toppled president Saddam Hussein, adjusted for the different time frames, and extrapolated to cover the entire 24.4 million population of Iraq.

The most common cause of death is as a direct result of a worsening 'culture of violence', mostly caused by indiscriminate U.S. co-ordinated air strikes, and related military interventions, reveals the study of almost 1000 households scattered across Iraq. And the risk of violent death just after the invasion was 58 times greater than before the war. The overall risk of death was 1.5 times more after the invasion than before.

The on-going American Occupation has also created worsened civil strife as well as mass environmental destructions and related public health problems that is associated with American bomb-related released radioactive and other life-threatening pollutions. The American Occupation has also prevailed over the neglect to the repairing of vital public services-related infrastructure, which include U.S.-led destructions of water systems.

The figure of 100,000 had been based on somewhat "conservative assumptions", notes Les Roberts at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, U.S., who led the study.

That estimate excludes Falluja, a hotspot for violence. If the data from this town is included, the compiled studies point to about 250,000 excess deaths since the outbreak of the U.S.-led war.

Answer 2

I don't think you can count evil by the number of people it kills.

If you do, though, don't forget to add in the 3000 innocent people murdered on 9 September 2001. Whose score are YOU going to add them to?

Watch those videos and the reasoning in them. Go for the main point - that those buildings collapsed far too fast and far too neatly and completely (and the fact that they collapsed at at all). See where that line of thought takes you - and the implications involved.

I spent 3 hours looking at some of those tapes, trying to identify the faulty logic (and rejecting a lot of it as 'unproven until further verified'). Just the fact that WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 fell completely in more or less the same time that it would take for an object to drop in free fall from that height tells me that there was something else involved beside the planes crashing into them.

It is too scary for most Americans to even entertain the idea that 3000 fellow countrymen were knowingly murdered by people in very high authority in the US government in order to focus hate where it was politically expedient.

It is too scary, too improbable an idea, even, for most British people I have spoken to.

Please - if you are American, watch the videos and pressure to get Bush and the others involved impeached. It won't stop the rot in your government and society, but it will, at least make more people aware.

Answer 3

Vague answer but something like 20000 a year under Saddam and a couple hundred now. The real problem is the media talks about each death now where they didn't do much then. Same stuff in Damfur, Somalia, Afghanistan under the Taliban. People don't care to remember the thousands that died each week just the couple hundred terrorists that die at the hands of the US.

Answer 4

The difference is Suddam was a dictator who was executing his own poeple to strike terror in his own people and we are there to try to help.We are NOT executing women and children just because we can and unfortunatley it does happen but if those SOB's would quit strapping bombs to them and sending them into crowds of people we wouldn't need to shoot them to keep them from hurting so many more.We are not the bad guys.We are just trying to do the best we can and if the press would quit sesationalizing every little thing it would be a whole lot better.They are the ones kidnapping and beheading not us!Did some of us forget that little tidbit?They have a government(such as it is) and quite frankly I doubt we actually know here in the USA what is going on over there.I don't think we need to,either.The death toll still isn't as high as Vietnam or WW1/WW!!.

Answer 5

Isn't it telling how easy going some people are about the loss of other people's lives. These same people make such a clamour when supposed terrorists take a few lives. The hypocrisy is disgusting. The best thing would have been non-interferance in other nation states business. Where is the principle of Isolationism now? I suppose we didn't need as much oil then as we do now.

Answer 6

You forgot to mention that the vast majority of those killed after 2003 have been at the hands of Saddam loyalists. Most of the people killed by the U.S. are terrorists. Some innocents have been killed by the U.S., but not intentionally.
Big difference.

Answer 7

considering individuals discovered from Vietnam now to not count number civilian deaths - in basic terms the deaths of our troops - no man or woman can be certain. some believe that the numbers ought to flow as intense as a million. we've killed extra Iraqi civilians than Saddam did.

Answer 8

I'm not sure; but in the realm of body count, this whole Iraq thing has been bloodless compared to battles like D day. Or the bombing of Dresden.

What do they have maybe 100,000 total that is like the first few seconds on the beaches of Normandy.

Answer 9

Before 2003: 0 free.
After 2003: 25 million free.

Some have died, it sucks, it is the price of freedom.

Answer 10

More citizens of Iraq have died then insurgents. It impossible to shrink these numbers because not only do the insurgents kill them but we do too. We are not killing them on purpose but what difference would that make to you if your child got blow up.

Look at the size and population of Iraq. If you put that into perspective to our population we would have lost a Million civilians