COMMENTS: 40
Iraq's Bloody Toll: History Repeats Itself
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest World headlines via email.
The great 19th-century Tory Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli once remarked there were three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. It is a dictum the Bush administration has taken to heart when it comes to totaling up the carnage in Iraq: If you don't like the numbers, just change them; and when in doubt, look 'em in the eye and lie.
For instance, according to the Department of Defense (DOD), the United States does not track civilian casualties. As former commander General Tommy Franks put it, "We don't do body counts."
But testimony in the recent trial of U.S. Army snipers from the First Battalion of the 501 Infantry regiment indicated the generals indeed do body counts. In a July hearing at Fort Liberty, Iraq, Sgt. Anthony G. Murphy said he and other snipers felt "an underlying tone" of disappointment from their commanders when they didn't rack up big body counts.
"It just kind of felt like, 'What are you guys doing wrong out there?'" he testified. When the snipers started setting traps to lure in unsuspecting Iraqis, the kill ratios went up and the commanders, he said, were pleased.
The choreography the Bush administration does around casualties is aimed at creating a dance of lies and disinformation to cover up one of the worst humanitarian crises to strike the Middle East since the Mongols sacked Baghdad.
That is not an overstatement.
A recent poll by the British agency Opinion Research Business (ORB) found that the war may have killed more than one million people, a toll that surpasses the 800,000 killed in the Rwandan genocide. The ORB used "excess mortality" as its measure, that is, deaths over and above mortality figures from the past.
The Grim Numbers
Trying to figure out the butcher bill in Iraq is an uphill task.
For instance, according to the London-based organization Iraq Body Count, by March of this year, civilian deaths stood at 65,160, although the organization noted that 2007 has seen "the worst violence against civilians in Iraq since the invasion." The conservative Brookings Institute's Iraq Index posts slightly higher figures, and the United Nations higher still.
The Iraq Interior Ministry is highly critical of the UN's conclusion that 34,000 Iraqis died in 2006, calling the figures "inaccurate" and "unbalanced," but refuses to release its own figures. And the only sum the Bush administration has ever come up with is when the president commented to the press in December 2005 that the number of Iraqis killed was "30,000, more or less."
The first serious statistical investigation of the war's impact was a survey by Johns Hopkins University published in the British medical magazine, The Lancet. According to the study, from the March 2003 invasion through September 2006, the number of deaths due to the war was 654, 965 Over half of those were women and children. The Johns Hopkins study also used the "excess mortality" methodology, which measures not only deaths from war, but violent crime and disease. It found that 91.8% of the excess mortality was due to violence, 31% of that inflicted by coalition forces.
President Bush immediately dismissed the study's methodology as "pretty well discredited," and the media either ignored it or accepted the White House's characterization.
In fact, there is virtual unanimity among biostaticians and mortality experts that the methodology used in the Johns Hopkins study is accurate. Following up on an earlier version of the study, Liala Guterman, a senior reporter for the Chronicle of Higher Education, says she contacted 10 experts in the field about the Lancet article, and "not one of them took issue with the study's methods or conclusions." Indeed, she said, the experts found the conclusions "cautious."
According to John Zogby of Zogby International, one of the world's most respected polling services, "The sampling [in the Lancet survey] is solid, the methodology is as good as it gets." Ronald Waldman, a Columbia University epidemiologist, said the method was "tried and true," and British Defense Ministry science advisor, Sir Roy Anderson, said the survey was "close to the best practice."
Indeed, the Bush administration used exactly the same methodology to determine the number of deaths in Darfur, figures that were used to convince the U.S. Congress to label the current crisis in the Sudan "genocide."
U.S. Casualties
The administration's sleight of hand on deaths and casualties even extends to its own forces. There are, for instance, no hard figures on the number of private U.S. and British contractors wounded or killed, even though private contractors outnumber the number of coalition troops in Iraq.
And when casualty statistics come out in ways the DOD doesn't like, it just changes how they are counted.
