1.8 million civilians died during the sanctions

[CptStern]

the first gulf war dead tally during actual fighting:

200,000 iraqi soldiers
20-30,000 civilians


it's estimated that for every dead american 1000 iraqi soldiers were killed


during the 12 years of sanctions:

by 2003:

1,807,000 civilians, 757,000 of those were children


US deaths: 148
out of the 148, number of americans who died due to friendly fire: 37


during the 5 years in office Governor GW Bush executed 156 ...he killed more americans in prison than died in the gulf war


source


btw author of the source: Ramsey Clark, former US attorney general

 

[PickledGecko]

200,000 iranian soldiers
20-30,000 civilians

Typo??

 

[CptStern]

Typo??

hehhe yes

 

[gh0st]

the first gulf war dead tally during actual fighting:

200,000 iraqi soldiers
20-30,000 civilians

I dont mind so much the soldiers deaths... but I question how many iraqi civilians died... as I recall we never attacked Iraq directly during that war.

The amount of dead from those sanctions is incredible. Punishment should happen to the regime, not to the people - though saddam certainly didnt make it easier for his people by squandering the resources his nation was alloted on himself and his party.

during the 5 years in office Governor GW Bush executed 156 ...he killed more americans in prison than died in the gulf war

Why is this relevant? Are you telling me that all 156 people there were innocent of all charges? Are you saying that a judge and jury were wrong?? Bush didnt "kill" them, the system did.

 

[seinfeldrules]

I dont mind so much the soldiers deaths... but I question how many iraqi civilians died... as I recall we never attacked Iraq directly during that war.

The bombings. There is a middle ground that the US needs to walk when fighting a war. The objective is to prevent as many civilian deaths as possible, while still waging an effective war. For the most part, I believe the US has done so during both Gulf Wars. The civilian casualties could have been much, much higher if precautions werent taken.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

the first gulf war dead tally during actual fighting:

200,000 iraqi soldiers
20-30,000 civilians


it's estimated that for every dead american 1000 iraqi soldiers were killed

That seems a bit high for civvies. Iraqi combatant count seems right, I remember Bodey telling us about how they fought against warnings before the ground war and the Allied forces ended up having to dig trenches and bulldoze enemy bodies into them for burial (too many to do individual)

during the 12 years of sanctions:

by 2003:

1,807,000 civilians, 757,000 of those were children

Taking action sooner could have helped stop this, I blame the UN. Clinton wasn't too too bad with Iraq, Operation Desert Fox should have went much farther, though.

US deaths: 148
out of the 148, number of americans who died due to friendly fire: 37


during the 5 years in office Governor GW Bush executed 156 ...he killed more americans in prison than died in the gulf war

The governor does not sentence people to death, the courts do. Is every governor of every state the one killing the convicts on death row in their state? No. Also, they have been found to be guilty and a judge has declared they deserve death.

 

[Eg.]

the main point of war is not to minize civilian death, its to beat the opposing nation into a pulp so that it cannot fight back. thinking that way is just touchy-feelyness coming into a part of reality that it doesnt beong.


go blame clintom stern, and the UN

 

[Sparta]

I dont think Clinton had anything to do with the first Gulf War did he? I was always under the impression that Bush Snr. started that.

 

[UltraProAnti]

And, lest we forget: Saddam became the enemy when he became disobedient, not when he slaughtered Kurds, and his invasion of Kuwait was no different in kind from Bush Sr's invasion of Panama previously.

All this talk of HOW wars are fought is irrelevant to the political issues surrounding WHY they are fought in the first place, which is where attention is better focussed since in a democracy, the people who start the wars can - at least nominally - be held to account.

10 cents plse.

 

[Direwolf]

I dont think Clinton had anything to do with the first Gulf War did he? I was always under the impression that Bush Snr. started that.

The argument is that while Clinton made several bombing runs (ok, not personally ) he never followed through and did more than drop bombs, no matter what Saddam did.

