1.2 Million Iraqis killed in war

24

Comments

  • Posts: 21,037
    14. A recent Science Magazine article stated that Gilbert Burnham (one of your co-authors) didn't know how Iraqis on survey team conducted their work. The article also claimed that raw data was destroyed to protect the safety of interviewees. Is this true?

    LR: These statements are simply not true; and do not reflect anything said by Gilbert Burnham! He's submitted a letter to the editors of Science in response, which I hope they will print.

    15. A UNDP study carried out survey 13 months after the war that had a much higher sample size than both Lancet studies and found about 1/3 the numbers of deaths that your team has found. Given the much higher sample size shouldn't we assume the UNDP study was more accurate and that therefore your numbers are way too high?

    LR: The UNDP study was much larger, was led by the highly revered Jon Pederson at Fafo in Norway, but was not focused on mortality. His group conducted interviews about living conditions, which averaged about 82 minutes, and recorded many things. Questions about deaths were asked, and if there were any, there were a couple of follow-up questions.

    A) I suspect that Jon's mortality estimate was not complete. I say this because the overall non-violent mortality estimate was, I am told, very low compared to our 5.0 and 5.5/ 1000 /year estimates for the pre-war period which many critics (above) claim seems too low. Jon sent interviewers back after the survey was over to the same interviewed houses and asked just about <5 year old deaths. The same houses reported ~50% more deaths the second time around. In our surveys, we sent medical doctors who asked primarily about deaths. Thus, I think we got more complete reporting.

    B) This UNDP survey covered about 13 months after the invasion. Our first survey recorded almost twice as many violent deaths from the 13th to the 18th months after the invasion as it did during the first 12 (see figure 2 in the 2004 Lancet article). The second survey found an excess rate of 2/1000/year over the same period corresponding to approximately 55,000 deaths by April of 2004(see table 3 of 2006 Lancet article). Thus, the rates of violent death recorded in the two survey groups are not so divergent.
    Les Roberts Responds To Steven Moore Of The Wall Street Journal

    Moore's editorial can be read here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110009108

    Distinction between criticism and fabrication regarding deaths in Iraq

    I read with interest the October 18th editorial by Steven Moore reviewing our study reporting that an estimated 650,000 deaths were associated with the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq. I had spoken with Mr. Moore the week before when he said that he was writing something for the Wall Street Journal to put this survey in perspective. I am not surprised that we differed on the current relevance of 10 year-old census data in a country that had experienced a major war and mass exodus.

    I am not surprised at his rejection of my suggestion that the references in a web report explaining the methodology for lay people and reporters was not the same as the references in our painstakingly written peer reviewed article. What is striking is Mr. Moore's statement that we did not collect any demographic data, and his implication that this makes the report suspect.

    This is curious because, not only did I tell him that we asked about the age and gender of the living residents in the houses we visited, but Mr. Moore and I discussed, verbally and by e-mail, his need to contact the first author of the paper, Gilbert Burnham, in order to acquire this information as I did not have the raw data. I would assume that this was simply a case of multiple misunderstandings except our first report in the Lancet in 2004 referenced in our article as describing the methods states, ".interviewees were asked for the age and sex or every current household member."

    Thus, it appears Mr. Moore had not read the description of the methods in our reports. It is not important whether this fabrication that "no demographic data was collected" is the result of subconscious need to reject the results or whether it was intentional deception. What is important, is that Mr. Moore and many others are profoundly uncomfortable that our government might have inadvertently triggered 650,000 deaths.

    Most days in the US, more than 5000 people die. We do not see the bodies. We cannot, from our household perspective, sense the fraction from violence. We rely on a functional governmental surveillance network to do that for us. No such functional network exists in Iraq. Our report suggests that on top of the 300 deaths that must occur in Iraq each day from natural causes; there have been approximately 500 "extra" deaths mostly from violence.

    Of any high profile scientific report in recent history, ours might be the easiest to verify. If we are correct, in the morgues and graveyards of Iraq, most deaths during the occupation would have been due to violence. If Mr. Bush's "30,000 more or less" figure from last December is correct, less than 1 in 10 deaths has been from violence. Let us address the discomfort of Mr. Moore and millions of other Americans, not by uninformed speculation about epidemiological techniques, but by having the press travel the country and tell us how people are dying in Iraq.
  • Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I think it's disgusting that you can take such a blase attitude to these reports. Both surveys were conducted by highly respected institutions whose findings in many fields have been praised and accepted by the same people who denounce their findings in Iraq.
    Your comment is an insult to all those men women and children who have died and are dying over there, including Americans.

    sorry I dont find it to be accurate. no matter how long your replies of cutting and pasting are.
  • Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    sorry I dont find it to be accurate. no matter how long your replies of cutting and pasting are.

