Survey : More than 1 Million Iraqis killed

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Music_Producer, Jan 30, 2008.

  1. Music_Producer macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    #1
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080130/wl_nm/iraq_deaths_survey_dc

    "LONDON (Reuters) - More than one million Iraqis have died as a result of the conflict in their country since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, according to research conducted by one of Britain's leading polling groups.

    The survey, conducted by Opinion Research Business (ORB) with 2,414 adults in face-to-face interviews, found that 20 percent of people had had at least one death in their household as a result of the conflict, rather than natural causes."

    :eek:
     
  2. SilentPanda Moderator emeritus

    SilentPanda

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Bamboo Forest
    #2
    Some things I think polls are good for... some things I think are not. This would be an example of not. Any amount of deaths is unfortunate but I think this number is fairly high.

    Now the rest of this I'm just pulling out of memory and have no links to back me up but...

    I was thinking that only within the past few months have Iraqis been moving back to the country either due to feeling safer there now or due to lack of funds to maintain living outside their home country. I'm not sure how many people moved out but if enough moved out then you have to take into consideration you have:

    20% of the people currently residing in Iraq that knew somebody in their household + 80% of the people currently residing in Iraq the did not know somebody in their household + people that moved out = total population

    If the people that moved out is sizable enough then that would matter significantly. The poll was if they knew somebody in their household.

    Also this was pulled from a Digg.com comment so may or may not be valid...

    * We have been in Iraq for around 1800 days now. The number of deaths concluded by this survey indicates that, on average, 522 Iraqis have died every single day since the beginning of the conflict. Keep this drastic figure in mind for the rest of these points.

    * The highest one-day civilian death toll in Iraq, according to all media outlets ranging from independent Middle-Eastern media, to independent American media, to the main stream media, is no higher than 250. This means that every foreign and domestic media agency has failed to detect even half the deaths of the average daily death toll that ORB alleges.

    I dunno. I'm not saying it's not possible nor trying to disregard any real loss of life. I just think their stats might be a bit out of whack. Seems like a poor way to try to use statistics.
     
  3. JW8725 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    When u give bums that hang around malls weapons and tell them "Go fight Al Qaeda son in Iraq, do it for your country!" innocent blood is going to be spilt.

    I hope that war crimes proceedings can be bought against the biggest tyrants of them all. The current American Administration. Make no mistake America has managed to destroy Iraq.
     
  4. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #4
    It's hard to assess these things in a wartime situation like that in Iraq, but from what I've read, the Lancet papers' methodology was solid. Those showed, from some time ago, very very high casualty counts as well, though not as high as this survey. All I know is--it's a lot.
     
  5. Music_Producer thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    #5
    But do you really think anything will happen to the idiots who did all this? There is so much substantial evidence that the war was based on nothing but lies - still, nothing is done about it. It really infuriates me.. I mean, can you imagine what a petty thief might think? "Hey if Bush and co. can get away with killing so many people.. I should get away with stealing a few bucks"

    It's ludicrous that ordinary criminals can get imprisoned.. illegal music downloaders get fined, people get jailed for the stupidest things (don't pay taxes and get years in jail) - but organize such a big disaster.. kill so many people.. steal billions.. and nothing happens. WTF is wrong with this country and its people?
     
  6. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #6
    You obviously didn't read the article.

    It's not just a matter of those killed by gunfire, but also a matter of those who've died because hospitals have no electricity, drugs, equipment, etc; the number who have died from lack of clean water, etc, etc.

    War is more than just bullets ya know.
     
  7. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #7
    And if you don't believe it, go ask the Congo. As per a recent New York Times article, they have recently faced more healthcare related deaths secondary to the civil war than actual conflict deaths, since the civil war itself has been tamping down of late.
     
  8. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #8
    It's so much easier to sacrifice others than to make sacrifices ourselves.
     
  9. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #9
    What was the death toll before the war. Sadam numbers. Would the numbers be any different if he was still in power?
     
  10. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #10
    So, that's the bar? US Occupation: hey, in some ways, we're marginally better than Saddam!
     
  11. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #11
    Im saying, would the violence be any different no matter what happens. Does it matter that we are there or not. I wonder if the numbers are inflated.
     
  12. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #12
    Saddam was a paper tiger on his way out. There's simply no way that anyone could predict what would have happened if the war hadn't taken place.

    The point is the US went in without a plan and a million Iraqis are dead as a result. As well as a few thousand Americans.
     
  13. JW8725 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    Sorry but those "marines" killed in Iraq died for a completely nonsensical reason. Families have been torn apart because of your current Government. Yet I still see redneck parents saying crap about their children killed in action like "well I'm proud of my son, I support the war in Iraq"...etc. I'm thinking "hello wake up, Bush killed your child what have you to be proud about exactly? Where is Iraq relative to USA on a map?"

    This whole war is a farce, look how much it has cost your nation. Wouldn't that money have been better spent on domestic issues like bettering your health care for those not able to afford decent insurance.

