world

85,000 Iraqis killed in almost 5 years of war

36 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

36 Comments
Login to comment

The vast majority of those 85,000 deaths were caused by extremist wackos.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - the American extremists or others?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: funny you had to rush and here and say that -- usually people who get so defensive are guilty (or defending the guilty). You have no way to verify who was killed by whom, the same as this number could be true or could be utter hogwash (I suspect the latter, but as I said there's no way to prove it). But go ahead and keep telling yourself what you said if it makes you sleep better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

browny1 - You're confusing brave U.S. troops with the extremist wackos who would torture and kill you without hesitation or remorse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wait a minute... only 85,000 deaths? But CNN said it was 655,000 deaths, with around a third of them caused by coalition ( U.S. ) forces...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Amin said the missing figures were based on people who came to the ministry to report a missing relative, something that many Iraqis, who feared reprisals and were hesitant to draw attention to themselves, were loathe to do.

I could have gotten a more accurate number counting rocks in the desert, or stars in the sky. The whole basis for the number is total malarky.

Moreover, this would be a specific number, yet what we get are figures rounded off to the thousands? Baloney. And it says they cut out deaths that were not violent and the year 2003? How? Reports of missing people do not include how they died or when! If you knew that, you would not be reporting people missing! What complete garbage!

The most intelligent line:

At best, the numbers released by the Human Rights Ministry and those obtained by the AP are a minimum of the number who died.

I am not even sure if by the methods we could even consider this to be the bottom of the bell curve. Even if it were, you know what the bottom of the bell curve is good for? A starting point for your pencil to make a sharp upward stroke. That is it.

Clearly, these numbers are designed to please Americans and the Brits and a few others, whose support the Iraqi government still needs. Its hogwash. Its pandering. And its embarrassing that anyone from my country would swallow this hooey. First they got duped into supporting the war. But instead of learing the lesson, they opt to get duped again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

would saddam hussein have killed that many in that space of time sarge? who did you help out in the end? what a waste of life, and money

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The vast majority of those 85,000 deaths were caused by extremist wackos.

Yes, most of them from the "Coalition of the Willing"

You're confusing brave U.S. troops with the extremist wackos who would torture and kill you without hesitation or remorse.

Torture? Oh, I see, you're just #&$!ing with us. You ARE joking, right?

One major excuse given for invading Iraq, along with the WMDs (there were none), was that Saddam allegedly gassed his own people. So they barge in and wreck the place, resulting in so many more casualties than Saddam could ever have caused.

Wait a minute... only 85,000 deaths? But CNN said it was 655,000 deaths...

Yes, but its AT LEAST 85000 deaths, and its from 2004-2008, and its an official Iraq government figure. I guess many more died during the initial US-led invasion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Only 85 thousand Iraqis killed!That's a number much lower than the one their dictator Saddam Hussein, who tried to play a little of that high stakes Texas Hold Em with Mr Bush,lost and got himself hanged,would have killed in the same period.That means everything is backwards.Supporters of the Coalition of the Willing, like me, were right, and all the rest were wrong!Knew it all along I did.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

who tried to play a little of that high stakes Texas Hold Em with Mr Bush

like I thought, little boys still in the playground. what it's all about. rhymes with drole, starts with a 'T'

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Next time lets try a slow crumbling of the regime like the fall of the communism in East Europe.

About who killed the people, in my opinion any invading and later ocupation force have responsability of the security of the civilians. No one can say that is in charge of the security of the place and later say "its not my fault if they killed each other when I replaced the local security".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dear Sarge, You are confusing brave U.S. troops with the extremely cowardly and whacko government and certain people of America who will bomb and kill you and have no hesitation to accept extremely low numbers to avoid the torture of remorse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

85,000+ dead Iraqis in 5 years, over 4300 Americans dead and a $3Trillion debt for this war before end. Such a waste while Sarge parades. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The terror-makers got smashed! Mr Bush won, everybody else lost.Must be why the AlQaida boys are trying so hard in Afghanistan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

War crimes happened and the guilty are still free. The whole invasion was a hoax who justifications changed nearly monthly. In the end another country is destroyed and hundreds of thousands are dead. Nothing is accomplished.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "browny1 - You're confusing brave U.S. troops with the extremist wackos who would torture and kill you without hesitation or remorse."

Like the boys of Haditha, sarge? Or how about the grunt who murdered an inmate or two? Sorry, bud, but your tired old line didn't work back then, it doesn't work now, upwards, sideways, or any other way you slice it. American troops in some cases are no better than the terrorists they purport to be fighting, as is the case for the leader who put them there.

"Wait a minute... only 85,000 deaths? But CNN said it was 655,000 deaths, with around a third of them caused by coalition ( U.S. ) forces..."

Yeah... whom to trust... a corrupt and failing government who desperately wants people to approve of them and the war, or a news station that treats life like a video game.... The point is, sarge, that putting blind faith in either extreme is not a good idea. Read the article!! People in it say that, "At best, the numbers released by the Human Rights Ministry and those obtained by the AP are a minimum of the number who died."

