world

U.S. military says 77,000 Iraqis killed over 5 years

27 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

I thought we were well over a million? What happened to that number? Wasn't that widely reported and believed for quite a long period of time?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib: This is the US MILITARY reporting the numbers, not others. You are going to see the same kind of bias you see from extremely high reports, but of course with the lowest number they can deem possible. Either way, you're never going to see an accurate figure because I doubt there's any possible way you can count the bodies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

77 thousand Iraqis killed, and in over 95 percent of these deaths by their co-religionists.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah Smith that is a whole 8694 below what the Iraqis report. So where are the other 914306 bodies? Oh right those are babies that died right? We heard that overbloated number before. But I thought I heard liberal exaggerators say it was more like 1.5 million Iraqi babies. Man you guys like to inflate your egos with your own imagination.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

77 thousand Iraqis killed, and in over 95 percent of these deaths by their co->religionists.

After the chaos installed by the "liberators".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After the chaos installed by the "liberators"

Huh ? Chaos got 'installed' ? A bloodthirsty dictator got deposed.Iraqis were, for the first time in decades, allowed to join the community of free nations. A resource-rich country, which we are told by the war's opponents was thoroughly secular, lapsed instead into incredible barbarity. This,in part, is why Bush was vilified - the rest of the non-Muslim world witnessed something they wanted to believe humanity was well and done with.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Statistics like this, as Smith says, depend on who is doing the counting, what they count and how they count it. Figures on the number of people directly killed vary according to different sources, but seem to be somewhere around 100,000 or a little lower. The really massive figures come from studies published some years ago in The Lancet, which counted the number of excess deaths; ie, not just people directly killed, but also those who died from other causes such as malnutrition, lack of medical care, spread of disease, and other factors associated with the invasion and subsequent insurgency. It's the same method used for estimating the total casualties from earthquakes and floods. At the time of publication the Lancet studies met with incredulity from commentators. But nobody, so far as I know, has seriously disproved either the methodology or shown that the estimates (about 650,000 excess deaths, I think) were wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A resource-rich country, which we are told by the war's opponents was thoroughly secular, lapsed instead into incredible barbarity.

The country was secular because Saddam kept it that way. And it lapsed into barbarity when Bush removed Saddam. Like pulling out the plug and then complaining that the bath has emptied. No problem if the plumbing is in place and functional, but in Iraq it wasn't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No problem if the plumbing is in place and functional, but in Iraq it wasn't.

But how can that be? After all, the country was occupied after WW1 by a foreign power which proclaimed, far and wide at the time, that it was the very pinnacle of civilization...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TimRussert,

I know he's gone and did you need to point out "In accordance with US law"?Nationalism? My point was that the invasion of Iraq wasn't just about liberating Iraq from Saddam. And I have doubts about the average Iraqi citizen being much happier than during Saddam.I say doubts because my humility prevents me to say that I know things that i don't know in facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you think that iraqi are happier now that they got "liberated"

This question always drags up quotes from Iraqis who are indeed glad Saddam is gone and they are now free (to shoot their neighbours), but they never ask the dead ones. I don't think any of them are very happy to have been liberated from their lives.

But how can that be? After all, the country was occupied after WW1....

And bombed into the ideological Stone Age in 1991 and again in 2003.

Take away the rule of law, and it's not unusual for previously civilised people to descend into a free-for-all. Lookit the looting and violence after Katrina.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And this is all in retaliation for how many killed in 9/11?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The country was secular because Saddam kept it that way. And it lapsed into barbarity when Bush removed Saddam. Like pulling out the plug and then complaining that the bath has emptied. No problem if the plumbing is in place and functional, but in Iraq it wasn't.

Yeah, I hear you. But that's like justifying Marischal Tito. In both cases their repression kept the lid on the pressure cooker underneath. Whether that status quo was more desirable than the alternatives and ensuing chaos is moot.

Not sure there is a roadmap out of that kind of situation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo: And bombed into the ideological Stone Age in 1991 and again in 2003.

Most of the heavy bombing was done in 1991. Not much of the infrastructure was affected in 2003. But since the world supported the war in 1991 and didn't support the war in 2003 it means that the world has decided that the 2003 war did most of the damage.

smithinjapan: Either way, you're never going to see an accurate figure because I doubt there's any possible way you can count the bodies.

