4 million Muslims killed by U.S.A since 1990?

[CarlinAnnArbor]

So, you admit the Zionist actions of Israel + U.S.A wars are akin to a Crusades?

No. Can't you read plain American?

 

[irosie91]

Indeed, this Turkish professor says 12.5 million Muslims have been killed in the past 25 years.

Wars killed 12.5M Muslims in last 25 years: Expert

Of course, not all of this is the U.S.A, just a quite a bit of it is.

You know the Islamic world is on a CRUSADE against the West dont you?

the Arabic word for CRUSADE is JIHAD. If muslim had been responsible
for the deaths of 12.5 million non muslims (actually---they could very well be)
in the past 25 years------allah would be DELIGHTED

CRUSADE works for me, since they are guilty of the very thing they accuse us of.

So, you admit the Zionist actions of Israel + U.S.A wars are akin to a Crusades?

Now, what kind of garbage is this?

When all it did was create more Islamic refugees headed West?

Furthermore, the U.S.A can't even keep together it's own demographic, but here goes the Anglo Zionists thinking that genocide in the Mid-East is necessary.

Truly appalling.

I do not see any connection at all to the historic "CRUSADES"
and either USA or Israeli actions in the USA-----the word
"crusade" itself is often USED to describe a noble endeavor.
You are playing semantics

 

[Darkwind]

No matter the total, it's far too much.

Why do so many Zionists call for genocide?

I'm tired of this country calling for more death, and despair (Genocide)

Now here go the Zionists calling for Sanctions on Iran, the same kind of sanctions that killed millions in Iraq.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990


Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990
#HumanRights


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades

Nafeez Ahmed
Wednesday 8 April 2015 15:12 UTC
Monday 18 April 2016 7:50 UTC
reddit googleplus 65.2K
Topics:
HumanRights
Tags:
war, USA, Humanitarian Crisis, IDP's, Refugees
Show comments
Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

Mind the gaps
The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.

The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.

For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.

Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.

According to the PSR study, the much-disputed Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraq deaths up to 2006 (and over a million until today by extrapolation) was likely to be far more accurate than IBC’s figures. In fact, the report confirms a virtual consensus among epidemiologists on the reliability of the Lancet study.

Despite some legitimate criticisms, the statistical methodology it applied is the universally recognised standard to determine deaths from conflict zones, used by international agencies and governments.

Politicised denial
PSR also reviewed the methodology and design of other studies showing a lower death toll, such as a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine, which had a range of serious limitations.

That paper ignored the areas subject to the heaviest violence, namely Baghdad, Anbar and Nineveh, relying on flawed IBC data to extrapolate for those regions. It also imposed “politically-motivated restrictions” on collection and analysis of the data - interviews were conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which was “totally dependent on the occupying power” and had refused to release data on Iraqi registered deaths under US pressure.

In particular, PSR assessed the claims of Michael Spaget, John Sloboda and others who questioned the Lancet study data collection methods as potentially fraudulent. All such claims, PSR found, were spurious.

The few “justified criticisms,” PSR concludes, “do not call into question the results of the Lancet studies as a whole. These figures still represent the best estimates that are currently available”. The Lancet findings are also corroborated by the data from a new study in PLOS Medicine, finding 500,000 Iraqi deaths from the war. Overall, PSR concludes that the most likely number for the civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 to date is about 1 million.

To this, the PSR study adds at least 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, killed as the direct or indirect consequence of US-led war: a “conservative” total of 1.3 million. The real figure could easily be “in excess of 2 million”.

Yet even the PSR study suffers from limitations. Firstly, the post-9/11 “war on terror” was not new, but merely extended previous interventionist policies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secondly, the huge paucity of data on Afghanistan meant the PSR study probably underestimated the Afghan death toll.

Iraq
The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime.

An early PSR study by Beth Daponte, then a US government Census Bureau demographer, found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians. Meanwhile, her internal government study was suppressed.

After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.

Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.

