What do you think of the fact that 650,000 Iraqis have been killed since the US invasion of that country?

Question

Yes, it's true: 655,000 killed as revealed by a team from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (in Baltimore, USA) in a peer-refereed study published by The Lancet, the world's leading medical journal.

[Of course the US Government has denied it]

Answer 1

If you add up

1. All the support in weapons that the US gave to the Iraqi dictator to support him in the eighties, including helping saddam and the bath party into power in the first place (the secular Baath party was started by a CHRISTIAN).
2. The complete destruction of a modern wealthy oil rich nation (including free education and well equiped health service that even the Americans would be jealous of) with more explosives than WW1 and WW2 put together in 1991
3. The use of over 1000 tons radioactive DU weapons that disintigrate into fine dust with particles of about a few micrometers and a half life of over four billion years to continue causing cancers in the local population
4. The brutal sanctions for a decade that resulted in the deaths of over half a million children in the first few years
5. The destruction and invasion of a helpless nation in 2003 and to steal anything left of value and imprisonment, humiliation, rape and torture of tens of thousands of people including women and children

then we should all be ashamed of being idle and watching all this happen.

For those who say it is muslims killing muslims, this is a lie. This is being encouraged and inflamed by the US tactics - the sectarian rivalry was no worse than in any other country eg the blacks, mexicans and WASPS in the US.

Unfortunately, it was the zionist in washington and israel who where the biggest supporters of this madness.

Source(s):

http://www.casi.org.uk/
http://www.iraqanalysis.org/
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/...

Answer 2

Whether or not this figure is correct, there's no doubting that an awful lot of civilians have been killed and continue to be killed so it's pretty pointless for everyone to be arguing over numbers. The life of one person is precious, so the numbers are academic. It is, however, a heartbreaking example of what can happen when a superpower intervenes in an arena where it's totally ignorant of the mentality of its occupants. The USA and the UK opened a Pandora's Box when they invaded and everything has gone pear-shaped. Saddam was evil, but surely in this day and age he could have been eliminated by means other than bombing the guts out of the country? It could now be looked upon as an atrocity. I note that some replies make a big point of the fact that a lot of these deaths were Iraqi killing Iraqi; we all know that, but the point is that this situation is the aftermath of a war that should never have happened in the first place, hence my comments above.

Answer 3

But how killed them? These numbers came from 2000 interviews all over Iraq then the team of Iraq Doctors and John Hopkins made their estimates. The numbers they have would mean an increase in their normal (high for the rest of the world) death rate of over 500 people a day, everyday since the invasion started. During my 12 months there I know they are crazy enough to kill that many of their own people but I never saw any evidence.

Answer 4

Have you actually READ the study??? Didn't think so. I have and here is a link if you care to TAKE THE TIME to review all of it.

The numbers were estimated by polling approximately 1800 households and asking them how many persons they knew had been killed. And EVERYONE OF THEM TOLD THE TRUTH!

Very scientific. SUUUUUUURRRRRRRRE!!!!!!!!

I have a degree in chemistry, have done statistical analysis for years, and this is one of the sloppiest excuses I have ever seen for a so-called "scientific study".

A group of British citizens set up Iraq Body Count, the project that now provides the most quoted fatality statistics. Their estimates put the death toll at 43,850 to 48,693. From the report: "An Iraqi non-governmental organisation, Iraqiyun, estimated 128,000 deaths from the time of the invasion until July, 2005, by use of various sources, including household interviews." Even extrapolated to Oct 2006, still far less than the 655,000 reported in the Lancet. Oh, but let me guess, they're in on the conspiracy too...

Here is a quote that demonstrates the study is worthless: "From January, 2002, until the invasion in 2003, virtually all deaths in Iraq were from non-violent causes." What do they call Saddam's torture rooms and the millions that he killed? Must be natural causes! Some thug beats you to a bloody pulp, cuts off limbs, attaches electrical cables to your genitals, burns you with acid, etc., you die, naturally!

Here is another quote from the report: "All surveys have potential for error and bias. The extreme insecurity during this survey could have introduced bias by restricting the size of teams, the number of supervisors, and the length of time that could be prudently spent in all locations, which in turn affected the size and nature of questionnaires." Thus, the researchers are saying that their own data is not reliable. But they printed it anyway. Gotta keep that grant $ rolling in!!!

