PDA

View Full Version : 2005 the bloodiest year in Iraq since invasion


Atlas
06-08-2006, 12:34 AM
IRAQ DEATH TOLL IN THIRD YEAR
OF OCCUPATION IS HIGHEST YET

SoCals link:http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr13.php

The civilian death toll has risen inexorably for the entire duration of the US-led military presence in Iraq following the initial invasion. That is the grim reality uncovered by ongoing tracking of media reports by the Iraq Body Count project (IBC).

Figures released by IBC today, updated by statistics for the year 2005 from the main Baghdad morgue, show that the total number of civilians reported killed has risen year-on-year since May 1st 2003 (the date that President Bush announced “major combat operations have ended”):

6,331 from 1st May 2003 to the first anniversary of the invasion, 19th March 2004 (324 days: Year 1)
11,312 from 20th March 2004 to 19th March 2005 (365 days: Year 2)
12,617 from 20th March 2005 to 1st March 2006 (346 days: Year 3).
In terms of average violent deaths per day this represents:

20 per day in Year 1
31 per day in Year 2 and
36 per day in Year 3.

The IBC figure for Year 3 includes no deaths from March 2006, excludes the bulk of killings which followed the 22nd February bombing of a major Shiite Muslim shrine in Samarra, and lacks Baghdad morgue data for January and February this year. If January and February 2006 are excluded as being clearly incomplete, then the daily death rate for the remaining part of Year 3 rises to 40 (11,480 deaths over 287 days = 40 per day). However even before Year 3 has ended, and with incomplete data for its final months, the number of civilians reported killed is already higher than for all of Year 2 (12,617 vs. 11,312).

Although what has been described as ‘sectarian violence’ undoubtedly contributes to a growing proportion of deaths, the last year’s total includes 370 known civilian deaths from military action by US-led forces and 2,231 from anti-occupation activity against coalition and Iraqi government targets. The post-invasion increase in criminal activity remains an important concern, but the majority of media reports do not allow a clear identification of the perpetrators or their motives. The “unknown agents” who did most of the killing could fall into any of the categories above, as well as other types of ‘terrorist.’ Reports also indicate that the past year has seen an increasing number of extra-judicial executions.

Speaking from London, Iraq Body Count cofounder John Sloboda said, “Today’s figures are an indictment of three years of occupation, which continues to make the lives of ordinary Iraqis worse, not better. Talk of civil war is a convenient way for the US and Iraqi authorities to mask the real and continuing core of this conflict, which is between an incompetent and brutal occupying power on the one hand and a nationalist insurgency fuelled by grief, anger, and humiliation on the other. This conflict is proof that violence begets more violence. The initial act that sparked this cycle of violence is the illegal US-led invasion of March and April 2003 which resulted in 7,312 civilian deaths and 17,298 injured in a mere 42 days. The insurgency will remain strong so long as the US military remains in Iraq, and ordinary Iraqi people will have more death and destruction to look forward to.”

Iraq Body Count cofounder Hamit Dardagan added: “In September 2003, after our first major review of civil insecurity in Iraq informed by data from the Baghdad morgue, we noted that:

‘The US may be effective at waging war but the descent of Iraq’s capital city into lawlessness under US occupation shows that it is incompetent at maintaining public order and providing security for the civilian population. The US has toppled Saddam and discovered that it won't be discovering any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So why is it still there? And if the US military can’t ensure the safety of Iraqi civilians and itself poses a danger to them, what is its role in that country?’
“The question still stands, and Iraqis are still being killed in increasing numbers. How many more must die before the architects of the ‘military solution’ for Iraq realise that the only sure way to reduce violence is to stop inflicting it?”

Atlas
06-08-2006, 12:35 AM
I imagine the Iraqis aren't to impressed with the democracy we have shown them.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 02:27 AM
IRAQ DEATH TOLL IN THIRD YEAR
OF OCCUPATION IS HIGHEST YET


Way to "liberate" the people there, Dumbya. :oyvey:

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 02:32 AM
I just don't understand how people who voted for Bush can sleep at night knowing that all these people are dead because the guy they voted for is a lying sack of sh*t.

Atlas
06-08-2006, 02:32 AM
We can hope that the death of Zarqawi is a turning point and the suicide bombs ect.... will decrease.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 02:38 AM
We can hope that the death of Zarqawi is a turning point and the suicide bombs ect.... will decrease.

I wonder if/when it will be confirmed that he is dead?

So far, everyone is quoting the source as saying he "may be" dead.

Remember how many times the Bush propaganda machine has reported "we killed al Qaeda's #3 guy," etc.

Icing down the champagne just in case...

As for the suicide bombs, etc., I guess it remains to be seen who Bin Laden chooses to be this assclown's successor.