Personally I do feel sorry for the effect of the sanctions, but I also know that its just international politics as usual. This stuff happens, sad as it is.

 

[CptStern]

seinfeldrules and RakuraiTenjin ...you both havent listened to a word that I've said in the last year or so ..the US (not the UN, nato or any other group: the US) didnt try to "minimalize civilian casualties" in fact the exact opposite is true..iraqi water treatment assessment document proves that


eg: you have no clue


gh0st ...you're right there was no real need to bring bush into it but it hammered my point that the first iraqi war was nothing more than an excercise in mass slaughter


btw the bulldozer incident ..there's some accounts that the US bulldozed alive wounded iraqi soldiers

 

[baxter]

When asked on US television if she [Madeline Albright, US Secretary of State] thought that the death of half a million Iraqi children [from sanctions in Iraq] was a price worth paying, Albright replied: “This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it.”

For some reason I find this remark appalling. No denial, no outrage just a kind "yeah so what " attitude. I've never felt the urge to slap a women before but for some reason....

 

[CptStern]

I agree ..when I first saw the 60 minutes episode I was appalled ..I thought there had to be some mistake ...I mean why would she openly admit that it was necessary that 500k children had to die?

 

[Gorgon]

cptStern, the real Number is 6-8Million Iraqis has been killed since 1979.

Proof: ask any Iraqi.............

Scary. 1979 the year Sadam started executing people.

 

[Laivasse]

I agree ..when I first saw the 60 minutes episode I was appalled ..I thought there had to be some mistake ...I mean why would she openly admit that it was necessary that 500k children had to die?

If senior public figures don't react to the figures with shock or humility, then the rest of the populace will be cultured into acting with the same blase attitude. No human can really comprehend the atrocity of 500,000 other humans dying. So politicians react the way they want other people to react, then they minimise the criticism they get.

 

[CptStern]

I agree ...but it just seems so hypocritical to suggest killing children could ever be justifiable under any circumstances

 

[Hapless]

There you go using ANYTHING Ramsey Clark says as evidence of anything. Ramsey Clark is a kook. Anybody who wants to can do the research on him. And I don't want to hear, "But he was the US Attorney General." Yeah, he was. 30-40 years ago. Michael Jackson used to be a respected pop star. 30-40 years ago.

 

[CptStern]

There you go using ANYTHING Ramsey Clark says as evidence of anything. Ramsey Clark is a kook. Anybody who wants to can do the research on him. And I don't want to hear, "But he was the US Attorney General." Yeah, he was. 30-40 years ago. Michael Jackson used to be a respected pop star. 30-40 years ago.

hmmm instead of a weak attempt of character assasination just prove him wrong ...post casualties figures released by the US


oh ya ...forgot:


"It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in. -- Gen. Colin Powell in the New York Times, on Iraqi deaths the first time round"

 

[Hapless]

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/06/21/clark/
http://emperors-clothes.com/ramsey/ramsey4.htm
http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/November-December-2003/feature_saunders_novdec03.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4470825

Just a few links regarding your favorite source.

 

[Hapless]

hmmm instead of a weak attempt of character assasination just prove him wrong ...post casualties figures released by the US


oh ya ...forgot:


"It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in. -- Gen. Colin Powell in the New York Times, on Iraqi deaths the first time round"

Ah, I see. Your boy throws random numbers out there with nothing to back them up, and I gotta prove him wrong. Schweet. Remember the oil pipeline in Afghanistan, Stern?

 

[CptStern]

so? all these articles say he defended criminals ...well he is a criminal defense lawyer

btw:

doesnt seem too bad here




so you find those figures yet?

 

[CptStern]

Ah, I see. Your boy throws random numbers out there with nothing to back them up, and I gotta prove him wrong. Schweet. Remember the oil pipeline in Afghanistan, Stern?

one argument doesnt win the battle ...how many times have I trumped you? oh I forgot ..I dont keep count of such trivial matters


oh btw Albright seems to agree with Ramsey's figure

 

[T.H.C.138]

cptStern, the real Number is 6-8Million Iraqis has been killed since 1979.

