Iraq War: Counting the Cost
Stewart A. Alexander | 01.04.2007 14:08 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Iraq
The post invasion Iraqi death toll is now estimated to be as high as 1,000,000, far higher than the previous estimate of 655,000; this is according to recent scientific data. Over 5,000,000 Iraqis have been hurt or wounded. Recent figures indicate the refugee numbers have climbed from 2,700,000 to over 3,900,000 and the refugee crisis is broadly impacting the entire region of the Middle East. These are the figures that are not being reported on American television or in American newspapers.
Stewart A. Alexander
Views and News
March 31, 2007
The U.S. has just entered into the fifth year of the Iraq War and the cost has escalated far beyond the original estimates of the Bush Administration and U.S. military experts. Prior to the invasion, March 19, 2003, it was anticipated that the major conflict would have been accomplished in less than six months.
Now more than four years later the U.S. is entrenched in a civil war that has cost the lives of more than 3,200 Americans and more than 24,000 have been reported wounded by official reports.
The Iraqi casualties reveal another grim reminder of the disastrous human cost and the effects of the Iraq Civil War. Updated figures reveal the situation is far worst than what is being reported on American television or in American newspapers.
The post invasion Iraqi death toll is now estimated to be as high as 1,000,000, far higher than the previous estimate of 655,000; this is according to recent scientific data. Over 5,000,000 Iraqis have been hurt or wounded. Recent figures indicate the refugee numbers have climbed from 2,700,000 to over 3,900,000 and the refugee crisis is broadly impacting the entire region of the Middle East.
Some estimates indicate the cost to rebuild Iraq will exceed $1 trillion; however as the civil war continues this number could be off by a much wider margin.
Presently the U.S. Congress is working on legislation to provide the Bush Administration the supplemental military funding, over $100 billion, to continue a civil war that is not supported by the majority of Americans.
The cost to finance the Iraq Civil War has thrown the U.S. into the grips of a recession which is affecting every working class family across America. Working class families and veterans have to sacrifice vital services for the U.S. government to cover the escalating cost of the war.
Families, that have loss loves ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, are not receiving a decent compensation from the U.S. government to continue with their lives and to raise their children; instead Congress continues to fund the devastation and their pork barrel projects here in the U.S.
Presently Congress is borrowing the U.S. further into debt to continue the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost to occupy these two countries is creating a dangerous situation for the U.S. in the event of a natural disaster, such as Hurricane Katrina that claimed over 1,700 victims and devastated entire communities; and today the U.S. is not prepared for such emergencies.
The U.S. Congress has been setting timetables for troop withdrawals and to end the occupation in Iraq; however these timetables are extended too far and have been set to accomplish the political goals for the Democrats and the Republicans in 2008.
It is time for the U.S. Congress to cut funding for a policy that has only produced failing results. Congress should only provide the necessary funds to bring American troops back home; a sum far short of $100 billion.
A majority of Americans are opposed to the supplemental military funding in Congress because the funds will only increase the deaths and bloodshed of innocent people and American troops; funds that will further disrupt the peace in the Middle East and the entire world.
For more information search the Web for Stewart A. Alexander; Troop Withdrawal Timetables Divide Democrats; Democrats Waffling on Iraq War; Alexander: PFP Setting Tone for 2008.
http://www.salt-g.com
stewartalexander4paf@ca.rr.com
http://sacramentofordemocracy.org/?q=node/view/5305
Views and News
March 31, 2007
The U.S. has just entered into the fifth year of the Iraq War and the cost has escalated far beyond the original estimates of the Bush Administration and U.S. military experts. Prior to the invasion, March 19, 2003, it was anticipated that the major conflict would have been accomplished in less than six months.
Now more than four years later the U.S. is entrenched in a civil war that has cost the lives of more than 3,200 Americans and more than 24,000 have been reported wounded by official reports.
The Iraqi casualties reveal another grim reminder of the disastrous human cost and the effects of the Iraq Civil War. Updated figures reveal the situation is far worst than what is being reported on American television or in American newspapers.
The post invasion Iraqi death toll is now estimated to be as high as 1,000,000, far higher than the previous estimate of 655,000; this is according to recent scientific data. Over 5,000,000 Iraqis have been hurt or wounded. Recent figures indicate the refugee numbers have climbed from 2,700,000 to over 3,900,000 and the refugee crisis is broadly impacting the entire region of the Middle East.
Some estimates indicate the cost to rebuild Iraq will exceed $1 trillion; however as the civil war continues this number could be off by a much wider margin.
Presently the U.S. Congress is working on legislation to provide the Bush Administration the supplemental military funding, over $100 billion, to continue a civil war that is not supported by the majority of Americans.
The cost to finance the Iraq Civil War has thrown the U.S. into the grips of a recession which is affecting every working class family across America. Working class families and veterans have to sacrifice vital services for the U.S. government to cover the escalating cost of the war.
Families, that have loss loves ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, are not receiving a decent compensation from the U.S. government to continue with their lives and to raise their children; instead Congress continues to fund the devastation and their pork barrel projects here in the U.S.
