100,000 dead in Iraq...

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
100,000 Excess Civilian Iraqi Deaths Since War study
Thu Oct 28, 2004 02:59 PM ET
By Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violence since the U.S.-led invasion last year, American public health experts have calculated in a report that estimates there were 100,000 "excess deaths" in 18 months.

The rise in the death rate was mainly due to violence and much of it was caused by U.S. air strikes on towns and cities.

"Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq," said Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in a report published online by The Lancet medical journal.

"The use of air power in areas with lots of civilians appears to be killing a lot of women and children," Roberts told Reuters.

The report came just days before the U.S. presidential election in which the Iraq war has been a major issue.

Mortality was already high in Iraq before the war because of United Nations sanctions blocking food and medical imports but the researchers described what they found as shocking.

The new figures are based on surveys done by the researchers in Iraq in September 2004. They compared Iraqi deaths during 14.6 months before the invasion in March 2003 and the 17.8 months after it by conducting household surveys in randomly selected neighbourhoods.

Previous estimates based on think tank and media sources put the Iraqi civilian death toll at up to 16,053 and military fatalities as high as 6,370.

By comparison about 849 U.S. military were killed in combat or attacks and another 258 died in accidents or incidents not related to fighting, according to the Pentagon.

VERY BAD FOR IRAQI CIVILIANS
The researchers blamed air strikes for many of the deaths.

"What we have evidence of is the use of air power in populated urban areas and the bad consequences of it," Roberts said.

Gilbert Burnham, who collaborated on the research, said U.S. military action in Iraq was "very bad for Iraqi civilians".

"We were not expecting the level of deaths from violence that we found in this study and we hope this will lead to some serious discussions of how military and political aims can be achieved in a way that is not so detrimental to civilians populations," he told Reuters in an interview.

The researchers did 33 cluster surveys of 30 households each, recording the date, circumstances and cause of deaths.

They found that the risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher than before the war.

Before the war the major causes of death were heart attacks, chronic disorders and accidents. That changed after the war.

Two-thirds of violent deaths in the study were reported in Falluja, the insurgent held city 50 km west of Baghdad which had been repeatedly hit by U.S. air strikes.

"Our results need further verification and should lead to changes to reduce non-combatant deaths from air strikes," Roberts added in the study.

Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, said the research which was submitted to the journal earlier this month had been peer-reviewed, edited and fast-tracked for publication because of its importance in the evolving security situation in Iraq.

"But these findings also raise questions for those far removed from Iraq in the governments of the countries responsible for launching a pre-emptive war," Horton said in an editorial.

Could all of this have been avoided? What do we do now?
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
Any doubts about the GOP's position on the sanctity of life have now been erased...

{* Post edited 5/15/05 to remove link to sensitive material pending admin review.

Georgia Ketchmark
Martial Talk
Senior Moderator
*}


Graphic, but THIS is the truth. If there are children viewing this, I apologize to you, personally. Some lessons are hard to learn though...

upnorthkyosa

ps - the photos are really important for this thread. They really drive home the real cost of this war.
 

MA-Caver

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
14,960
Reaction score
308
Location
Chattanooga, TN
HA! I saw an episode of "Modern Marvels" on the History Channel a couple days ago and it talked about "The Deadiest Weapon"... thermonuclear warhead ranked #1 of course :rolleyes:. Seems ole' Donald Rumsfield should've watched that one. It talked about smart bombs and how the military and State Dept. are trying to eliminate civilian casualities using precision targeting systems on their "smart-bombs". Oh yeah they're smart when going for specific targets, but that's not all the bombs that we've been using over there. Clusters and other wonderful modern marvels are assuredly on the list.
In that short a time span we've killed as wontonly as Saddam.
Oh sure we're trying to oust insergents but they're living right amongst the populace and thus collateral damage has to be taken into account.
Ka-phooey, I say. 100,000 soldiers I'd have no beef about because that's WAR but 100,000 civilians who (we claim) are SOOO happy to have us there is just plain wasteful.
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
MACaver said:
HA! I saw an episode of "Modern Marvels" on the History Channel a couple days ago and it talked about "The Deadiest Weapon"... thermonuclear warhead ranked #1 of course :rolleyes:. Seems ole' Donald Rumsfield should've watched that one. It talked about smart bombs and how the military and State Dept. are trying to eliminate civilian casualities using precision targeting systems on their "smart-bombs". Oh yeah they're smart when going for specific targets, but that's not all the bombs that we've been using over there. Clusters and other wonderful modern marvels are assuredly on the list.
In that short a time span we've killed as wontonly as Saddam.
Oh sure we're trying to oust insergents but they're living right amongst the populace and thus collateral damage has to be taken into account.
Ka-phooey, I say. 100,000 soldiers I'd have no beef about because that's WAR but 100,000 civilians who (we claim) are SOOO happy to have us there is just plain wasteful.