On January 29, 2007, the Pentagon listed 47,657 "non-mortal" casualties in Iraq. One day later this number had fallen to 31,493 by the simple device of dropping any casualty that did not require "medical air transport." The DOD also doesn't include vehicle accidents, or soldiers who are taken ill, including those with mental problems.
Other Consequences
No one has systematically collected information on the number of Iraqis wounded by the war, although a ratio of two or three to one wounded to killedin excess of one million people -- is considered a good rule-of-thumb figure.
Besides the deaths and injuries, the war had unleashed, according to the Financial Times, "The worst refugee crisis in the Middle East since the mass exodus of Palestinians that was part of the violent birth of the state of Israel in 1948." According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, 2.2 million Iraqis have fled their country, mostly to Jordan and Syria, and another 2 million have been turned into internal refugees. If one adds to that the ORB figures for deaths, it means at least 20% of Iraqi's pre-war population of 26 million has been killed, wounded, exiled, or displaced.
The White House has simply ignored the refugee crisis.
In 2006, the United States budgeted $3 million for refugees, although according to Amman-based researcher Noah Merrill, none of the relief organizations, including the UN, has seen any of that money. And if they had, Merrill points out, it would come to a grand total of $3.50 per person. "Jordan is an expensive country, " he says, "and $3.50 will not help anyone -- not even for a day."
Half of Iraq's population are children, nearly 20% of them under the age of five. Some 25% are malnourished and 10% suffer from acute malnutrition. According to a UNICEF study, 70% of Iraqi's children suffer from traumatic stress syndrome.
Food rationing, a system on which five million Iraqis rely to stay alive, is breaking down, and according to Patrick Cockburn of The Independent, two million can no longer be fed because of security concerns. Unemployment is at 68%. Once the most industrial country in the Arab world, Iraq is devolving into an oil-rich, agrarian backwater. Some 75% of the country's doctors and pharmacists have fled, bringing its medical system -- at one time the best in the Arab world -- to the point of collapse.
And finally, like a biblical plague, cholera is working itself down the country's river system, from the Kurdish north to Basra in the south. Over 7,000 cases have been confirmed in northern Iraq, according to the World Health Organization.
In 1258 the Mongol generals Hulagu and Guo Kan besieged and took the city of Baghdad. They murdered its inhabitants, burned its libraries, and ravished its lands. The Bush administration has done the same, but hidden it behind a smoke screen of lies and voodoo statistics.
For the average Iraqi, there is little difference between the Mongols and the United States. Both have laid waste to their country.
Stay up to date with the latest World headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rocketman on Oct 19, 2007 12:13 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As to the deaths, regardless of the numbers it's mainly Iraqi's killing Iraqi's..and Americans - In hindsight, Saddam turned out to be the worlds best bet at keeping things in balance in Iraq - so he killed, raped and tortured for his pleasure. - most seem ok with that. What Iraq needs - seems to want - is another Saddam - amazing isnt it!
The sad truth is that we got ourselves into what is probably the worst foreign policy blunder in the nation and have republicans and democrats to blame for it. Do we really care that Saddam was such a madman - we don't seem to care about Darfur and Arabs are doing the killing there. The wonders of oil!
They can count bodies all they want - point fingers all they want but the bottom line is no one seems capabe of extracting us from this. The killing, and occupation, will go on for years to come! Unless of course we attack Iran then we can leave Iraq in peace!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Another fine mess..............
Posted by: hilaryuk
» RE: Did you see the news?
Posted by: pammers
» RE: Did you see the news?
Posted by: mjglow
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thekidde on Oct 19, 2007 12:40 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: thekidde
Posted by: oldwoman
» RE: thekidde....this
Posted by: Captainmagic
» RE: thekidde
Posted by: alphaeagle
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CJC on Oct 19, 2007 1:43 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As this article correctly states, The Johns Hopkins study of Iraqi deaths that was published twice in the Lancet is based on the same kind of structured sampling frame that polling organizations use all the time to estimate public opinion. Sample sizes are usually about 1000 and as we know give pretty accurate estimates of public opinion, often broken down by age, sex, region etc etc. The news media know these are generally reliable. Therefore, their swallowing the administration's kool aid about the unreliability of the Johns Hopkins study is just enabling bs.