Presently Congress is borrowing the U.S. further into debt to continue the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost to occupy these two countries is creating a dangerous situation for the U.S. in the event of a natural disaster, such as Hurricane Katrina that claimed over 1,700 victims and devastated entire communities; and today the U.S. is not prepared for such emergencies.
The U.S. Congress has been setting timetables for troop withdrawals and to end the occupation in Iraq; however these timetables are extended too far and have been set to accomplish the political goals for the Democrats and the Republicans in 2008.
It is time for the U.S. Congress to cut funding for a policy that has only produced failing results. Congress should only provide the necessary funds to bring American troops back home; a sum far short of $100 billion.
A majority of Americans are opposed to the supplemental military funding in Congress because the funds will only increase the deaths and bloodshed of innocent people and American troops; funds that will further disrupt the peace in the Middle East and the entire world.
For more information search the Web for Stewart A. Alexander; Troop Withdrawal Timetables Divide Democrats; Democrats Waffling on Iraq War; Alexander: PFP Setting Tone for 2008.
http://www.salt-g.com stewartalexander4paf@ca.rr.com http://sacramentofordemocracy.org/?q=node/view/5305
Stewart A. Alexander
e-mail:
stewartalexander4paf@ca.rr.com
Homepage:
http://www.salt-g.com
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
Those very high numbers are disputed
02.04.2007 10:13
Anarchist
Dispute the disputed?
02.04.2007 14:52
The Lancet survey which numbered the dead Iraqis at 655,000 was impeccable and peer reviewed. Never in it's history has Lancet research ever been disputed.
It is entirely predictable that 'official sources' prefer to keep the figures for number of deaths to 30-40,000.
The scale and varacity of this evil genocide, empire building, theft of resources and lies can only be blurred by the constant dispute and muddying of the waters by 'official sources'.
Soon there will be no longer enough mud left on the planet to cover up the vile truth, or for the millions of corpses to be buried beneath it.
cassandra
Yeah the Lancet got it wrong...
03.04.2007 00:06
"The survey asked respondents about deaths in the family and verified responses by asking for death certificates, which were produced in 92 percent of cases when requested.[61] The study’s conclusions showed an increase in violent deaths overall, and a proportional shift toward violence by actors other than Coalition forces. However, Coalition violence continued to account for the largest reported proportional source of violence – 31% of all deaths.[62]"
"Unsurprisingly, both Hopkins studies have been hotly contested by the White House, Downing Street and many other defenders of the war and occupation."
The death toll attributable to war and the effects of the bungled occupation will continue to rise for years after any withdrawal.
The prime reason that targetting civilian infrastructure is prohibited under the Geneva Conventions and that occupational forces have the duty of care to uphold the human right to normality and protection under the rule of law, is not some wet liberal concept of fair play and decency, it is because attacking infrastructure kills civillians, often far more indirectly through the loss of facilities that support life than through the initial attacks.
That being taken into account, the Lancet study is actually a snapshot in time and will therefore grossly underestimate the wider, real-world mortality.
I doubt we will ever get an accurate picture of all those who have died, are dying and will die from a lack of fresh water (promoting serious (and often fatal when there is a lack of basic antibiotic treatment or even ambulances) gastric disease (especially in the very young and old), the lack of food, the pathology of chronic malnutrition (and given its link to infertility and miscarriage , the population loss is also incalculable), the statistics for murder due to the breakdown in the rule of law and suicide due to the lack of psychiatric treatments.
The health issues were burgeoning under the Oil for Food pro gramme as were also the damage being done to child development due to the lack of access to education (also feeding crime and child prostitution), we can now add the issues of total lack of security, mass unemployment and massive internal displacement.
Anyone who tells you that mortality falls below 30k is quite frankly either completely ignorant of the effects of war and blatant liar.
The Lancet got it "wrong" because as scientists they limited themselves to verifiable, empirical data sources. Common sense dictates that the real figure is much higher, but by the very nature of the total loss of civillian normality, we will only ever be able to guess at how much higher the actuality is.
Iraq is still under the same brutal siege it was under before the invasion, it has just stepped up in intensity and brutality.
Not Donald Rumsfled
cluster bomb the messenger
05.04.2007 18:19
No, reread the report. The Lancet put the median figure at the time of research as 655,000. They put the upper figure at 1 million and conceded that was probably an under-estimate.
You could criticise them for releasing a figure while admitting it was conservative. But you've just done the smae thing yourself. The Lancet did so though knowing the flak they were going to take from the most powerful people in the world, and in the context of Iraqi Body Counts 36000 estimates. Even two weeks ago on IM there was a photo of an activist with a sign claiming '186,000 innocent victims' which only illustrates how under-reported this has been.
In a way it becomes surreal after a while, arguing whether Blair is more guilty for helping kill 1 million than killing 655,000. Or how many will end up being killed by his corruption - an 'ethical foriegn policy' turned to an ethnically-cleansed foriegn policy. Still, i bet it matters to the 345000 extra dead and their families, or however more it must be by now. But don't blame the Lancet for that, they didn't kill anyone.
orca