Atlas
06-08-2006, 02:40 AM
I wonder if/when it will be confirmed that he is dead?

So far, everyone is quoting the source as saying he "may be" dead.

Remember how many times the Bush propaganda machine has reported "we killed al Qaeda's #3 guy," etc.

Icing down the champagne just in case...

As for the suicide bombs, etc., I guess it remains to be seen who Bin Laden chooses to be this assclown's successor.

He is dead. Military confirmed finger prints.

I reallly don't think Bin Laden is going to choose his replacement. we'll see. Long ways to go but at least this is a positive sign.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 02:56 AM
He is dead. Military confirmed finger prints.

Cool! :thumbsup:

Couldn't have happened to a more deserving piece of crap.

Atlas
06-08-2006, 03:18 AM
Cool! :thumbsup:

Couldn't have happened to a more deserving piece of crap.

I hope he suffered like Nicolas Berg. They were able to recognize his face so odds are pretty good he didn't die instantly. I hope he was able to sit there in his own blood conteplating his mistakes, knowing that we got him.

gunns
06-08-2006, 05:27 AM
I imagine the Iraqis aren't to impressed with the democracy we have shown them.

Dumbya's point is that at least it isn't Saddam killing them anymore. That should thrill them.

We can hope that the death of Zarqawi is a turning point and the suicide bombs ect.... will decrease.

I sincerely doubt it. They are never ending, another example of Bush not knowing the enemy. We should have been fighting our enemy on their own ground, not taking it to some country where the mental midget had an agenda. I wonder sometimes if Bush looks at this occupation and wonders what went wrong with his glorious plan. I doubt it, the cluelessness is never ending.

Spider
06-08-2006, 06:56 AM
if numbnuts Zarqawi is realy dead hooray for ourside ......

defenseman
06-08-2006, 07:34 AM
I hope he suffered like Nicolas Berg. They were able to recognize his face so odds are pretty good he didn't die instantly. I hope he was able to sit there in his own blood conteplating his mistakes, knowing that we got him.

Agreed. And if you believe in hell, he's there now, enjoying the scenery and the torture......for eternity...dman

W*GS
06-08-2006, 08:03 AM
How does 2005 being the "bloodiest" square with the 100,000 dead figure being bandied about back in 2004?

Atlas
06-08-2006, 11:27 AM
How does 2005 being the "bloodiest" square with the 100,000 dead figure being bandied about back in 2004?

I guess it depends on how you gather the statistics and what data you use.

The 100,000 number comes from all deaths. Alot of deaths happen because there is just no medicine there anymore, also the street lights don't work and no cops patroling traffic so traffic deaths are up tremendously. ect. ect. ect. Plus the 100,000 comes from years 2003 and 2004 combined.

The 2005 stat is strictly violent deaths.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 05:50 PM
How does 2005 being the "bloodiest" square with the 100,000 dead figure being bandied about back in 2004?

The '04 figure was a cumulative (there's that word you have a hard time with again) total.

The '05 figures are just for that one year ('05.)

W*GS
06-08-2006, 09:26 PM
The '04 figure was a cumulative (there's that word you have a hard time with again) total.

Sigh. Time for another smackdown on ya...

You asserted (and I quote):

"Oil prices started to climb the minute Smirk & Sneer took office--before 9/11 and before the Iraq invasion."

yet the data shows that oil prices fell by nearly 50% between early 2001 and early 2002.

There was no "cumulative" in your original assertion.

W*GS
06-08-2006, 09:33 PM
I guess it depends on how you gather the statistics and what data you use.

Or comparing apples and oranges.

IBC says:

"The initial act that sparked this cycle of violence is the illegal US-led invasion of March and April 2003 which resulted in 7,312 civilian deaths and 17,298 injured in a mere 42 days."

Add that 7,312 to the

"6,331 from 1st May 2003 to the first anniversary of the invasion, 19th March 2004 (324 days: Year 1)
11,312 from 20th March 2004 to 19th March 2005 (365 days: Year 2)
12,617 from 20th March 2005 to 1st March 2006 (346 days: Year 3)."

statistics, and it's not quite so clear.

Why count deaths from other non-war-violence causes and compare them to deaths just from war violence?

But, as Stalin said, a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
06-08-2006, 11:17 PM
I reallly don't think Bin Laden is going to choose his replacement. we'll see.

It's all a hoax, anyway. Al Qaeda is NOT a centralized organization, they do NOT depend on any single individual to boss them around, they aren't dependent on Zarqawi or anyone else to keep going. This guy going down is about as meaningful as trimming a fingernail is to my liver.

And we aren't fighting Al-Q in Iraq in any event, in any real way. The people fighting us are Iraqis, not some foreign group that will run away if we kill a handful of leaders.

Wonder if they'll thaw OBL for the fall elections?