War's Iraqi Death Toll Tops 50,000

L.A.Times ^ | June 25, 2006 | Louise Roug and Doug Smith

[yoe]

At least 50,000 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.

Many more Iraqis are believed to have been killed but not counted because of serious lapses in recording deaths in the chaotic first year after the invasion, when there was no functioning Iraqi government, and continued spotty reporting nationwide since. The toll, which is mostly of civilians but probably also includes some security forces and insurgents, is daunting: Proportionately, it is equivalent to 570,000 Americans being killed nationwide in the last three years.

In the same period, at least 2,520 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq.

Iraqi officials involved in compiling the statistics say violent deaths in some regions have been grossly undercounted, notably in the troubled province of Al Anbar in the west. Health workers there are unable to compile the data because of violence, security crackdowns, electrical shortages and failing telephone networks.

The Health Ministry acknowledged the undercount. In addition, the ministry said its figures exclude the three northern provinces of the semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan because Kurdish officials do not provide death toll figures to the government in Baghdad.

In the three years since Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, the Bush administration has rarely offered civilian death tolls. Last year, President Bush said he believed that "30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis."

[Tribune7]

Here's the casualty breakdown for the Kosovo for the first year after Kfor/KLA took over in 1999.

Remember Kosovo has a population of 2.1 million which is less than a tenth of that of Iraq.

[AmericaUnited]

50,000 DEAD IRAQI!!!

Somehow the MSM had to get the number of dead up to Vietnam levels and our military was just not cooperating.

[Sisku Hanne]

There are figures for that which have been posted here at FR which showed the yearly death toll under Saddam was actually higher than it has been during war time.
Regardless, this war time death toll estimate of 16,500 a year offers no differentiation of who is an "insurgent" and who was killed by "insurgents"...they only try to soft-pedal that angle by implying that number is insignificant. I'm sure when a bomb goes off in a busy police station or marketplace they just lump them all under war collateral.

[dalight]

This is a common tactic anymore.. take the "official" figure. Say it is inaccurate in an unprovable way. Come up with some new unprovable number based on spurious reasoning that is shocking. Take that number and multiply it to a much more shocking number. This time by multiplying it my the population of the US.

[Berlin_Freeper]

"a toll 20,000 higher than previously acknowledged by the Bush administration."

snip

"LAST YEAR, President Bush said he believed that "30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis.""

They make it seem like President Bush was trying to under count, then further into the so called news piece they are forced to admit that was last year.

[MNJohnnie]

More made up BS. Notice how they CLAIM they have "Statistics" but do not give an clear indication of WHERE they got their statistics. How much you want to be their "Source" is one of the wacko Leftist groups like Answer or Act up?

[Doogle]

.."all we all know how truthful Muslums, AL NYT and AL LA Times are..so it must be true"

Doogle

[JimRed]

40,000 non combatants, police and military trainees killed by terrorists or so-called insurgents by everything from car bombs and IEDs to targeted attacks; most of 10,000 terrorist insurgents killed by U.S. and coalition military and Iraqi security forces, and (regrettably) a few innocents caught up in the crossfire.

The numbers are a WAG (wild a$$ guess), but the concept is correct. The enemy kills WAY more civilians than we do, but the LAT suggests that Bush killed 'em all!

[TexasPatriot8]

This is such a load of crap. Most of the civilians killed by a wide margin are civis killed by the terrorists in their homes and mosques and on the street minding their own business.

And many of those in the count killed are terrorists, who dress like civilians so our military can't easily spot them on sight until they pull a gun on you and start shooting. It's not like the terrorists have little badges they wear, or special turbins that say "Aim here, I'm a terrorist". Last time I checked they didn't have those at least.

[ldish]

maybe i missed the point of your post...what is your point?

No war...no deaths...no nothing until it is your a** on the line or in a twin tower 99+ story building...and you have done nothing wrong?

[RandallFlagg]

Good point. Must be bookmarked...


Point of reference: left's "sanction deaths" comparison.

Thanks, dirtboy.

[Bommer]

So we've wasted 50,000 terrorists and only lost 2,520? This is bad news?

Funny how there no mention of many people have been murdered by Muslims and their car bombs, or how many thousands were founfd in Saddams mass graves!

[4rcane]

it was 100k deaths (lancelot report pre-2004 election) in iraq before it was 50k deaths. So what happened to the other 50k deaths?

[El Gato]

And the vast majority of that 50,000 "needed killin'".

I suspect a goodly number of them were killed by the Jihadies. Didn't bother to mention that did they. It's all "Bush's fault" anyway, so I guess even if they had mentioned who killed them, the LAT would still blame Bush for their deaths.

[null and void]

Resurrection?

[MilspecRob]

during the War of Northern Aggression.

Meat = Poison

I thought it was the rebelion war.

[silverleaf]

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it. --60 Minutes (5/12/96)

[PeteB570]

For the writers;

Ahhh, yeah. And just who has killed most of them?

How about low life, pod scum sucking, Qu'ran reading terrorists using car bombs and other such devices.

Muslims - killing their own faster than anybody else can.

[gpapa]

"It's that time of year when New Yorkers start making their summer vacation plans. Renting a place in the Hamptons? Nah, been there, done that. How about a Parisian jaunt? Noooo. Too many riots. Well, how about visiting a country that's ancient, historic, beautiful and exotic - Iraq? Sure, there's a little war going on there, but when you look at the violent death statistics in the world, [Iraq is] safer than a number of other popular travel destinations. Believe it or not. I happened to catch Rep. Steve King, a Republican of Iowa, on C-span last week and he rattled off some startling figures that demonstrate how off-base journalists are when it comes to reporting on the war in Iraq.

According to Mr. King, the violent death rate in Iraq is 25.71 per 100,000. That may sound high, but not when you compare it to places like Colombia 61.7" per 100,000 death rate, violent death rate. South Africa, has a higher violent death rate per 100,000: 49.6 per 100,000. Even Jamaica has a higher violent death rate than does Iraq: 32.4, and Venezuela comes in at 31.6 violent deaths per 100,000. "How about the violent death rates in American cities? New Orleans before Hurricane Katrina was 53.1," violent death rate per 100,000. "FBI statistics for 2004-05 have Washington" DC's violent death rate at 45.9 per 100,000; Baltimore at 37.7 per 100,000, and Atlanta at 34.9 per 100,000. The figure again from Iraq, 25.71 per 100,000, and that includes the war.

So Iraq, I mean, if you're just going to roll the dice and take your chances, Iraq's a much safer place to go than Washington or Jamaica or New Orleans pre-Katrina, or Venezuela!” (Rush Limbaugh 5/16/06) http://www.goofigure.com/UserGoofigureDetail.asp?gooID=6420

[RoadTest]

Good! That's the right sized font, too.