Proof: ask any Iraqi.............

Scary. 1979 the year Sadam started executing people.

QFE

I have been thinking lately that every country should just push the damn button and get it over with..a cleansing fire to remove the pestilence called "Man"..

this next bit isn't directed at anyone here,its just a general shout at the world

your country sucks as bad as everyone elses just in different ways,so get over yourself and start looking at the similarities instead of glorifying the differences..

we all need the same things..air,water,food,etc. theres a start! the same things kill us..we all reproduce the same way..the list goes on..

lets start a revolution of the world!

 

[Hapless]

one argument doesnt win the battle ...how many times have I trumped you? oh I forgot ..I dont keep count of such trivial matters


oh btw Albright seems to agree with Ramsey's figure

I don't recall you ever trumping me. Posting the same Madeline Albright quote over and over and relying on guys like Ramsey Clark for your info is hardly trumping anybody. But, I'll get back to you with those figures, for now RL calls.

 

[CptStern]

cptStern, the real Number is 6-8Million Iraqis has been killed since 1979.

Proof: ask any Iraqi.............

Scary. 1979 the year Sadam started executing people.

600,000 not 6 million:


"Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq."

source

more iraqi children died during the sanctions. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam was a murdering psychopath but that doesnt excuse the deliberate murder of 1.8 million civilians during the sanctions on iraq

 

[Feath]

When I met the minister of health, a Kurd and a medical doctor, in Baghdad on Feb. 24, 2003, he gave me the ministry's detailed report on the effects of the sanctions on the people of Iraq, through December, 2002. It stated 1,807,000 people had died in Iraq as a direct result of the sanctions since their imposition on Aug. 6, 1990. Of these 757,000 were children under the age of five.

So, his figures came from the Iraqi Government. They obviously have no interest in making up figures at all.

I remember reading something about the sanctions a while ago. The Iraqi Government came up with the figures using the following method:

1) Measure current population. Call this, X.
2) Estimate what current population should be. Call this Y.
3) Number of people killed by sanctions = Y - X

If this is true, then you can see how easily the figures can be misleading. Some of these "deaths" would have just been people who weren't born.

(If this has been disproved, then sorry.)

 

[baxter]

It's unfair to be anti Bush (as if ) all the time but while looking around the net at these figures I came across this from the UK.

• Just before Christmas [1999], the department of trade and industry in London blocked a shipment of vaccines meant to protect Iraqi children against diphtheria and yellow fever. Dr Kim Howells told parliament why. His title of under secretary of state for competition and consumer affairs, eminently suited his Orwellian reply. The children's vaccines were banned, he said, “because they are capable of being used in weapons of mass destruction”.

 

[Feath]

Erm, what's so Orwellian about his job description?

 

[baxter]

I think he is refering to faceless bureaucracy.

 

[Kebean PFC]

Hmm ok,

First that Ramsey guy is a known war criminal sypathizer so i don't trust any of his stuff. Just the same way you wouldn't trust the account of Joe war monger, so lets give it a rest, huh?

your country sucks as bad as everyone elses just in different ways,so get over yourself and start looking at the similarities instead of glorifying the differences..

we all need the same things..air,water,food,etc. theres a start! the same things kill us..we all reproduce the same way..the list goes on..

lets start a revolution of the world!

QFT

 

[Hapless]

http://www.mattwelch.com/NatPostSave/Sanctions.htm
http://www.reason.com/0203/fe.mw.the.shtml

Note that first link is to a Canadian website.. :E

Now, I challenge you to argue against this guy without resorting to personal attacks...