One wonders when the first callous comments regarding the "costs of war" will come? :rolleyes:
 

Adept

Master Black Belt
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
1,225
Reaction score
12
Location
Melbourne, Australia
I think, according to these figures, that an american soldiers is three times as likely to die in iraq as an iraqi civilian.

But added to that, what figures are being used? Yes, civilian deaths are regretable. And yes, that is the cost of war. But are we simply taking the rate of deaths since occupation and comparing that to rates of death prior to the invasion? Because I doubt Saddam was big on keeping the death rates publicised.

At any rate, no ammount of mourning will bring back the dead. All we can do now is hope for the best possible resolution to the situation. We won't even know if we've done the right thing for maybe fifty years.
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
Adept said:
I think, according to these figures, that an american soldiers is three times as likely to die in iraq as an iraqi civilian.

But added to that, what figures are being used? Yes, civilian deaths are regretable. And yes, that is the cost of war. But are we simply taking the rate of deaths since occupation and comparing that to rates of death prior to the invasion? Because I doubt Saddam was big on keeping the death rates publicised.

At any rate, no ammount of mourning will bring back the dead. All we can do now is hope for the best possible resolution to the situation. We won't even know if we've done the right thing for maybe fifty years.

There is valid argument regarding the figures in the article. Yet, in other sources, the number of iraqis killed that has been reported by the media alone is nearly 20,000. The media isn't everywhere in Iraq.

Yes, Saddam was a brutal dictator, but people knew what they had to do in order to live and prosper. You didn't have bombs and bullets ripping through every neighborhood indiscriminately. In fact, one could even prosper...

Are the Iraqis better off now that Saddam is gone? That remains to be seen.

For every Iraqi child portrayed in the link above, that question has an answer now. And it doesn't take 50 years to answer it.

I'd like to photoshop some of those pictures and put the faces of a few white bright eyed american children into that horror. Then I wouldn't mine parading that in front of the white house or in some other "red" states. I'd have a few questions prepared...

"Now, do you think we should have tried harder to do this peacefully?" and "Is this the price you want to pay in order to 'reform Islam by force?'" and "Do you think stuff like this makes us any friends in the Arab world?"

If you voted for Bush (or for Kerry for that matter) and you tell me how moral you are, look at those pictures and goddammit you've got a lot of explaining to do...

upnorthkyosa

ps - as a parent of two beautiful children that I love more then anything in the world, I can't look at those pictures without feeling an anger that nearly unseats my reason.
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
AnimEdge said:
War is Hell

This is why war is hell...I don't think you get it.

Would you want this hell for your children/brother/sisters?



(* Post Edited to remove the uploaded images. They do not meet our rules and guidelines on Image Posting:
Image Posting Policy:
1- If it is of a particularly sensitive nature, it must be -clearly- labeled as such, and -only- posted as a clickable link.
2-No nudity, or suggestive images in either format. Must be kid safe. No Pornographic Material. Any sexually oriented imagery or links to such content will not be tolerated.

The request is a PG-13 ish posting, and in this case those picutre even though relavent, were not linked and warning posted, and not kid safe.

Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Super Moderator
*)
 
A

AnimEdge

Guest
Why dont we post up some pictures of kids of Domestic Violence, Homeless Kids eh, Kids hit by Drunk Drivers? Ok my saying was wrong, People are Hell
 
A

AnimEdge

Guest
What is this about Carpet Bombing or about War effect on kids? cuz if its about Carpet Bombing then my last reply is out of place
 

shesulsa

Columbia Martial Arts Academy
MT Mentor
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
May 27, 2004
Messages
27,182
Reaction score
480
Location
Not BC, Not DC
Moderators Note:

Thread moved to Premium Club due to graphic content - thread will be reviewed by admin.

Georgia Ketchmark
MT Senior Moderator
 

Rich Parsons

A Student of Martial Arts
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Oct 13, 2001
Messages
15,951
Reaction score
517
Location
Michigan
Mod. Note.
We require that the conversation is kept to a kid-safe level. We removed the uploaded pictures.

