Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

One in 40 Iraqis killed but governments in denial
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Big_Bird



Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:43 am    Post subject: One in 40 Iraqis killed but governments in denial Reply with quote

One in 40 Iraqis 'killed since invasion'

US and Britain reject journal's finding that death toll has topped 650,000

Sarah Boseley, health editor
Thursday October 12, 2006
The Guardian


Corpses of Shia family members strewn across a road after they were killed by suspected insurgents near Baquba, Iraq. Photo: Helmiy al-Azawi/Reuters

The death toll in Iraq following the US-led invasion has topped 655,000 - one in 40 of the entire population - according to a major piece of research in one of the world's leading medical journals.
The study, produced by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and published online by the Lancet, claims the total number of deaths is more than 10 times greater than any previously compiled estimate.

The findings provoked an immediate political storm. Within hours of its release, George Bush had dismissed the figures. "I don't consider it a credible report," he told reporters at the White House. "Neither does General Casey [the top US officer in Iraq], neither do Iraqi officials."

The Foreign Office also cast doubt on the findings, stating that the government preferred to rely on the body count of the Iraqi ministry of health, which recorded just 7,254 deaths between January 2005 and January 2006.

But the US researchers have the backing of four separate independent experts who reviewed the new paper for the Lancet. All urged publication. One spoke of the "powerful strength" of the research methods, which involved house-to-house surveys by teams of doctors across Iraq.

The Johns Hopkins researchers published an earlier study in the Lancet in October 2004, which caused similar shock waves. They say the new work validates the old and shows an alarming escalation in violent deaths.

Nearly a third of the deaths (31%) were ascribed to the coalition forces. Most of the deaths - 601,000 out of 655,000 - were due to violence and of those, 56% were caused by gunshot wounds. Air strikes, car bombs and other explosions accounted for a further 13-14%.

To continue reading click here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big_Bird



Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This terrible misadventure has killed one in 40 Iraqis

The government will do all it can to discredit the latest estimate of civilian casualties since the invasion: 650,000

Richard Horton
Thursday October 12, 2006
The Guardian


Many people refused to believe the Lancet report in 2004 from a group of American and Iraqi public-health scientists who surveyed homes across the country and found that about 100,000 additional Iraqi deaths had taken place since the coalition invasion in March 2003. Several government ministers were deployed to destroy the credibility of the findings and, in large part, they succeeded. But now their denials have come back to haunt them, for the figures from Iraq have been confirmed by a further study.

The same team from Johns Hopkins University worked with Iraqi doctors to visit over 1,800 homes in Iraq, selected randomly to make sure that no bias could creep in to their calculations.
They identified more than 12,000 family members and tracked those who had died over an interval that spanned both pre- and post-invasion periods. The Iraqi interviewers spoke fluent English as well as Arabic, and they were well trained to collect the information they were seeking. They asked permission from every family to use the data they wanted. And they chased down death certificates in over four out of five cases to make sure that they had a double check on the numbers and causes of death given to them by family members.

All of these checks and balances mean that the 650,000 additional Iraqi casualties they report since the invasion is the most reliable estimate we have of civilian deaths. Most of these deaths have been of men aged 15 to 44.

Not only do we have a better understanding of the toll our invasion has had on the country; we also understand better just how those deaths have come about. Before the invasion only a tiny proportion of deaths were due to violence. But since the invasion over half of all deaths have been due to violent causes. It is our occupation and our continued presence in Iraq that is fuelling this violence. Claims that the terrorist threat was always there are simply disproved by these findings.

To continue reading article click here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dogbert



Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: Killbox 90210

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's stupid for Bush to quibble about the numbers -- it would be no less horrible were it 1 in 400.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hank Scorpio



Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dogbert wrote:
It's stupid for Bush to quibble about the numbers -- it would be no less horrible were it 1 in 400.


Gosh, Dr. Phil, that's a great platitude!

What sense does that arithmetic make? By your logic the Battle of the Somme was no more horrible than say, the Battle of Khe Sahn. Likewise, a nuke is no more horrible than a car bomb.

How about less support group, feel-good nonsense and more tangible reality?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dogbert



Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: Killbox 90210

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hank Scorpio wrote:
dogbert wrote:
It's stupid for Bush to quibble about the numbers -- it would be no less horrible were it 1 in 400.


Gosh, Dr. Phil, that's a great platitude!

What sense does that arithmetic make? By your logic the Battle of the Somme was no more horrible than say, the Battle of Khe Sahn. Likewise, a nuke is no more horrible than a car bomb.

How about less support group, feel-good nonsense and more tangible reality?


Why don't you just fire up your bong and not worry about grown-up things, mkay?

I don't approve of my government killing Iraqi civilians in my name. In that sense, I don't care if it's a hundred Iraqis or a million Iraqis. And yes, I realize that the figures in the report include those not killed by U.S. soldiers.

Lippy fucking pothead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big_Bird



Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dogbert wrote:
It's stupid for Bush to quibble about the numbers -- it would be no less horrible were it 1 in 400.


Quite right. Just one unnecessary death is a crime against humanity.

If only 1 in 40,000 US citizens were being killed by an occupying power, our friend Hank would be in uproar.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big_Bird



Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The lowest estimate given is still nearly 400,000. Weren't we supposed to be doing them a big favour? Shocked

Quote:

Thus they calculate that 654,965 Iraqis have died as a consequence of the invasion. It is an estimate and the mid-point, and most likely of a range of numbers that could also be correct in the context of their statistical analysis. But even the lowest number in the range - 392,979 - is higher that anyone else has suggested. Of the deaths, 31% were ascribed to the US-led forces. Most deaths were from gunshot wounds (56%), with a further 13% from car bomb injuries and 14% the result of other explosions.



From: 655,000 Iraqis killed since invasion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pyongshin Sangja



Joined: 20 Apr 2003
Location: I love baby!

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank God Saddam Hussein is no longer in power.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Big_Bird



Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is another article featuring graphs and diagrams:http://electroniciraq.net/news/2533.shtml

The Lancet Survey: Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq

Authors: Prof Gilbert Burnham, MD, Prof Riyadh Lafta, MD, Shannon Doocy, PhD, Les Roberts, PhD. Participating institutions: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message