The human beings who die as a result of the violence and chaos of war in Iraq are just as dead as the Armenians who died in Anatolia in 1915. The difference might be that we tolerate this violence to others in the name of giving them freedom and saving them from Saddam Hussein, who also slaughtered a million of his own citizens.
The Iraqi refugee crisis - the estimated 2 million internally displaced and the 2.5 million who have fled abroad - gets much less publicity than it ought. And the fact that the US has admitted a mere handful of Iraqis is scandalous. Does Bush believe that God is whispering in his ear that this is OK?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: vox persona on Oct 20, 2007 12:27 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TT18 on Oct 20, 2007 12:59 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» a Reverand Sun Myung Moon owned newspaper editorial
Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: a Reverand Sun Myung Moon owned newspaper editorial
Posted by: bobtr900
Comments are closed-
Posted by: richholland on Oct 20, 2007 3:40 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NATO europe is warned by Europeans no more soldiers for USA adventures...
read Orwell 1984....
But you still can vote Obama???
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: world war III
Posted by: dannrusso
» RE: world war III
Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 20, 2007 9:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Robert Fisk, writing in the Independent, June 17, 2004:
"Our story begins in March 1917 as 22-year old Private 11072 Charles Dickens of the Chesire Regiment peels a poster off a wall in the newly captured city of Baghdad. It is a turning point in his life. He has survived the hopeless Gallipoli campaign, attacking the Ottoman empire only 150 miles from its capital, Constantinople. He has then marched the length of Mesopotamia, fighting the Turks yet again for possession of the ancient caliphate, and enduring the grim battle for Baghdad. The British invasion army of 600,000 soldiers was led by Lieutenant-General Sir Stanley Maude..."
"...the British, once they were installed in Baghdad, decided in the winter of 1917 that Iraq would have to be governed and reconstructed by a "council" formed partly of British advisers "and partly of representative non-official members from among the inhabitants." The copycat 2003 version of this "council" was, of course, the Interim Governing Council, supposedly the brainchild of Maude's American successor, Paul Bremer."
So, here we are again - seeking to control Iraq's massive oil reserves, which amount to a minimum of 100 billion barrels of oil - and at $100 a barrel, that's $10 trillion dollars worth - massive, massive wealth, as Petraeus has gleefully pointed out.
Daniey Yergin, author of "The Prize" (and Bush's Economic Adviser), wrote that:
"But the oil potential of Mesopotamia was not forgotten. In late 1915 and 1916, a British official and a Frenchman hammered out an understanding for the postwar order in Mesopotamia. Known by their names as the Sykes-Picot agreement, it rather casually assigned Mosul in northeastern Mesopotamia, one of the most promising potential oil regions, to a future French sphere of influence... The issue became more urgent in 1917 when British forces captured Baghdad."
Think of our British private Dickens as your average US soldier in Iraq today..Now, let's look at the post WWI-era in Mesopotamia through Yergin's lens:
"...But oil exploration and production in Iraq could not begin without a new, sounder concession granted by the government. For one thing, Washington consistently refused to recognize the validity of the 1914 grant to the Turkish Petroleum company. Allen Dulles, the chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs in the State Department, carefully monitored the long negotiations for the U.S. government. In 1924, he told Teagle [head of Standard Oil] that the United States government believed that the Turkish Petroleum Company's claim to a concession was "invalid". . . . Yet the various Iraqi cabinets, fearful of nationalist sentiments and domestic criticism - which sometimes expressed itself in the form of assassination - were most reluctant to take responsibility for signing over a revised concession to the foreigners."
