50,000.
By on Jun 25th, 2006 at 10:22 am
50,000.
Number of Iraqis “have died violently since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, according to statistics from the Baghdad morgue, the Iraqi Health Ministry and other agencies — a toll 20,000 higher than previously acknowledged by the Bush administration.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
It’s just a number, right?
June 25th, 2006 at 10:28 amTHE DARK SIDE:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/
worth viewing.
June 25th, 2006 at 10:30 amAs long as they aren’t Americans, right?
June 25th, 2006 at 10:31 amIt’s not Fascism when WE do it.
50 Ways To Dump The Dubya
June 25th, 2006 at 10:38 amThat country’s going to be a graveyard when it’s all said and done.
I’d like to see the stats on how many have just got up and left the country as well. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s been some kind of mass exodus.
June 25th, 2006 at 11:06 amBush: Some people say, It’s OK to condemn people for t-t-t-tyranny. I don’t believe it’s OK to condemn people for t-t-t-tyranny, particularly those of us who live in the free societies.
European Summit, 6/21/06
(The “transcript” does not accurately reflect the video regarding the above statements.)
50,000 (at least), dead.
These weren’t soldiers, killed in combat.
The vast majority are civilian casualties.
Collateral damage.
Children.
Women.
People executed because they belonged to a religious sect.
A civil war, with civilians waging genocide on each other.
And we allowed it to happen.
“I don’t believe it’s OK to condemn people for tyranny”
All Hail Bush the Lesser, First Tyrant of the United States of America.
(Tyrant: an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution. m-w.com}
(See also; War-Time President)
June 25th, 2006 at 11:12 amOsama Bin Laden, not Saddam Hussein, killed Americans on American soil.
June 25th, 2006 at 11:13 amAnd two wrongs make a REICH
June 25th, 2006 at 11:28 amMUST WATCH – the youth – our only hope it seems:
What Would Jesus Do? Another Incredible Flash Animation by 15-year-old Ava Lowery of Alabama. 6/25
June 25th, 2006 at 11:46 amHow many did Saddam kill?
June 25th, 2006 at 11:50 amGeorge W. Bush, you have the blood of thousands on your hands, in the name of power hungry greed. Every moment you are conscious, your head should be hung in shame.
June 25th, 2006 at 11:55 amBush orders bombing and militay action that results in collateral casualitys, just like Benladen and Hussan, but thats OK cause he is protecting ME. It’s not OK for 7 GIs to protect ME. You go figure.
June 25th, 2006 at 12:04 pmLancet (UK’s most prestigious medical journal) study in 2004 estimate between 100 and 600 THOUSAND civilian dealths stemming from US Invasion and occupation.
Bush and his neocon buds are war criminals. They deserve what ever it was war criminals got back in the days of Neuremberg…. oh, dang, what was it that happened to THOSE Nazis? Ah yes.
June 25th, 2006 at 12:50 pmAnd speaking for BushCo, Tony Snow says, so who’s counting?
June 25th, 2006 at 1:34 pmA number is merely a number.
BushCo have blood on their hands – this is all their doing, they are accountable.
I hope to see them at the Hague.
Try doubling that number, because its more like 100,000 plus.
Problem is these studies are done on “body count”.
As anyone knows who exhumed bodies from the Twin Towers, when there are explosions and fire involved, many bodies are never going to be recovered.
50,000 is way, way low.
June 25th, 2006 at 1:45 pmIn fact, the number buy now is more likely in the 200,000 range.
Back in 2004 “THE LANCET”, the worlds LEADING Medical Journal performed a scientific study back in 2004, which estimated Iraqi “Civillian” casualties at 98,000 dead, mostly, according to the study, women and children.
Additionally the study found that most deaths were caused by coalition bombing from the air.
June 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmBased on the Lancets study, we’d be looking at somewhere in the range of 200,000 dead civilians.
Thats a lot of blood on our hands.
June 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmBased on the Lancets study, we’d be looking at somewhere in the range of 200,000 dead civilians.
