+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Iraq again

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    5,253

    Iraq again

    So, Gen Franks says "We don't do body counts", but other people are.

    Reported on the BBC is the early online publication of a survey in The Lancet on mortality rates among Iraqi civilians. the result: an estimated 100,000 civilian deaths caused directly or indirectly by the invasion.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3962969.stm

    Poor planning, air strikes by coalition forces and a "climate of violence" have led to more than 100,000 extra deaths in Iraq, scientists say.

    A study published by the Lancet claims the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion.

    It condemns the coalition's planning on public health as "grievously in error".

    The Lancet admits the research is based on a small sample - under 1,000 homes - but says the findings are "convincing".

    Scientists from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the US city of Baltimore gathered data on births and deaths since January 2002 from 33 clusters of 30 households each across Iraq.

    They found the relative risk of death was one-and-a-half times higher for Iraqi civilians after the 2003 invasion than in the preceding 15 months.

    That figure jumps to two-and-a-half times higher if data from Falluja - the scene of repeated heavy fighting - is included.

    Before the invasion, most people died as a result of heart attack, stroke and chronic illness, the report says, whereas after the invasion, "violence was the primary cause of death."

    Violent deaths were mainly attributed to coalition forces - and most individuals reportedly killed were women and children.

    Dr Les Roberts, who led the study, said: "Making conservative assumptions we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more, have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    "Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from coalition forces accounted for most of the violent deaths."

    He said his team's work proved it was possible to compile data on public health "even during periods of extreme violence".

    The sample included randomly selected households in Baghdad, Basra, Arbil, Najaf and Karbala, as well as Falluja.

    Lancet editor Richard Horton said: "With the admitted benefit of hindsight and from a purely public health perspective, it is clear that whatever planning did take place was grievously in error."

    He went on: "Democratic imperialism has led to more deaths not fewer. This political and military failure continues to cause scores of casualties among non-combatants."

    He urges the coalition forces to rethink their strategy to "prevent further unnecessary human casualties".

    "For the sake of a country in crisis and for a people under daily threat of violence, the evidence we publish today must change heads as well as pierce hearts," he said.
    The Bush administration, having no time for scientists or inconvenient facts, will no doubt feel free to brush this aside.

    However, I wonder whether it explains the distinct lack of popularity that the "coalition" is suffering from? Hmmm, *strokes beard thoughtfully *
    David Aldridge,
    "The Oracle Sponge"

    Senior Manager, Business Intelligence Development
    XM Satellite Radio
    Washington, DC

    Oracle ACE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,844

    Re: Iraq again

    Originally posted by slimdave
    The Lancet admits the research is based on a small sample - under 1,000 homes - but says the findings are "convincing".
    Maybe the small sample size relates to the extreme violence in Iraq?
    But hey we liberated them.

    this space intentionally left blank

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    over the hill and through the woods
    Posts
    995
    Gandolf, I bet you were one of those kids who would take a stick, beat the side of a hornets nest then run away.

    Hence---Sr. Instigator.
    Oracle it's not just a database it's a lifestyle!
    --------------
    BTW....You need to get a girlfriend who's last name isn't .jpg

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,844
    Originally posted by OracleDoc
    Gandolf, I bet you were one of those kids who would take a stick, beat the side of a hornets nest then run away.

    Hence---Sr. Instigator.
    That's not quite my style. But I think that some people need to be riled up once in a while. Hence, Sr. Instigator. Although, that is an odd comment from a "Hippy Killer"
    this space intentionally left blank

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    323
    Is there any CBA as to all this mess -> civilian deaths,GI deaths, deficits, loss of goodwill to the US etc. etc vs. Saddam still being in power had the invasion not taken place ?


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,844
    Originally posted by cruser3
    Is there any CBA as to all this mess -> civilian deaths,GI deaths, deficits, loss of goodwill to the US etc. etc vs. Saddam still being in power had the invasion not taken place ?

    What is CBA?
    this space intentionally left blank

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    5,253
    cost benefit analysis
    David Aldridge,
    "The Oracle Sponge"

    Senior Manager, Business Intelligence Development
    XM Satellite Radio
    Washington, DC

    Oracle ACE

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    323
    IMHO - Had W not attacked but allowed inspections he could have kept Saddam as a threat and a re-election issue - now Iraq's a mess, Al-Q is off the radar mostly!

    Any bets as to whether the latest Al-Q video by an American is GOP artwork ?

    -------------
    CBA -> analysis of whether a 100M is better spent investing in a business which returns 20-30% with it's inherent risks or better put in fixed income securities which return say 6% & lower risk !!
    -----------------------


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width