Iraqi official estimates at least 150,000 Iraqis killed by insurgents

[ECH1969]

About 150,000 Iraqis have been killed by insurgents since the U.S.-led invasion more than three years ago, a senior Iraqi official said Thursday.

For every person killed about three have been wounded in violence since the war started in March 2003, Iraq's Health Minister Ali al-Shemari told reporters in Vienna.

In October, the British medical journal The Lancet published a controversial study contending nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, a far higher death toll than other estimates. The study, which was dismissed by President Bush and other U.S. officials as not credible, was based on interviews of households and not a body count.

Al-Shemari disputed that figure on Thursday. ``Since three and a half years, since the change of the Saddam regime, some people say we have 600,000 are killed. This is an exaggerated number. I think 150 is OK,'' he said.

http://www.kotv.com/news/national/story/?id=114012

[sabra]

1. 150,000 Iraqis killed by insurgents (Iraq Health Minister)

http://www.localnewsleader.com/brocktown/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=24736

150,000 Iraqis killed by insurgents

VIENNA, Austria - About 150,000 Iraqis have been killed by insurgents since the U.S.-led invasion more than three years ago, a senior Iraqi official said Thursday.

For every person killed about three have been wounded in violence since the war started in March 2003, Iraq ‘s Health Minister Ali al-Shemari told reporters in Vienna.

Al-Shemari did not explain how he arrived at the figure or say whether that number included Iraqi soldiers and police, as well as civilians. Also unclear was if it included Iraqis killed in sectarian violence or only in insurgent attacks. But he said the count was of "innocent" victims, suggesting civilians only.

...

"Since three and a half years, since the change of the Saddam regime, some people say we have 600,000 are killed. This is an exaggerated number. I think 150 is OK," he said.

[whistle]

2. So, how many Iraqis have been killed by wars, insurgencies and

...secret assassinations since the George Herbert Walker Bush put Saddam in power back in July 1979 and now his dim-son George Dubya Bush has been trying to get regime change? Conservative estimate over 27 years, I am thinking 2.7 to 3.0 million Iraqi men, women and children.

[maddezmom]

3. kick

[pberq]

4. Iraqi official: 150,000 civilians dead

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer 10 minutes ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A stunning new death count emerged Thursday, as
Iraq's health minister estimated 150,000 civilians have been killed in the war — about three times previously accepted estimates.

. . .

Previous estimates of Iraq deaths held that 45,000-50,000 have been killed in the nearly 44-month-old conflict, according to partial figures from Iraqi institutions and media reports. No official count has ever been available.

Health Minister Ali al-Shemari gave his new estimate of 150,000 to reporters during a visit to Vienna, Austria. He later told The Associated Press that he based the figure on an estimate of 100 bodies per day brought to morgues and hospitals — though such a calculation would come out closer to 130,000 in total. . . .

[kenny blankenship]

5. That's not to be confused with the Johns Hopkins/ Lancet study figures

which have to do with the mortality rate from all causes pre and post invasion.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

6. Well, did he tell GWB "thanks"?

Iraqis have good reason to hate Bush.

[Boo Boo]

7. Rummy resigns, and whoomp! There it is. New number.

This is probably an under count, because the Health Minister is going off what he sees in Hospitals and Morgues, while many dead are simply being buried (or disposed of) without ever making it to the Morgue.

[Cafe Americano]

8. Probably accurate

People seem to forget that besides the US, everyone in Iraq is fighting a 19th century war. Wars in previous centuries led to hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, mainly due to disease/sanitation problems.

[LynnTheDem]

9. Excellent point.

Also, the Muslim religion calls for burial within 24 hrs, isn't it? If that were my religion and my family were killed in Iraq, I'd not bother with authorities (who to trust, anyways?!) and morgues and the huge delays with so many bodies backed up. I'd just bury my loved ones per my religion. And seek justice for their deaths but that's another issue.

[daleo]

10. Saddam is going to be hanged for 150 deaths

Should Bush be hanged 1000 times?

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. Iraqi official: 150,000 civilians dead

Nov 9, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A stunning new death count emerged Thursday, as Iraq's health minister estimated 150,000 civilians have been killed in the war — about three times previously accepted estimates.

Moderate Sunni Muslims, meanwhile, threatened to walk away from politics and pick up guns, while the Shiite-dominated government renewed pressure on the United States to unleash the Iraqi army and claimed it could crush violence in six months.

After Democrats swept to majorities in both houses of the U.S. Congress and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld resigned, Iraqis appeared unsettled and seemed to sense the potential for an even bloodier conflict because future American policy is uncertain. As a result, positions hardened on both sides of the country's deepening sectarian divide.

Previous estimates of Iraq deaths held that 45,000-50,000 have been killed in the nearly 44-month-old conflict, according to partial figures from Iraqi institutions and media reports. No official count has ever been available.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061109/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

150,000 crimes against humanity.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. More like 1/4 the accepted estimate.

[hatrack]

13. So, will President Chimp "consider it a credible report"?

:mad:

[DoYouEverWonder]

15. He will when he hears the verdict

read at his trial. GUILTY

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. 3x previous estimates. 1/3 of the real number.

Still 150K too many!

[babylonsister]

16. So who do we believe, Lancet or this Iraqi official? Big difference. nt

[0rganism]

17. but no longer an order of magnitude difference

it's a lot harder for the apologists to spin the JH/Lancet stuff now

[babylonsister]

18. Lancet claimed there were upwards of 650,000 dead Iraqis. I'd

say there is a difference in magnitude.

[0rganism]

19. an "order of magnitude" is 10X

so when the "official estimates" were at 50k, and JH/Lancet is 650k, that's more than an order of magnitude difference. The "official" adjustment changes that.

[truthisfreedom]

20. did the JH/Lancet figures include those who died of ordinary causes as well?

i thought they did.

[0rganism]

21. violent deaths were distinguished from natural IIRC

although it would also be fair to say that those "natural causes" might have been ameliorated quite a bit if we hadn't been bombing their infrastructure and embargoing medical supplies for the 12 years prior to the invasion.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Their figures were 'excess deaths'

that is, they compared the death rates with those under the last couple of years of Saddam. So they could include 'ordinary deaths' if they were, say, partly caused by a bad water supply. The 655,000 also includes deaths of all people, so it includes 'insurgents' - I don't know if there was an estimate of how many they constituted. The 655,000 figure includes all deaths in the war - ie it includes Iraqi soldiers in the army killed in the initial invasion.

[barb162]

24. I'd believe this Iraqi official

versus Lancet's estimates

[ronnie624]

25. I believe this Iraqi official's estimate

is of deaths attributed to violence. The John Hopkins researchers attempted to compare death rates before and after the invasion. Obviously, any increase after the invasion, in what is considered a normal death rate before the invasion ("normal", considering the U.S was already causing the deaths of tens of thousands with the murderous sanctions), can be attributed to the invasion, no matter the cause.

War brings many hardships to the most vulnerable members of society, and there can be no doubt many, if not most, have died from causes other than violence. These deaths are no less a result of the shameful and amoral war against the Iraqi people.

I would give far greater credence to Lancet.

[tridim]

23. This is just the civilian death count no?

What's the definition of a non-civilian in Iraq?

[Haole Girl]

26. This is just sad...

...and senseless. :-(

[uacpeace]

27. what are we doing to humanity?

Even if we were to pull out and end the war, it's distressing to realize that many more Iraqi's will continued to be killed for generations to come due to the weapons that have been used and continued to be used (i.e. depleted uranium), as they seep into their water supply as well as into their . It's been said that the killing of 1 person is murder; the killing of 100.000 people? US foreign policy. what are we doing to humanity?

[chknltl]

28. Welcome to both DUs uacpeace

Yeah I know that this thread is a week old and yeah I know that my posting here will refresh it and who knows maybe just maybe if this DU keeps gettin reminded about that other DU-the silent killer....

A little over a year ago while learning how to operate my kid's computer, I stumbled across an article in Truthout about the ravages of DEPLETED URANIUM POISONING by Leuren Moret and I was absolutely mortified. Why isn't this THE BIGGEST news story of the century? I found the Democratic Underground shortly thereafter and thought to myself that here was a group of movers and shakers who need to know about this..(ok I really am/was that childlike in many ways). My first postings were on this topic and yes it generated some talk...then faded. Others before and after me have posted this topic here and like mine they all generate a little buzz...then fade... and yet much of the Middle East is no longer fit for human habitation, will remain as such for a long LONG while. (The half-life of this nightmare is over 5 BILLION YEARS).

So whats to be done? Ok here is a notion:
Senator Jim McDermott (Dem Wa. State) is very enlightened about DU Poisoning and tried to propose legislation to at least study the problem...in a Republican run Senate that went over about as well as a... well it just seems to have quietly died out. Perhaps it is time to speak to the good Senator again, see if a fire can be rekindled there.

Well that's a start, one which I WILL do before I sign off for the night. What next? I am not sure but after being offline for almost a year I think it is a good time to research an update on Depleted Uranium poisoning and post another article here in the big DU. I am wondering if it is even possible to clean up this mess...that might make a a good topic. The bottom line is that folks here are aware of the problem... just unsure about the way to handle it.

"uacpeace", you asked: "...what are we doing to humanity?"... I say a better question is; "What is humanity going to do about the Depleted Uranium poisoning this planet?" Welcome to the Democratic Underground uacpeace and thank you for the reminder of why I am here. :patriot:

On edit: I found out just now that Senators McDermott and Cantwell actually did get sometthing going on this last month (while I was offline)... :http://www.washblog.com/story/2006/10/3/151021/179
:patriot:

[SOS]

29. Adjusted for population size

that's 545 times the 9/11 attacks.
On a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, had no WMD and had no connection to Al Qaeda.

"The biggest strategic mistake in American history."
- General Odom