But how did the 1 million plus number get so much attention for so long? We probably had that number thrown around in this forum alone for years. I'm betting that there are quite a few people walking around today that would still use that number. The media played fast and loose with the numbers to sell the unpopularity of the war and we're still seeing the effects today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

m5c32: Not sure there is a roadmap out of that kind of situation.

You have 2 choices in that case:

Perpetual dictatorship

Civil war with no coalition forces.

But since those two options didn't play out, one can just pretend they were never on the table....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But since the world supported the war in 1991 and didn't support the war in 2003 it means that the world has decided that the 2003 war did most of the damage.

Sorry, but I don't see the point of that sentence. What are you trying to say? What does it matter what 'the world' has decided about when what damage was done? Does it change the facts in any way?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TimRussert - "A resource-rich country, which we are told by the war's opponents was thoroughly secular, lapsed instead into incredible barbarity."

Like Bush and co. before the invasion, TimR clearly hasn't read his history books, the bit about the British.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In the real world.

People don't give two hoots who runs the country all they truly care about is getting basics necessities like electicity, gas, water, food and being able to have a good job/safe life and provide a good life for their families.

If you can cover those than the coutnry is run well regardless if it is a monarch, dictator, democracy or whatever that rules it.

This don't change for an islamic or whatever country/society, etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Iraq never did anything bad to the USA, 9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein, but every thing to do with SAUDI ARABIA, but idiot BUSH felt it would be cool to start a war with Iraq, to kind of finish what his daddy never finished, Mission Accomplished? My a.s.s! The idiot Bush dynasty got us into this bloody mess and poor Mr. Obama is trying to get us out, but idiot Republicans here and every where want to blame our US president, Obama for the foolish war REPUBLICANS wanted. I do not even want to imagine how much $$$$$$$$ Dicky Cheney etc..have made from these wars in Iraq and do not forger Afghanistan. RIP 77,000 poor Iraqi souls.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo: Sorry, but I don't see the point of that sentence. What are you trying to say? What does it matter what 'the world' has decided about when what damage was done? Does it change the facts in any way?

The destruction of Iraq's infrastructure is most often attributed to the 2003 war, not the 1991 war, even though reality was the other way around. Why? Because the 2003 war was unpopular and people just decided to make up anything they wanted and it stuck. Just like the 1,000,000 plus dead number. It's taken years to counter the misinformation the anti-war crowd sold to the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

TimRussert,

Concerning my question about whether the iraqis were happier I think Zenny11 gave the best answer ever.

In the real world. People don't give two hoots who runs the country all they truly care about is getting basics necessities like electicity, gas, water, food and being able to have a good job/safe life and provide a good life for their families. If you can cover those than the coutnry is run well regardless if it is a monarch, dictator, democracy or whatever that rules it. This don't change for an islamic or whatever country/society, etc.

100% agree!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you remember when George W. Bush declared victory while dressed in fighter pilot gear in front of a big banner "Victory!"? LAUGH! Whatever the aims of the US and its military were in Iraq, I think it's safe to say, FAIL. Except to make one big mess maybe. And meanwhile.. they are concurrently failing again in Afghanistan which is an echo of its fail in Vietnam.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zenny11: People don't give two hoots who runs the country all they truly care about is getting basics necessities like electicity, gas, water, food and being able to have a good job/safe life and provide a good life for their families. If you can cover those than the coutnry is run well regardless if it is a monarch, dictator, democracy or whatever that rules it.

So you'd be OK if your country turned into a dictatorship as long as you had ample services? Or are you saying that it's OK for other people living far away in other countries?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib.

I said what I said.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kicking Saddam out of Kuwait was great! Getting in knee deep in Iraq for??? Distracting the US public from our real enemies in Saudi Arabia is a huge, huge MISTAKE. The average Iraqi is just a scape goat for US imperialism in this part of the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

and the US didn't kill all those Iraqis. Many of them were killed in sectarian violence, which is still happening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's taken years to counter the misinformation the anti-war crowd sold to the world.

You might not want to go down the "selling misinformation" route, chum. Pots and kettles and all that.

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