A minimum, not 'the'. You see, as also pointed out, these are only the guaranteed number of dead as reported by relatives. What if the whole family died and no one reported it? Or what if, as the article also pointed out, many didn't report the deaths for fear of reprisals?

adaydream: "85,000+ dead Iraqis in 5 years, over 4300 Americans dead and a $3Trillion debt for this war before end. Such a waste while Sarge parades. < :-)"

Forgot to add at the end, "...safe and sound from his armchair in Japan". :)

Of course, if/when the fledling government collapses and Iraq falls into the hands of a less stable and worse dictator than Saddam, none of the Neo-Cons will be able to admit it was a bad idea, they'll just blame it on everything but the facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Somebody needs to come in and give America a good caning for their big mess in Iraq. Unfortunately, it's gonna take 5-10 more years for China to equal the US militarily and the UN is running dog to the Empire of the US, so justice will not be served in this case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I was there from 2004 to 2008. The vast majority of civilian casualties was from the sectarian violence and retaliation. At the height of the violence there were daily instances of mosque bombings, market bombings, police station bombngs, buses with army or police recruits bombed or hijacked and all the passengers executed. The U.S. military used very accurate targeting and even passed up high value targets to avoid civilan casulties. The U.S. (probably CIA) greased Sadr's palm with millions to call for a cease fire and it worked. I imagine they are atill paying him off.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, rather than join in the slagging match, here's to hoping that despite the many deaths caused by the invasion, things will continue to improve since the very dark days of mid 2006.....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

100 people dying per day I should have said.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"that would be akin to the United States losing about 900,000 people over a similar period"

And we would lose that many if we didn't fight terrorists and extremists wherever they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dendon:

" would saddam hussein have killed that many in that space of time sarge? who did you help out in the end? what a waste of life, and money "

Not only would he, he did. Look up the number of mass graves, and only those from his internal campaigns. You don´t even need to get into the blood baths of the Iran-Iraq war.

Moderator: Back on topic please. Saddam Hussein is not relevant to this discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Who cares. Obama won. The figure of 650,000 dead from March 2003 to the 2 weeks before the 2004 presidential election was useful at the time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the southern Shiite holy city of Karbala"

What makes Karbala holy?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And we would lose that many if we didn't fight terrorists and extremists wherever they are.

Ridiculous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Moderator: Back on topic please. Saddam Hussein is not relevant to this discussion.

OK then.....

I understand the death toll is high, but it should be compared to the other reality which would have been the leadership of a man who is irrelevant to what I'm talking about.

(Or should we just ban all chat that might include some kind of justification or context to the information contained in the article? Your choice, just let me know.)

Moderator: The story is about the number of Iraqis who have died in the last five years. Comparing the death toll to what it might have been under Saddam is, of course, irrelevant, as any high school debating student would tell you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge:

" What makes Karbala holy? "

The Shiites, who now run the show, have an important shrine there. Nothing holy there for the Sunnis, not to mention the non-members of the religion of peace.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

justforeignpolicy.org has the number way higher than 85,000. And with an agenda like "a just foreign policy," I'm inclined to agree. The higher numbers are borne out in the UK's The Lancet of a few years back.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

85,694 people were killed

Mostly by their own countrymen. Sounds like a civil war to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ustforeignpolicy.org has the number way higher than 85,000. And with an agenda like "a just foreign policy," I'm inclined to agree. The higher numbers are borne out in the UK's The Lancet of a few years back

Higher bodycount suits your agenda?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And we would lose that many if we didn't fight terrorists and extremists wherever they are.

Take a look at this statement in terms of the ability to project power and the costs required to project it: The U.S. defense budget figures in the hundreds of billions of dollars. I doubt if "the terrorists'" budget is much beyond several millions, if that.

The "terrorists" shot a pretty big wad on 9/11 and killed a grand total of less than 4,000. That leaves them 896,000 to go.

If the "terrorists" could project the kind of power needed to kill that many people on the budget they have to work with, the United States ought to fold up its tent and find a new game to play.

No, the "terrorists" only hope is that there are enough stupid Americans who will, in essence, "punch themselves out" through swinging blindly, wildly, and often. Comments like the one quoted above must really give them hope.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It doesn't matter how many they finally conclude have died. The 'winners and losers' always dispute the numbers (who won in this instance??) and the revisionist historians will make them and and distort them in the end. Then eventually someone will start a movement denying anyone perished at all. Sound familiar?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'make them up' meant to say

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yes we can accept those figures, but how many are killed because of the insurgency, suicide bombers, sectarian violence perhaps 98% of that figure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yes we can accept those figures, but how many are killed because of the insurgency, suicide bombers, sectarian violence perhaps 98% of that figure.

And that was with a multi-national force trying to keep them apart.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

807 days to complete withdrawal from Iraq.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites