22 Oct 06
5 edits
Originally posted by 7ate9i cannot belive you began this thread with no facts ...
Oh, that's right... I forgot Bush was superior. [silly me]
for a start lets try:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003
Iraqi Deaths 30,000 - given by G. W. Bush in a public speech on December 12, 2005. Spokesmen later said Bush was "basing his statement on media reports, 'not an official government estimate'."
44,274-49,157 civilian deaths up to October 2006 - as compiled from media reports by the Iraq Body Count project (IBC)
50,000 - as of June 2006 - based on compilation of official figures from the Iraqi Ministry of Health and Baghdad Morgue.
655,000 excess deaths up to September 2006 - from the second (October 2006) Lancet survey of mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq:a cross-sectional cluster sample survey; See Lancet surveys of mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq
[1], [2], [3], [4], [5]
U.S. armed forces 2,791 total deaths, 21,086 combat wounded (9,543 evacuated), plus an unknown number of non-combat injuries. [6], [7]
Armed forces of other coalition countries See Multinational force in Iraq
238 (119 British, 32 Italian, 18 Ukrainian, 17 Polish, 13 Bulgarian, 11 Spanish, 6 Danes, 5 Salvadorans, 3 Slovaks, 2 Australians, 2 Dutch, 2 Estonians, 2 Romanians, 2 Thai, 1 Fijian, 1 Hungarian, 1 Kazakh, 1 Latvian.)|| [8], [9]
Non-Iraqi civilians In total, at least 568 non-Iraqi individuals have been killed since the 2003 invasion (311 contractors, 87 journalists, 20 media support workers, and 150 aid workers).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003
22 Oct 06
Originally posted by 7ate9for the most all inclusive consideration of mortality;
What is the environmental death toll? What are the areas in Iraq that need help and defence against Americans using excess force on innocent people in societies. Let's rid America of it's anti-social behaviour and have a zero-tollerance to it's abuse!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_mortality_before_and_after_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq
The Lancet has published two highly controversial surveys of the effect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq on Iraqi death rate, the first in 2004, the second (by many of the same authors) in 2006.
The first survey, published on 29 October 2004 estimated the increased risk of death following the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq to be 1.5 fold (95% confidence interval: 1.1 to 2.3) higher than that prior to the invasion, leading to an estimate of an increase in total deaths (combatants plus noncombatants) of 98,000 (95% confidence interval: 8,000 to 194,000) over what would have been expected, had there been no invasion. The authors have called this a conservative estimate, because it excluded "extreme statistical outlier" data from Falluja; If including the outlier Fallujah data, the estimated increased risk of death was 2.5 fold (95% confidence interval: 1.6 to 4.2). The Falluja cluster "indicates a point estimate of about 200,000 excess deaths in the 3% of Iraq represented by this cluster", while no confidence interval is given for this point estimate. There have been several studies that have attempted to measure violent deaths due to the war in Iraq. The 2004 Lancet survey was the first formal epidemiological attempt to estimate the effect on total excess mortality of the invasion, utilizing verbal household surveys rather than documented deaths. Its reliability was widely criticized, for a variety of reasons. See criticism below.
The second survey, published on 11 October 2006, estimated 655,000 deaths related to the war, or 2.5% of the population.[1] The new study applied similar methods and involved surveys during May and June 2006. Considerably more households were surveyed, allowing for a relatively tighter claimed 95% confidence interval of 393,000 to 943,000 excess Iraqi deaths, which is between 8 and 32 times what other studies have found. It, too, was widely criticized.