 

[CptStern]

I was wondering how long before you brought that article up:


"The surveys, UNICEF reiterated, were never intended to produce an "absolute figure" of deaths, and the half-million number was based on false assumptions: "In other words, if there hadn't been two wars, if sanctions hadn't been introduced and if investment in social services had been maintained -- there would have been 500,000 fewer deaths of children under five."


either way you slice it 500,000 children died ..it's a ball park figure UNICEF admitted to it



"From the standpoint of on-the-ground research, the UNICEF report is by far the best we have. For interpretation of the scores of other studies, I have been impressed with the aforementioned Richard Garfield, whose major work (available at www.cam.ac.uk/societies/casi/info/garfield/dr-garfield.html) picked apart others' methodologies and freely admitted which of his data points were weakest

Recently, he has estimated the latter, less conservative number at 500,000 plus between 1990 and 2002"

The chief causes? "Contaminated water, lack of high-quality foods, inadequate breast-feeding, poor weaning practices and inadequate supplies in the curative health care system. This was the product of both a lack of some essential goods, and inadequate or inefficient use of existing essential goods."



so pretty much it's my "whacko" against yours ..although I have far more "whackos" in my corner



...you know what would settle this? if we just had the figures from the US assessments of civilian casualties in iraq

 

[Hapless]

I was wondering how long before you brought that article up:


"The surveys, UNICEF reiterated, were never intended to produce an "absolute figure" of deaths, and the half-million number was based on false assumptions: "In other words, if there hadn't been two wars, if sanctions hadn't been introduced and if investment in social services had been maintained -- there would have been 500,000 fewer deaths of children under five."


either way you slice it 500,000 children died ..it's a ball park figure UNICEF admitted to it ...again were are the figures from the US assessments of civilian casualties in iraq?

Nobody knows how many children died as a result of sanctions. It would be nearly impossible to know for sure. Did you read the part about the special morgues in which dead babies were kept to be rolled out by the regime to show how the sanctions were killing Iraqi children? The majority of assessments of the death toll are based on Saddam regime information. Of course, Saddam would never lie to make himself look better, now would he?

Furthermore, the sanctions were A UNITED NATIONS thing. The UN enacted the sanctions, the UN monitored the sanctions and people associated with the UN including Kofi Annan's son profited from kickbacks as a direct result of the sanctions. Saddam spent billions during the sanctions building lavish mansions and pampering himself and his cronies.

Why does it matter whether or not there are US assessments of civilian deaths resulting from the sanctions? Would it make you feel better somehow if there were? My suspicion is that if the US came out and said, "500,001 Iraqis died as a result of the UN sanctions" you and your ilk would scream, "Liars!!! You're holding back information!!"

the half-million number was based on false assumptions

I think the above is all that needs to be said, and YOU said it.

Edit: Bad boy, editing while I was replying :flame:

 

[Hapless]

Actually, how about neither of us relies on wackos anymore? Verifiable sources would be fine with me.

 

[Hapless]

But the "substantial reduction" was historic; if the rate had merely held firm at 1989 levels, the number of "excess deaths" would have been 420,000

Conveniently missed that little gem in your cutting and pasting, didn't you?

 

[CptStern]

Nobody knows how many children died as a result of sanctions. It would be nearly impossible to know for sure. Did you read the part about the special morgues in which dead babies were kept to be rolled out by the regime to show how the sanctions were killing Iraqi children? The majority of assessments of the death toll are based on Saddam regime information. Of course, Saddam would never lie to make himself look better, now would he?

funny how you didnt mention that there were ground assessments by the UN and other public health groups:

"Team members visited Iraq’s thirty largest cities in all eighteen Governorates, including rural areas in every part of the country. The mission was accomplished without Iraqi government interference or supervision."

source

Furthermore, the sanctions were A UNITED NATIONS thing. The UN enacted the sanctions, the UN monitored the sanctions and people associated with the UN including Kofi Annan's son profited from kickbacks as a direct result of the sanctions. Saddam spent billions during the sanctions building lavish mansions and pampering himself and his cronies.

hmmm the evidence points to another culprit as well:

"Holds on contracts for the water and sanitation sector are a prime reason for the increases in sickness and death," Hall wrote. Of the 18 contracts, all but one hold was placed by the U.S. Government. The contracts are for purification chemicals, chlorinators, chemical dosing pumps, water tankers, and other equipment." - Rep. Tony P. Hall, (D-Ohio)


Effects of Bombing on Disease Occurrence in Baghdad

"Food- and waterborne diseases have the greatest
potential for outbreaks in the civilian and military
population over the next 30 to 60 days.