    So you're an expert on these surveys are you? Did you even read the article above? The figures they have come up with are 'conservative estimates', but because you know better, the figures must be exagerrated, right?
  • "A deafening silence on report of one million Iraqis killed under US occupation"

    "The reaction to the ORB report in the US political and media establishment was virtual silence. After scattered newspaper reports Friday, there was no coverage on the Friday evening television newscasts or on the cable television news stations. There was no comment from the Bush White House, the Pentagon, or the State Department, and not a single Republican or Democratic presidential candidate or congressional leader made an issue of it. On the Sunday morning talk shows on all four broadcast networks the subject was not raised."

    http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=144&a=3566
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Posts: 1,146
    jlew24asu wrote:
    making up stuff is fun

    The numbers presented are vertiginous, and even nauseating. But why do you dismiss them without even a second thought? Why does this seem so far out that you're willing to close your eyes on the largest genocide since, well since a long time?
  • Posts: 21,037
    Kann wrote:
    The numbers presented are vertiginous, and even nauseating. But why do you dismiss them without even a second thought? Why does this seem so far out that you're willing to close your eyes on the largest genocide since, well since a long time?

    http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=144&a=3566

    This article Roland posted a link to sums it up pretty well:

    'Opinion Research Business (ORB), founded by the former head of British operations for the Gallup polling organization, is a well-established commercial polling firm. It gave a detailed technical description of the methods used to make a scientific random sample.

    Six months ago, by contrast, an ORB survey in Iraq was hailed by the White House because some of its findings could be given a positive spin in administration propaganda. That survey, conducted in February and made public March 18 in the Sunday Times of London, found that only 27 percent of Iraqis believed their country was in a state of civil war and that a majority supported the Maliki government and the US military “surge,” and believed life was getting better in their country.

    That survey also reported figures on violence that largely dovetail with those of the survey conducted in August and reported last Friday, including 79 percent of Baghdad residents experiencing either a violent death or kidnapping in their immediate family or workplace. But its findings of Iraqi political opinions—not the figures on deaths—were given headline treatment in the US press, with articles in the Washington Post, the Christian Science Monitor and other national media outlets.

    White House press spokesman Tony Snow cited the ORB poll at a March 23 news briefing, when he used its findings to rebut the results of a poll of Iraqis by ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the German ARD network and USA Today newspaper. Asked about the ABC poll’s finding that Iraqis were more pessimistic about the future, Snow declared, “there was also a British poll at the same time that had almost diametrically opposed results.” He added that the British poll had “twice the sample” of the ABC poll, and should therefore be considered more authoritative.

    The March ORB poll was widely hailed in the far-right media, including Fox News Network. The right-wing magazine National Review declared, “Supporters of Operation Iraqi Freedom will be buoyed by a new poll of Iraqis showing high levels of support for the Baghdad security plan and the elected government implementing it.”

    The latest ORB poll, focusing on the enormous death toll produced by the US invasion, has received no such positive reception at the White House. There is, of course, ample reason for such hostility. The figures reported by ORB undermine Bush administration claims that its goal in Iraq is to “liberate” the Iraqi people from tyranny and terrorism, or to defend “freedom and democracy.”

    ...Equally significant is the silence from congressional Democrats and the Democratic presidential candidates, all of whom claim to be opposed to the Iraq war. This antiwar posturing, however, has nothing in common with genuine compassion for the plight of the Iraqi people or principled opposition to the predatory interests of American imperialism in the oil-rich country.

    The Democrats oppose the Bush administration’s conduct of the war, not because it has been a bloody and criminal operation, but because it has been mismanaged and unsuccessful in accomplishing the goal of plundering Iraq’s oil resources and strengthening the strategic position of US imperialism in the Middle East.

    The Democrats do not want to highlight the massive scale of the bloodbath in Iraq, as suggested by the ORB survey, because they share political responsibility for the war, from the vote to authorize the use of force in October 2002, to the repeated congressional passage of bills to fund the war, at a total cost of more than $600 billion. In any war crimes trial over the near-genocide in Iraq, leading Democrats would take their place in the dock, second only to the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld war cabal.'
  • Well you see it's much harder to censor the internet. The internet is the last bastion of real democracy.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • How many of those deaths were at the hands of fellow iraqi's?
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • How many of those deaths were at the hands of fellow iraqi's?
    3

    hhehehehe...........

    whats up my friend????
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Posts: 8,066
    How many of those deaths were at the hands of fellow iraqi's?


