MarkHumphrys.com

Irish. Atheist. Liberal-right. Anti-jihad. Pro-West. Pro-Israel.

Home      Blog      Contents      Contact


This site is banned in Iran
Search:

Aug 2014 entries      July 2014 entries

170,000 page views per month


Politics - Iraq - How many died in Iraq?


  Total dead in Iraq

1. Enemy killed by allies

2. Civilians killed by allies

3. Allies killed by enemy

4. Civilians killed by enemy

5. Lives saved by the war

How many died in Iraq? How many lives did the Iraq war save?

There are several separate issues in Iraq body counts:
  1. How many enemy combatants have the allies killed? (good, the more the better)
  2. How many civilians have the allies killed? (bad, and our moral responsibility)
  3. How many allied troops have the enemy killed? (bad, but not our moral responsibility)
  4. How many civilians have the enemy killed? (bad, but not our moral responsibility)
  5. How many lives have been saved by deposing Saddam? (good)
Iraq body counts often confuse 1,2,3 and 4 all together, and ignore 5.

(Note: I include in the "allies" the brave Iraqi troops and police fighting for their freedom, and dying in far larger numbers than their allies the western troops.)



Total dead in Iraq



The misleading Iraq Body Count logo, as if the deaths they report are people killed by Americans.
Their entire website is discredited by this logo.



Year after year, Iraq Body Count carefully collects a list of all known deaths in Iraq.
And yet they never show the slightest interest in who is doing the killing!
They never collect that information!



justforeignpolicy.org displays its political bias for all to see. Its logo says, absurdly: "Iraqi Deaths Due to U.S. Invasion".




Obama Body Count



"Civilians killed in Iraq since Obama was elected".
I said about this elsewhere:
The left has also begun to notice that Obama has not ended the War on Islamism.
Absurdly, they blame Obama for killings done by Islamists (just as they blamed Bush for killings done by Islamists). Why not blame the people who are actually doing the killing?




The Lancet



More politics in the Lancet and other scientific journals




Lancet editor Richard Horton speaks at the extreme left-wing Stop the War Coalition demo, Manchester, Sept 2006. A few points:
  1. Even if he believes the Lancet study of Iraqi deaths, why does he scream that it is "thanks to the arrogance and delusion" of Blair? Surely it is thanks to the jihad? After all, if the jihad had not resisted the arrival of democracy in Iraq, not one person would have died since 2003. All the allies ever wanted to do was set up one-man one-vote democracy in Iraq. Why couldn't the jihad allow that?
  2. Why didn't the Iraqi "resistance" stand for election? If people support them, there's no need for violence. They can just stand for election, win, form a government and then ask for allied withdrawal. Why didn't they do that? Why do they suicide bomb mosques and marketplaces instead? If, leftie morons, you can answer this question, then finally you will understand what this war is about.
  3. Horton implies that the brave allies want to kill Iraqi children. He attacks the Blair government "that prefers to support the killing of children instead of the building of hospitals and schools." (Of course Blair and his American allies are building hospitals and schools in Iraq, while the jihad bombs them. Not that Horton has a clue what's going on over there.)
  4. He attacks Israel for the war in Lebanon. This at a march containing open support for Hizbollah and Hamas.
  5. He describes the allies as an "Axis of Anglo-American imperialism", pursuing policies of "hate", responsible for third world poverty, and so on like a foaming Noam Chomsky. What a nutcase. I think I understand where the Lancet "survey" is coming from now.




1. Enemy killed by allies



U.S. dead compared to enemy dead in Iraq.
From here.




2. Civilians killed by allies - Did the allies really kill 100,000 civilians?


The Haditha massacre


The Mahmudiyah massacre


Other alleged or proven allied war crimes



The Afghanistan "kill team"




How the media distorts war crimes:
Rolling Stone, 27 Mar 2011, has a perfectly valid story to write on the Afghan "kill team".
But they (and their idiot commenters) wreck it by smearing other (or even all) American soldiers.



Rolling Stone piously complains about this attack on Taliban scum being edited into a music video.
Oh the inhumanity! Such disrespect to dead Taliban! It must not be allowed!
Search for copies:
See original.





The 2007 airstrike video




3. Allies killed by enemy




4. Civilians killed by enemy


Iraqi government estimates


The vast majority of killings of civilians in Iraq are by the resistance

thereligionofpeace.com makes the point:

  • Iraqi civilians killed (all deliberately) in 2006 by the Iraqi resistance: 16,791.
  • Iraqi civilians killed (all accidentally) in 2006 by Americans: 225.

  • In other words, the incredibly careful and skilled Americans have hardly killed anyone innocent since 2003, and those that have died have all been killed accidentally while engaged in street warfare with jihadis. Almost all the deaths in Iraq are at the hands of the resistance, not at the hands of the Americans. As Glen Reinsford says: "Iraqis aren't dying from war. They are being murdered by Islamic terrorists."


The "resistance" are also doing most of the killing in Afghanistan

People also talk about the deaths in Afghanistan as if it is the allied forces that are doing the killing, rather than the jihad. But this is not true.

The vast majority of victims of Al Qaeda worldwide are Muslims



5. Lives saved by the war

The Iraq War dead counts ignore the killing that would be going on if Saddam was still in power. So they ignore the lives saved by the war:


lives

saved by the Iraq War

This count is based on Saddam's average rate of killing when he was in power.
This kill rate would likely be sustained by his son too.



Child mortality rates

The "NoBody Count" only considers the people deliberately and physically killed by Saddam, not the people who died in effect because of his misrule.

1 million lives saved?

The "NoBody Count" of lives saved by the war may be an under-estimate:

Even harder to calculate, history may judge that the Iraq War was the start of a process of reform of the Middle East that averted a full war with nuclear-armed Islamism. The Iraq War may have saved millions of lives.

The tragedy of humanity is that if we look through history, we can see many cases where war would have saved millions of lives. Who can not regret that the Allies did not go to war against Germany in 1933, for example? There is every reason to believe that the Iraq War is another such example - a war that has already saved lives, and will save more still.

  

Feedback form

 
Enter a URL for me to look at:
Enter this password:

See explanation. You cannot enter comments or send email. All you can do is enter a web address (a URL) for me to look at. You can put your comments at that address.

Politics      Religion      Politics feeds      Religion feeds      Maps

Bookmark and Share           Since 1995.