For conversation of a more mature nature, consider becoming a Premium member which gives access to the Premium Club as well as our Arcade. Details can be found here: http://www.martialtalk.com/premiummembership.shtml

Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Super Moderator


Thread moved back to the Study
 

terryl965

<center><font size="2"><B>Martial Talk Ultimate<BR
MTS Alumni
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Messages
41,259
Reaction score
337
Location
Grand Prairie Texas
AnimEdge said:
Why dont we post up some pictures of kids of Domestic Violence, Homeless Kids eh, Kids hit by Drunk Drivers? Ok my saying was wrong, People are Hell
I do feel for your statement but you have to remember in America the system is all wrong when it comes down to domestic violence, homeless childern our goverment feel the need to help other countrys before they support us and our homeless. It's called Gov. plan and simple
 
A

AnimEdge

Guest
That is true

(This is a diffrence of opinion nothing i say is personal attack or whatever to anyone you guys are all great)

"Yes, Saddam was a brutal dictator, but people knew what they had to do in order to live and prosper. You didn't have bombs and bullets ripping through every neighborhood indiscriminately. In fact, one could even prosper..."

That should prove how well people adabt(sp) how long was Saddam a Dictator? Long enough for people to figure out how the "System" worked to find ways around it

"I'd like to photoshop some of those pictures and put the faces of a few white bright eyed american children into that horror. Then I wouldn't mine parading that in front of the white house or in some other "red" states. I'd have a few questions prepared..."

This is what my Domastic Violence comment was about, "Oh no where killing woman and children (sence about all the males are in the army) with carpet bombing this is horrable" "But what about little Johnny and Susie down the street being abused by their Dad?" "Johnny who?"

Callateral Damage i think is a word one can use for this, it sucks yes, but its a fact of life, we should be greatfull that we can worry about kids of other countrys im sure that few over there care about the women and children in America (Dont they hate women over there? I forget) Maybe if they would fight in open fields and not in there houses or cars or suicide bombing then i would be more upset over this

I Voted for Bush and what explaining do i have to do?

Oh and are we still using Air Strikes(Carbet Bombing, Cluster Bombs, ect)? I didnt think we still where
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
AnimEdge said:
I Voted for Bush and what explaining do i have to do?

It's not just Bush. Plenty of democrats were jumping on the bandwagon...

Regardless, I have a few questions...

1. Is it okay to steal? How about kill?

2. When is violence appropriate? How about stealing?

3. Was Iraq a threat to our country?

4. Did we exhaust all peaceful options?

5. Was exhausting all peaceful options even in the administrations radar screen?

6. Do you think the invasion of Iraq gives us a strategic edge in the middle east?

7. What does "Reforming Islam by Force" sound like to you?

8. Are these dead children worth all of this????????????????

upnorthkyosa
 

Adept

Master Black Belt
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
1,225
Reaction score
12
Location
Melbourne, Australia
1. Is it okay to steal? How about kill?

When the situation calls for it, yes.

2. When is violence appropriate? How about stealing?

When the situation warrants it.

3. Was Iraq a threat to our country?

No. Or at least, I don't believe so.

4. Did we exhaust all peaceful options?

I doubt it.

5. Was exhausting all peaceful options even in the administrations radar screen?

Probably. War is incredibly expensive, and not even all the oil in Iraq is going to cover those costs.

6. Do you think the invasion of Iraq gives us a strategic edge in the middle east?

Yes and no.

7. What does "Reforming Islam by Force" sound like to you?

A dangerous idea.

8. Are these dead children worth all of this????????????????

That remains to be seen. How many women were saved from the rape chambers? how many lives must be paid for basic civil liberties?

We wont know if we've done the right thing until Iraq has stabilised itself, and begun on its new path. And that won't happen for a very long time.

upnorthkyosa[/QUOTE]
 

Gray Phoenix

Green Belt
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
131
Reaction score
9
Location
Tujunga, California
I had a political rant all typed up. I then realized what this is about...
How many lives is our security worth? I do not believe that someone who wants to kill another can be reasoned with, or bargained with, but am I willing to kill that person to prevent murder. How about those who protect the would be murder, or the people who are around him?

A terrorist who has surrounded himself with children is free to go? Should we try to stop him? If we could, how many dead children are acceptable? If the answer is zero, then we have now found a way for evil to protect itself.

If a terrorist really wanted to blow up a building, he can now pack a van full of explosives and kidnapped children and drive to his destination unhindered with full advertisements.

I AM NOT advocating the random slaughter of children, however, there are those that dont mind it. Our enemies know of our technological advantages, so is it not logical for them to avoid our technology and attack our hearts?

So again I ask the question, how many children are we as a nation willing to kill?
 
Top