    So are you saying that is was stupid to get rid of Saddam? He did keep things in check. ;) Keep your hands in your own pockets.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • Posts: 1,146
    How many of those deaths were at the hands of fellow iraqi's?

    I don't know if this question is relevant. The study does not try to find a culprit but to assess the number of deaths in this 4 year war. The only thing you can conclude right now is that this war is much more murderous than the official conclusions would show.
    There can be no judgment before the war comes to an end.
  • Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    So you're an expert on these surveys are you? Did you even read the article above? The figures they have come up with are 'conservative estimates', but because you know better, the figures must be exagerrated, right?

    where are the mass graves of all these people? 1.2 million huh? bodies have to be somewhere.

    and where is your outrage for Iraqis killing each other? if 1.2 million is even close to true. 99% of that number is Iraqis killing Iraqis. cant that be held accountable for the death?
  • 3

    hhehehehe...........

    whats up my friend????

    Hiya speedy! Only 3 eh? Well, at least the blood isnt only on the US's hands then. ;)
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • Kann wrote:
    I don't know if this question is relevant. The study does not try to find a culprit but to assess the number of deaths in this 4 year war. The only thing you can conclude right now is that this war is much more murderous than the official conclusions would show.
    There can be no judgment before the war comes to an end.

    Well, the study may not be in search of a culprit, but the OP sure is.
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • Posts: 21,037
    How many of those deaths were at the hands of fellow iraqi's?

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/sep2007/orb-s15.shtml
    'The survey found that 48 percent of the violent deaths were due to gunshot wounds, 20 percent to car bombs, 9 percent to aerial bombardment, 6 percent to other ordnance or explosions, and 6 percent to accidents.

    The figure for aerial bombardments is particularly noteworthy since such deaths—numbering well over 100,000 according to the ORB study—go virtually unreported in the American media. This is doubtless because such killings are entirely the work of the US and British occupation forces, the only ones equipped with helicopters and warplanes.'
  • Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    where are the mass graves of all these people? 1.2 million huh? bodies have to be somewhere.

    Did you not bother to read the articles posted which explain the subject matter at hand?

    http://medialens.org/alerts/06/061031_lancet_co_author.php
    '3. Why is it so hard for people to believe the Lancet report?
    I am an Iraqi and can assure you that the figure given is nearer to the truth than any given before or since.
    S Kazwini, London, UK

    LR: I think it is hard to accept these results for a couple of reasons. People do not see the bodies. While in the UK there are well over 1000 deaths a day, they do not see the bodies there either. Secondly, people feel that all those government officials and all those reporters must be detecting a big portion of the deaths. When in actuality during times of war, it is rare for even 20% to be detected. Finally, there has been so much media attention given to the surveillance-based numbers put out by the coalition forces, the Iraqi Government and a couple of corroborating groups, that a population-based number is a dramatic contrast.'

    jlew24asu wrote:
    and where is your outrage for Iraqis killing each other? if 1.2 million is even close to true. 99% of that number is Iraqis killing Iraqis. cant that be held accountable for the death?


    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/sep2007/orb-s15.shtml
    'The survey found that 48 percent of the violent deaths were due to gunshot wounds, 20 percent to car bombs, 9 percent to aerial bombardment, 6 percent to other ordnance or explosions, and 6 percent to accidents.

    The figure for aerial bombardments is particularly noteworthy since such deaths—numbering well over 100,000 according to the ORB study—go virtually unreported in the American media. This is doubtless because such killings are entirely the work of the US and British occupation forces, the only ones equipped with helicopters and warplanes.'
  • Posts: 5,515
    If Iraq is "free" now, how come we're not getting any Iraqi news feeds?

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Am I supposed to care? The US government is breeding its citizens to have the "take care of numero uno" and fuck everyone else mentality.
    "It's all happening"
  • Posts: 1,693
    Gue, good question.

    Indian Summer: Grow up and get a conscience. Get an "other worldy" view. Or get a stilleto in your crotch, whatever wakes you up.

    Peace,
    Bu
    Feels Good Inc.
  • Bu2 wrote:
    Gue, good question.

    Indian Summer: Grow up and get a conscience. Get an "other worldy" view. Or get a stilleto in your crotch, whatever wakes you up.

    Peace,
    Bu

    Just saying that's how it is. There's nothing you or I can do about.
    "It's all happening"

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.