Iraq: more than 34k civilians killed in 2006

#1

The envoy to Iraq, Gianni Magazzeni, said 34,452 civilians were killed and more than 36,000 hurt during the year.

The figure is nearly three times higher than calculations previously made on the basis of Iraqi interior ministry statistics for 2006.

Accurate figures are difficult to acquire, and previous UN estimates have been rejected outright by Baghdad.

Mr Magazzeni said his figures were compiled from data collected by the Health Ministry, hospitals, mortuaries and other agencies.

Incidents of violence are reported throughout everyday.
BBC News

:|

#2

Accurate figures, hard to acquire they are...

http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

Those report casualties in the hundreds of thousands...

#3

Blah Blah Blah...

Sample National Reported Death Rates per 1,000 population:

Israel: 6.18 per 1,000
Brazil: 6.17 per 1,000
Sweden: 10.31 per 1,000
U.K. : 10.13 per 1,000
Belgium: 10.27 per 1,000
U.S.A.: 8.26 per 1,000
Canada 7.28 per 1,000 (WITH FREE HEALTH CARE???)
Iran : 5.55 per 1,000 (With the air so nasty you have to wear a mask)

Highest estimated Iraq Death Rate : 5.37 deaths per 1,000 population

In the year 2000, it was 6.4 per 1,000.

(You wanna see the top thirty, just go to Africa...)

Bottom line, There are a hundred and eighty places more deadly than Iraq, and chances are, you are in one if you are reading this online.

#4

As sad as the Iraq numbers are, there are a lot worse places out there like Raum pointed out. It's so sad the number of people who die every day

#5

QUOTE(trashtalkr @ Jan 16 2007, 12:54 PM) As sad as the Iraq numbers are, there are a lot worse places out there like Raum pointed out. It's so sad the number of people who die every day

the Stark truth is when you spike global population, more people have to die to compensate, and for every war of man waged, there is a synapse in the brains of tens of thousands giving them the impulse to end their own lives. population control is still something we can not understand.

But we know the death rate, no matter what we do, doesn't fluctuate much. Iraq is safer today than in was in 1901. The death rate of US soldiers in Vietnam was 5 times as high as the war in Iraq.

Death is the Term by which we stake our claim on life. Accept that, and you are immortal and invincible.

#6

/blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blink:" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

WHAT THE FUCK?!

raum... while the article is not being specific, it seems to be DAMN CLEAR to me that that number is death toll related to the post-war situation. There are no cancer figures there, no traffic accidents, not dying in your sleep of old age.

it is just plain grotesk that you laugh it away the way you do.

and I am wrong because I say "some people are fed up with the US"?!!??!?! FFS. You guys keep on amazing me!

#7

by the way raum... it is like saying that the 3000+ US soldiers died of natural causes. Oh well... why all the fuzz about them, right?! I mean... you can as well just stay in Iraq then. Why discussing about pulling back to save American lives. They'd die anyway on American soil.

sounds stupid?! your analogy with death rates does as well. /rolleyes.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":rolleyes:" border="0" alt="rolleyes.gif" />

still can't believe it.

more food

Bot · #8

The BBC's Andrew North in the capital says no-one knows the true figure for how many Iraqis are dying in the conflict, but the regular UN calculations are seen as one guide.

Iraqi officials have yet to respond to this latest report, but they described a UN estimate of 3,700 civilian deaths in October alone as grossly exaggerated.

They don't teach you to think critically in Belgium, do they?

That second article proves nothing, either. You have the Iraqi government giving an estimate of 100,000-150,000. Lancet is claiming more than 600,000 people have been killed. IBC says it's only somewhere around 55,000.

So what's the real number?

No one knows... not even you. These body counts are just ridiculous, but of course you'll use them because they supposedly "prove your point" that Iraq is bad, and Americans are e-ville...

#9

QUOTE(Brains @ Jan 16 2007, 03:55 PM) /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blink:" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

WHAT THE FUCK?!

raum... while the article is not being specific, it seems to be DAMN CLEAR to me that that number is death toll related to the post-war situation. There are no cancer figures there, no traffic accidents, not dying in your sleep of old age.

it is just plain grotesk that you laugh it away the way you do.

and I am wrong because I say "some people are fed up with the US"?!!??!?! FFS. You guys keep on amazing me!

actually the numbers I POSTED include EVERY FORM OF DEATH from INFANTICIDE TO CANCER TO DRUNK DRIVING AND HEART DISEASE. And Iraqi death rate is MUCH SMALLER THAN ANY OTHER I posted.

but you know what??? In the year 2000, before our boots were there, the Death Rate in Iraq was over 6 per 1,000, and now it is just 5.37 per 1,000. The Population Growth Rate in Iraq is still 2.7!!! Do you realize that Iraq is still growing! Did you even know that in 2000, the population growth rate was 2.8?

OUR HUMAN RELIEF WHICH WE PROVIDED AS PART OF OUR WAR EFFORT HAS SAVED LIVES. The impact seems absurd, but it is part of the absurdity of war. War IS a function of growth. or it would not be so critical to human history.

But you know what? the LARGE majority of unarmed Iraqi citizens who die as casualties of war do not die by US military movements. So, what does that mean? How high on the list does "Killed by Evil Crusading American Oil-Vampire" occur on the list of the ways Iraqis are dying? not very high at all.

#10

I'm sure those tidbits will be conveniently ignored... /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />