\ Iman’s constant cravings… » The price of ‘freedom’?!

The price of ‘freedom’?!

Under: Around The World, How Outrageous, Uncategorized @ 8:41 am on Wednesday, 10.11.06

A controversial new study contends nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died because of the war, suggesting a far higher death toll than other estimates. The timing of the survey’s release, just a few weeks before the U.S. congressional elections, led one expert to call it “politics.”

In the new study, researchers attempt to calculate how many more Iraqis have died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. Their conclusion, based on interviews of households and not a body count, is that about 600,000 died from violence, mostly gunfire. They also found a small increase in deaths from other causes like heart disease and cancer.

An accurate count of Iraqi deaths has been difficult to obtain, but one respected group puts its rough estimate at closer to 50,000. And at least one expert was skeptical of the new findings.

“They’re almost certainly way too high,” said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic & International Studies in Washington. He criticized the way the estimate was derived and noted that the results were released shortly before the Nov. 7 election. “This is not analysis, this is politics,” Cordesman said. Speaking of the new study, Burnham said the estimate was much higher than others because it was derived from a house-to-house survey rather than approaches that depend on body counts or media reports.

A private group called Iraqi Body Count, for example, says it has recorded about 44,000 to 49,000 civilian Iraqi deaths. But it notes that those totals are based on media reports, which it says probably overlook “many if not most civilian casualties.”[more]

I wonder how true that report is, but I am more inclined to believe that more than 50,000 have been killed since Marc 2003… 655,000 is A LOT! That’s like over 15,000 a month!

1 Comment »

Rihab

10.11.06 @ 4:57 pm

I was watching CNN earlier, and they were interviewing a statistician who works for some polling centre, anyway, he said that the methodology used was a random sample of 1800 households in Iraq, and that it was “a sound methodology”. He also said, that most reports tend to be focused on certain areas where a lot of killings tend to occur whereas this report was nationwide.

The thing I’m wondering is, with all those major blasts that happen once in a while where a few hundred die in addition to the very high casualty rates at the start of the war - when evening that out over a period of 3yrs, could it really even out to be about 500 dead per day??

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>