Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Who Killed Most Civilians in Iraq?

by DoDo Wed Jul 20th, 2005 at 04:23:29 AM EST

If you believe the US propaganda and the docile mainstream media, 'the insurgents' (collectively*). I on the other hand have argued everywhere, including on my blog, that the main culprit are the occupation forces and criminals - a main reason why the claim that occupation forces are there to defend Iraqis from evil terrorists is a particularly cruel joke.

Now, for the first time, a major news outlet reports the above truth too - the BBC:


Nearly 25,000 civilians have died violently in Iraq since the US-led invasion in March 2003, a report says... The survey was carried out by the UK-based Iraq Body Count and Oxford Research Group...

37% of all non-combatant deaths were caused by the US-led coalition... Insurgents are said to have caused 9% of the deaths, while post-invasion criminal violence was responsible for another 36%.


I note: the latter is also the occupiers' (ir)responsibility. I also note: the IBC is based on (Western) media reports, which represents a significant undercount, while health-related excess deaths (which were included in the Lancet study) are ignored.

(You find the original Iraqi Body Count report here, but I thought the mainstream media reporting is a major part of the story.)

*) By all appearance there is no Iraqi resistance central command, yet even people as bright as Billmon often judge them as if there were one.







Update [2005-7-20 7:55:9 by DoDo]: Part as something to think about in response to a comment, part as further debunking of war propaganda bought into by too many, I reproduce below slightly rewritten parts of an older blog post of mine. The latest propaganda name - after "regime/Baathist diehards", "(foreign) insurgents", "terrorists", "anti-Iraqi forces" - for what the US is up against is "Sunni resistance". The picture is of sectarian warriors from the 20% Sunni Arab part of the population, who coerce even the majority of this 20% to boycotts and such. There is such an element, certainly. However, in truth:

"... a recent internal poll conducted for the U.S.-led coalition indicated that nearly 45 percent of the Iraqi population supports the insurgent attacks... Only 15 percent of those polled said they strongly support the U.S.-led coalition."
Let's contemplate what this means. Even if we assume
  1. that this poll was not warped from the beginning by its assotiation to the occupiers (wording of the questions, willingness of the polled to answer honestly),
  2. that it managed to represent Sunnis in the inaccessible Anbar and Niniveh provinces,
  3. and further assume that all Sunnis and all members of smaller minorities are pro while all Kurds anti (no Occupation there),
  4. and use the standard numbers (55% Shi'a Arab, 20% Sunni Arab, 20% Kurd, 5% other),
- that is: the scenario most favorable to war supporters - this still means that more than a third of even the Shi'a Arabs supports armed resistance. You may wonder how that could be, if you bought that other line of propaganda that all the resistance are terrorists who mainly attack civilians. But don't let the relative numbers of casulaties deceive you: obviously terrorists have more success in killing defenseless civilians than guerillas have in killing soldiers in bulletproof wests riding armoured vehicles with superior weapons at their disposal, not to mention air support. Instead, remember that for at most a dozen terrorist attacks a day, there are at present 70 or so against the occupiers. Consult the New York Times graph below too, especially the third part (not very up to date, but involves the first two months of the heightened anti-civilian violence):

Display:
So 73% of the deaths can be laid at the door of the invaders who failed in their obligations to provide security for the occupied.

Excellent going chaps.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 20th, 2005 at 05:07:21 AM EST
for what i read, a large part of the methodology behind the bodycount is based of media report and eyewitness but  there are very few journalists, and they never leave the green area, they (and by consequences, us) do not know anything about what really happen in Bagdad, (without talking about the others cities, must be zero knowledge :-( ).

they know only what the anglo-saxon occupiers want them to know, and certainly not about all the collateral damages : checkpoint casualties, retaliation, bombing from high, marriage...

but perhaps, the interesting thing to know, must be the trend, because 9% seems low but in a short period of time, it can be impressive and scary.

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jul 20th, 2005 at 05:26:25 AM EST
probably worst than that, and it didn't have to happen...

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia
by whataboutbob on Wed Jul 20th, 2005 at 06:23:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
i do not believe it possible to create a worst scenario ;-) but if someone can imagine something worst, write it here, it will happen soon ;-).

i think there is a kind of Murphy law for the anglosaxon in Irak.

and now the powerful and influential neighbour, Iran, has a conservative/ anti-american government, is richer and richer with oil's high prices, an nuclear power soon.

Turks will soon create problems with the kurdish government : they are struggling again with their kurdish (who are islamic fundamentalist as well) rebels and they do not appreciate the "khudisation" or kirkou.

The anglosaxon occupiers can not stay and can not leave !!!

by fredouil (fredouil@gmailgmailgmail.com) on Wed Jul 20th, 2005 at 11:20:29 PM EST
fredouil, the PKK is a maoist organisation, not islamic fundamentalist.

BTW, let me ask you: do you detest both the Anglo-Saxons (among whom you live in Australia, if I remember right) and Muslims (whom you always prefer to paint with a single brush)?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Jul 21st, 2005 at 06:34:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]