Dulles, of course, went on to fame as head of the CIA from 1953-1961 - an era during which he had the nationalist leader of Iran, Mossadegh, removed from power in the first of a long string of CIA-sponsored coups. He also initiated MK-ULTRA, which began the CIA torture program that eventually arrived at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
The story is the same today: the war in Iraq, the military effort to topple the government of Iran, all wrapped up in the desire to control Mideast Oil. Now, just as then, the "council" is resisting the hydrocarbon law because they know it would only inflame nationalist sentiments.
Our leaders don't know much history, do they?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» "Our leaders" are Not the Clowns Advertised...
Posted by: stryder
» RE: Well, the British did the same thing in 1917...and there we are now.
Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Trixie on Oct 20, 2007 10:13 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: MizBurns
Posted by: bobtr900
» A self-imposed Armageddon?
Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ekipnrut on Oct 20, 2007 2:23 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
USA WCriminals
for procedural details ,historical context and legal precedent.
Consult:
I have no legs for example of the evidentiary material supporting the primary charges to be set forth in indictments.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VAGreen on Oct 20, 2007 3:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You can say one thing for the Mongols...
Posted by: PakiBoy
» RE: You can say one thing for the Mongols...
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: stryder on Oct 20, 2007 3:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Put another way, “war on terror” has zero to do with democracy, freedom, free markets or “capitalism”. It is genocide paid for at public cost for Fascist corporate profit. (But that is global war in a nutshell)
As long as Americans can be deceived by corporate Fascist media into thinking the Mid East / Eurasia is about cheap patriotism and “fighting them over there so we don’t fight them here” – the Big Oil killing fields go on.
And never mind that false 9/11 “war on terror” with “al-Qaeda” was created and run by CIA-MI6-Saudi money as it still is.
Never mind that Saddam and 20 other dictators were bulldozed in by CIA bagmen to butcher millions of their own people for monopoly corporate crime.
“War on terror” is little more than genocide by fat and cozy western Fascists intent on divide and conquer for bloody Big Oil in freeloading petrodollars.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: The Realizer on Oct 20, 2007 10:32 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to mention the killing of several hundred thousand noncombatents (civilians) women and kids. Mr. Hussein would have cheerfully sold us the oil a hell of a lot cheaper than we are able to steal the damn stuff. Mr shrubs adventurism has cost grevious saddness to several thousand families. And now we beat the drum for Iran....HELP STOP THIS MADNESS!!!!!!!!!!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: We should be PROUD
Posted by: richholland
» RE: We should be PROUD
Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: We should be PROUD
Posted by: mjglow
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bobtr900 on Oct 22, 2007 12:45 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And just thin Pope John Paul II started all of this cabal of horrors when he aligned the Catholic Church, my Church, with Reagan and the Republican Party. Said alignment continues to this very day. Thank you Pope John Paul just look at your handy work. Aren't you proud of yourself and the Catholic Church.
When is the Church going to make restitution for it's complicity with Hitler and the Nazis. And exactly when will it make restitution for it's latest diabolical, could we almost say satanic, debacle. The fact of the matte is that it can never make restitution for all the misery, torture and death it has brought to the world since it's inception. Starting with it's 2000yr. hatred of the Jews and it's equally long history of the USING of women and keepong of women in a third class limbo/status.
I just really wonder how Catholic men let their wivs with ectopic pregnancies just die while they stand around congratulating themselves for their piety. The K of C and Jeb Bush(Catholic and K of C) will make sure this agenda of death for women becomes the law of the land. And while I'm at it how many women in Scalias, Thomas's, Robert's, Alito's and Kennedy's family's will they allow to die. Speak up you right winger death Gestapo.
And this is what the Church calls pro-life and family values.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: YUP
Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bobtr900 on Oct 22, 2007 1:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: votenic on Oct 22, 2007 7:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.votenic.com
Results Posted Tuesday Evening.
FREE, NON-BIASED
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
On Anniversary of Iraq Invasion, Time to Rethink Anti-War Activism
The Timing Is Ripe for Obama to Make Demands on Israel to Settle for Peace
Juarez Prison Celebrates International Women's Day With Lurid "Captive Beauty" Pageant