    Frankly I'm disgusted along with the rest of the world at the news reports that come out from Iraq on a daily basis. Its like one day there are 50 dead, another day a roadside bomb kills another 20 and on and on.
     
  14. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #14
    saddam's death toll record was horrific.
    the estimates i've read indicate that during Saddam's regime, an AVERAGE of 30-50 people died per day as a direct consequence of the regime.
    to that you'd have to add the 500,000 people who died in the Iran war.

    these are huge numbers and do not include the indirect deaths, but they still are lower by a large margin to the current estimates.

    another interesting piece of data, to estimate those 'indirect' deaths is to look at infant mortality (under-1 infant deaths per 1,000 births), especially compared to its direct neighbors (iran and Syria).

    Syria: 102 (1965-1970) -> 40 (1985-1990) -> 18 (2000-2005)

    IRAQ: 97 (1965-1970) -> 48 (1985-1990) -> 94 (2000-2005)

    Iran: 133 (1965-1970) -> 69 (1985-1990) -> 34 (2000-2005)

    these are UN data and correspond to pre-saddam colonialist time, saddam-days pre-sanctions (in 1990) and post-sanctions pentades.
     
  15. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #15
    The ones who should be directly counting the numbers, namely iraqi gov and US army. are doing nothing to help the situation

    So, why should I not trust other numbers? because its too high? and who is to say its actually too "high"? based on what? Based on your believe? or your disbelieve?
     
  16. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68020

    SactoGuy18

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA USA
    #16
    I'd like to know who funded this study in the first place. If it's connected with one George Soros, then I take the results of the study with BIG block of salt. :rolleyes:
     
  17. JW8725 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    sorry pal but WHOS fault was that? These were US imposed sanctions. The US aggressively pushed for these. Then I'm pretty sure these "estimates" are American and completely bias anyway. The fact remains Geroge W Bush and every single American who voted for that imbecile have the blood of innocent humans on their hands. There is not any other way to look at this. You voted in this Hitler and he exterminated.
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #18
    Hey now, like it or not, every single Briton who voted for that imbecile Blair has the blood of innocent Iraqis on their hands too. The invasion would probably not have been politically possible without British support.
     
  19. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #19
    Well, 'pal', not only as skunk points out this is partly a british responsibility as well, but which part of my posting suggest that I am supporting the bush administration or I am minimizing the role the 'western' world had in this tragedy?

    i pointed to some numbers.
    the numbers suggest that Saddam has a lot of blood on his hands, which is nothing new (and he shed a lot of it with full british and american support). They also suggest that these same numbers are significantly LOWER than the current estimate of the war-dependent deaths (if correct).

    the UN infant mortality data -again, if correct- suggest the the UK-US sanctions interrupted a significant improvement in health conditions i Iraq under Saddam, that paralleled those in Syria and Iran. With the sactions and the war, those numbers went right back to the levels of the 50s. This indicate e very large number of 'avoidable deaths' that affects arguably the most innocent of us all: infants (especially given the high natality rate in the Mid-east, Iraq included).

    So, 'pal', before launching in random personal insults, which are always inappropriate anyway, i'd strongly reccomend you to actually read other people's posts, and possibly try to understand what they mean.

    You're not making your side (which happens to be largely mine as well) any favour by resorting to name calling and, more in general, by acting as an immature imbecile.

    sincerely,
    Don't Panic
     
  20. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #20
    They are supporting their kids more then anything else. I don't think they like that their sons are at war, but what are they going to say. Stupid kids wanting to join the army I will never speak to him again.:rolleyes: Like it or not but we are there now and we can't turn back the clock now can we.
     
  21. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #21
    It does nothing for your credibility when you call George Bush, Hitler.
    Then telling the folks who voted for him that they also have blood on their hands. Another poster was recently banned for such hate mongering as this.

    Associated Press



    Certainly this story may a cut off point where you would stop blaming the "occupation" for deaths and start blaming the criminals and thugs we so pleasantly call Al Qaida.
     
  22. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #22
    I would agree that he use of unwilling suicide bombers is a new low and that thugs and criminals are material to the deaths, but the "occupation" is not off the hook as it is still directly responsible for the situation.
     
  23. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #23
    I wouldnt say America, I would say washington or the republican liar party. I still think Bush & Cheney should be facing a trial for this one.
     
  24. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #24
    I think you could easily call all of them liars, not just Bush and co. The Dems have their share of liars as well. Just group all of Washington under that moniker.
     
  25. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #25
    I can't believe everyone is letting this go. You're kidding right? We know we've killed a large amount of Iraqis, not to mention all the collateral damage as pointed out above. And also as point out above, being slightly better than Saddam was after decades of him being in power (and even that's debatable, one could argue we have been worse) isn't good enough. Who cares who funded the study if it's true? And it appears to be. Tossing out the name of a liberal bogeyman doesn't negate that. Are you saying you trust the official number of the administration, who also have their own agenda? Which, I might also point out that, even though it's been proven to not include certain types of deaths, is still ridiculously high for a people we claim to be trying to save.
     

Share This Page