Increased incidence of diseases will be attributable to
degradation of normal preventive medicine, waste disposal,
water purification/distribution, electricity, and decreased
ability to control disease outbreaks. Any urban area
in Iraq that has received infrastructure damage will have
similar problems."



"assessment is that major disease outbreaks currently have not occurred in Baghdad or Basrah. For severe outbreaks to develop, a protracted war or more extensive collateral damage would have to occur.

However, conditions are favorable for communicable disease outbreaks, particularly in major urban areas affected by coalition bombing...."

".....most likely diseases during next sixty-ninety days (descending order): diarrheal diseases (particularly children); acute respiratory illnesses (colds and influenza); typhoid; hepatitis A (particularly children); measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children); meningitis, including meningococcal (particularly children); cholera (possible, but less likely)."

source

Why does it matter whether or not there are US assessments of civilian deaths resulting from the sanctions? Would it make you feel better somehow if there were? My suspicion is that if the US came out and said, "500,001 Iraqis died as a result of the UN sanctions" you and your ilk would scream, "Liars!!! You're holding back information!!"

simple explanation:

"It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in." -- Gen. Colin Powell

“We don’t do body counts” - General Tommy Franks

Conveniently missed that little gem in your cutting and pasting, didn't you?

no I didnt ..actually it works against you. Every single shred of evidence from the declassified US documents, to WHO documents to UNICEF to Warchild ground assessments points to the same thing: a dramatic increase in child deaths during the sanctions.


"...the mortality rate of under-five year old children has increased by 160% over the last decade. This is on average ten times more than civil strife (Rwanda) or HIV/AIDS (South Africa) affected countries in east and southern Africa. "



finally


"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)


that pretty much confirms what all the evidence says ...I mean, if it wasnt true why wouldnt Albright say something like "wha? 500k are you crazy?"


we

think

the price

was

worth

it

 

[Direwolf]

I'm trying to sort through the links here (gah, change the color already!), but my impression Stern is that Albright just screwed up in that interview. My guess is she got caught off-guard and tried to backpedal, but put her foot in her mouth.

And if that really is what she feels, I sincerely doubt she speaks for the whole government on that point. The fact that you've quoted so many congressmen who had issues with it supports that thought.

 

[baxter]

"The change in 10 years is unparalleled, in my experience," Anupama Rao Singh, Unicef's senior representative in Iraq, told me. "In 1989, the literacy rate was 95%; and 93% of the population had free access to modern health facilities. Parents were fined for failing to send their children to school. The phenomenon of street children or children begging was unheard of. Iraq had reached a stage where the basic indicators we use to measure the overall well-being of human beings, including children, were some of the best in the world. Now it is among the bottom 20%. In 10 years, child mortality has gone from one of the lowest in the world, to the highest."

source

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html

 

[CptStern]

I'm trying to sort through the links here (gah, change the color already!), but my impression Stern is that Albright just screwed up in that interview. My guess is she got caught off-guard and tried to backpedal, but put her foot in her mouth.

And if that really is what she feels, I sincerely doubt she speaks for the whole government on that point. The fact that you've quoted so many congressmen who had issues with it supports that thought.

well it's the way the question was asked:

"do you think the price was worth it" ...she could have denied the number she could have denied culpability ...she didnt ..even in subsequent interviews she never denied the figures

 

[baxter]

Madeleine Albright has said: "We do not agree that if Iraq complies with its obligations concerning weapons of mass destruction, sanctions should be lifted."

It's actually very easy to see how this lady puts her foot in it.

Did I get this wrong?

We will hold your country hostage until you compile fully with UN demands and when you do we will still hold your country to hostage. Kind of a no win situation.