650,000 was given as the "estimate" death of civilians in Iraq since the US invaded in mid-march 2003. Well, this number was given in mid-september of 2006. so that is 12+12+12+7=43 months. Now, if we take an average of 30 days a month we get 43*30=1290 days. now take the death toll 650,000/1290=503.86 deaths a day. Holy mother****er! I think the most i have heard was around 100 (still disgusting number) killed in one day. Why do so many just accept these numbers?
2007-01-15 03:40:19 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
longhaired freaky person, there is an actual body count
http://iraqbodycount.org/
2007-01-15 03:47:08 · update #1
Because they are the best estimate of excessive deaths caused by the conflict. The scientists who produced them are not looking at media counts of murders, but rises in the death rate since the war started, brought on by violence, hunger, health care, higher suicide rates, etc.
It is the best study done to date. You would be better off believing it unless better numbers come along.
EDIT: You didn't read my answer. Iraqbodycount reads newspaper accounts to figure out how many people were killed by violence that was reported in the media. Obviously that is a huge undercount of everyone who was killed from all violence, and died from all other causes at a higher rate since the war, due to the collapsed infrastructure, poverty, etc. That is where the 655,000 figure comes from.
2007-01-15 03:45:37 · answer #1 · answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
b9 - you are right on!!!
My question is to continue this one... not only where did you get these so called "statistics," but how has this changed in the years since Iraq was invaded, versus what it was like before?
Also, how many of these civilian deaths were due to suicide bombings (from civilians) or Iraq soldiers, themselves?
You make these CLAIMS, write them as if they are facts, and expect people to believe you.
Where are your sources that American soldiers are the ones killing all of these civilians? YOU CAN'T!
Get a grip!!!
2007-01-15 03:51:35 · answer #2 · answered by Glory 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think it's possible to get a totally accurate body count. The russians say they lost 40 million during world war 2. While 650,000 sounds like alot of people to die in such a short period of time, I still think this number is conservative to say the least. I believe more than a million have died since the iraq invasion and ensuing war.
2007-01-15 04:00:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Because the 650,000 # came from a John Hopkins Univ. survey and since most top Neo Cons come from Johns Hopkins Univ. (they got the war started in Iraq) then why would they lie about the 650,000 deaths of civilians in Iraq?
2007-01-15 03:50:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Because it supports their anti Bush agenda.
Same thing with the 3000 military s. We had almost 20,000 killed, 40,000 wounded and 20,000 captured in a five week period in Winter 1944/45 in the Ardenne Forest. What would you call that?
Crucial Victory
2007-01-15 03:47:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Same reason people are willing to believe the worst of America.
2007-01-15 03:47:07 · answer #6 · answered by LoneStar 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
And just who gave you these numbers?
I think one of two things: One, you're making all this up to try and just stir up trouble, or two, you're terribly misinformed and/or you believe everything you read no matter how uncredible the source.
2007-01-15 03:45:50 · answer #7 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
This is a question for Iraqis. Until they are not fine with it nothing will change.
2007-01-15 03:50:12 · answer #8 · answered by C B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
nobody REALLY believes those nonsense estimates. Just more leftist lies.
2007-01-15 03:57:14 · answer #9 · answered by charbatch 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
lTake poverty away from the poor and they have nothing. Take lying away from the libs and they are nobodies
2007-01-15 03:49:00 · answer #10 · answered by Ibredd 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