And yet another quote that the media FOR SOME STRANGE REASON fails to report, "The population data used for cluster selection were at least 2 years old, and if populations subsequently migrated from areas of high mortality to those with low mortality, the sample might have over-represented the high-mortality areas." Translation: inflated death tolls.

Have whatever opinion you want about Bush and the War on Terror, but you better do your homework before you try to hang with the big dogs. HINT: A FACT IS THE ONE THING THE LIBERAL MEDIA HATES.

Answer 5

Yes,that was on BBC news this morning,and even then they say its probably just the tip of the iceberg. :(
I think they were repressed by the Saddam regime,that now they have the freedoms we all take for granted,they just don't know what to do and the fighting i believe between the Iraq's is a bit like us being let lose in a sweet shop,and no-one seems to know how to bring order back.
I mean killing each other is so sad,and they seem to appear leaderless,and the new government just have no idea how to cope with the freedom they have nor the slightest idea on how to rule a people who were scared to even whisper anything anti Hussein,and i believe the freedoms they have have maybe come a little too quickly,they couldn't go out for fear of being arrested now they can do what they like.
I think that this will continue for a few years yet,as no-one is taking control.
My heart breaks for the people.

Answer 6

While I find the 655 thousand total high, I think that total would be more reliable than anything the US government says. My guess is that it is in the 250000 range, still considerably higher than the 50000 total spewed by the Bush administration.
As for Monkey Harris' statement that if the Iraqis behaved like they were in the 21st century it "wouldn't have happened" I can only ask if he uses that same 'logic' to explain the deaths of the three thousand or so that perished in the 9/11?

Answer 7

i could sense afraid, and probable indignant. the challenge with visualising the kind you may sense in yet somebody else's place is which you would be able to basically empathise properly in case you have been given an precise photograph. all of us understand that the television media is very biased. The newspapers and magazines must be the two biased. professional and Anti Iraq conflict campaigners all have their very own axes to grind... Who do we've self assurance? till we genuinely pass to Iraq and spot for ourselves what the Iraqis think of roughly this invasion we can't possibly understand.... The "conflict on terror" is unlawful. whilst human beings ruin a regulation, they must acquire a in simple terms punishment. How do the Iraqis think of the Allies ought to pay for this crime that our governments have committed lower back them? maximum pertinent question: What do maximum folk of Iraqis want, regardless of their status as "harmless" or "extremist". We do in simple terms no longer understand. yet i assume that they'd not want us to scouse borrow or "tax" their oil.... that is all approximately oil.... i could extremely be unfavourable, and walk, and enhance my very own nutrition, and make my very own outfits, than be occasion to homicide that become performed for the sake of conserving my "way of existence". The oil will run out at last besides, so why combat over it? we could be greater desirable off making waiting ourselves for the inevitable.

Answer 8

I think you are missing the fact the the majority of those are Musllim killing muslim (sunni, shia) casualties.

To quote the most perfect synopsis of the region from Syrianna, Matt Damon is talking about the oil running out, he says, "100 years ago you were cutting each others heads off with swords in the desert, in 100 years you'll be doing the same again".

May be callous but I don't care. I'm tired of seeing the West prop up everyone else. If the East wants progress they need to do the one thing they will never do, drop Islam.

Answer 9

I think it's a grave tragedy but it shows they are sticking up for themselves and that the terrorists and rebels are getting desperate and they know that their time is ending. With all peace comes death. How many men died in the revolution to fee our country from the UK? How many men died freeing France, the Soviet Union, Poland and other countries in WWII from the invading Nazi Party? In certain things there are always hardships and tradegies if it's really worth it and to the citizens of Iraq who have been opressed for many years, freedom is worth it.

Answer 10

It is nothing short of genocide, consider that this so called war has no valid reason to be in the first place. We went to war based on George Bush's lies. He should have to go on trial for his crimes against the Iraqi people, 2750 Americans dead, he should have to be tried for that and the many, many more that are wounded and permanently disfigured, and he should be tried for his crimes against humanity. He should be punished for his crimes and not rewarded as the neo-cons would like.