Thats a lot of blood on our hands.
June 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pm3000 dead Americans on 9/11 gets you 50,000 dead Iraqis. I say we should have killed 5 million, but I guess we showed them little towel heads anyway. Mission accomplished and God Bless America!
June 25th, 2006 at 3:43 pm#18,
a reasonable projection.
June 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmI notice that most of you are acting as if the US military killed all these people. The truth, however, is that most of these people were killed by terrorists and insurgents. But you guys support the troops, right? Riiight.
The number of dead since 2003 is more than likely higher than 50,000, yet how much of that counts towards the actual war? Any society has violence. You have to subtract any eventual crime that would have happened there regardless of the war.
With Iraq suddenly free from Saddam Hussein, it’s not surprising to see crime by citizens go up. Instead of Saddam Hussein murdering people to keep control over the country, you now have people killing each other for religious or other purposes.
The crime rate under Saddam Hussein was likely very low, because that’s how things are under a dictatorship – strictly controlled in every way. So with freedom and democracy comes the price of that freedom – the freedom for people to kill each other for religion, money, or politics.
Not taking all that into consideration is nothing more than a dishonest propaganda exercise.
It’s very sad that 50,000 Iraqis have died since 2003. One wonders how many would have died under Saddam and his sons had we not removed them. One wonders how many Iraqis would have died if they had once again tried to remove Saddam from power themselves.
In Vietnam, millions of people died for absolutely no reason. Nothing came of that war. At least in Iraq we have accomplished something, and hopefully if we keep our will, we will see it through to the end – a democratic, prosperous and free Iraq to serve as a symbol for the entire Middle East.
June 25th, 2006 at 6:09 pmI notice that most of you are acting as if the US military killed all these people. The truth, however, is that most of these people were killed by terrorists and insurgents.
Comment by Stupido — June 25, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
Wrong again mellonhead.
You might actually want to “read” the independent study by the Lancet. MOST casualties were caused by “COALITION AIR STRIKES”.
But thanks for playing.
June 25th, 2006 at 7:45 pmAnd the military didn’t kill them dumbass. Bush, and all those who support him killed them.
The Troops are just doing their job.
June 25th, 2006 at 7:47 pmIt’s very sad that 50,000 Iraqis have died since 2003
Comment by Simpleton — June 25, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
Yes. I can feel your pain.
June 25th, 2006 at 7:49 pmBut its not 50,000.
Its more like 200,000.
And one day, that fact is going to be impressed upon you and you’re going to realize what you are.
Believe me, I’m not saying you’re the devil.
You’re just the chump that runs inside the liquor store to by the devil a pack of smokes.
June 25th, 2006 at 7:52 pmWorfeus,
Oh, I’ve read the Lancet study. In fact, I have ripped it into shreds. The sample they got was not representative of Iraq, end of story. You also seem to be comparing the initial stages of the war to the later stages. In the invasion period, most deaths were caused by air strikes. Since then, most deaths have been due to insurgents, terrorism, and gun battle. There are exceptions like Fallujah, but overall, especially in 2005 and later, most deaths were caused by sectarian fighting and terrorism. Not to mention the 1,000 people who died last fall during a pilgrimage, trampled to death. I guess you’ll fault Bush for that too, just like you do everything else.
June 25th, 2006 at 8:21 pmAt this rate there’ll be none left by morning.
Hey it’s almost as though when an estimate provided in the immediate aftermath of the invasion appears ridiculously high when compared to long term actual figures of dead bodies involved you should stop referring to it as something realisticn at some point. If you are REALLY FKN SLOW that point was a long time before 2006.
As an amusing side note, never, ever does the word “Lancent’ appear in any writing which acknowledges the existance of a standing army in Iraq at the time of the invasion. Likewise for the fact that most deaths in Iraq are attributable to the insurgency or religious infighting among Iraqis. I’m sure that’s just some coincidence.
June 26th, 2006 at 11:30 am#7 George W. Bush, not Osama Bin Laden, killed Americans on American soil.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:30 pm