The mass death was seemingly intended. Among items banned by the UN sanctions were chemicals and equipment essential for Iraq’s national water treatment system. A secret US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) document discovered by Professor Thomas Nagy of the School of Business at George Washington University amounted, he said, to “an early blueprint for genocide against the people of Iraq”.

In his paper for the Association of Genocide Scholars at the University of Manitoba, Professor Nagi explained that the DIA document revealed “minute details of a fully workable method to ‘fully degrade the water treatment system’ of an entire nation” over a period of a decade. The sanctions policy would create “the conditions for widespread disease, including full scale epidemics,” thus “liquidating a significant portion of the population of Iraq”.

This means that in Iraq alone, the US-led war from 1991 to 2003 killed 1.9 million Iraqis; then from 2003 onwards around 1 million: totalling just under 3 million Iraqis dead over two decades.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties could also be very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele revealed that anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a reviewpublished by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Denial
According to the figures explored here, total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.

I'll let you know when 'what you are tired of' rises to any level of concern for Me.

 

[saltydancin]

How am I hypocritical? As for you claiming I'm immoral, coming from someone like you, that's a compliment.

Catholics should take back what's there's, considering that America was mostly France, and Spain before it was the U.S.A, and England was mostly Rome (Italy)

I don't recognize your foul Anglo Zionists, we want a World where you are kicked to the curb, like the Palestinians.

Find cognitive dissonance amusing as this schizophrenia of a Christian Nation which had Knights of Columbus in the 1950's dictate it's one nation under God while Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" totalitarianism tautology is that of Anglo Zionists being responsible for those "death to the infidels jihads"....

[/QUOTE]

So, it's "Cool" when Jews take back their land, but "Not cool" when Catholics take back their land?[/QUOTE]

What are the Catholics taking back ? Since SCOTUS declares the USA is a "Christian Nation" which Christians dictate is "one nation under God" courtesy of the Catholics Knights of Columbus & Eisenhower, must be cool to be legends in their own minds scapegoating Anglo Zionists & Jews for an under God national religion of "it's not my job" as a Christian to accept any blame since they're all walking on water & not killing Muslims in a land grab......?[/QUOTE]

try not to obsess[/QUOTE]

The compulsive-obsessive Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" second coming crusade of 9/11 in the burning Bush's patriot act for a Christian Nation to war against Muslim "death to the infidels" Islam certainly leaves Anglo Zionists & Jews subject to being in the middle of sociopsychological warfare in yet another Islamo-Nazi-Christian more perfect business union.

 

[irosie91]

Catholics should take back what's there's, considering that America was mostly France, and Spain before it was the U.S.A, and England was mostly Rome (Italy)

I don't recognize your foul Anglo Zionists, we want a World where you are kicked to the curb, like the Palestinians.

Find cognitive dissonance amusing as this schizophrenia of a Christian Nation which had Knights of Columbus in the 1950's dictate it's one nation under God while Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" totalitarianism tautology is that of Anglo Zionists being responsible for those "death to the infidels jihads"....

So, it's "Cool" when Jews take back their land, but "Not cool" when Catholics take back their land?[/QUOTE]

What are the Catholics taking back ? Since SCOTUS declares the USA is a "Christian Nation" which Christians dictate is "one nation under God" courtesy of the Catholics Knights of Columbus & Eisenhower, must be cool to be legends in their own minds scapegoating Anglo Zionists & Jews for an under God national religion of "it's not my job" as a Christian to accept any blame since they're all walking on water & not killing Muslims in a land grab......?[/QUOTE]

try not to obsess[/QUOTE]

The compulsive-obsessive Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" second coming crusade of 9/11 in the burning Bush's patriot act for a Christian Nation to war against Muslim "death to the infidels" Islam certainly leaves Anglo Zionists & Jews subject to being in the middle of sociopsychological warfare in yet another Islamo-Nazi-Christian more perfect business union.[/QUOTE]

nothing new ---jews have been caught in the cross-fire between
muslims and Christians for the past 1400 years

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

No matter the total, it's far too much.

Why do so many Zionists call for genocide?

I'm tired of this country calling for more death, and despair (Genocide)

Now here go the Zionists calling for Sanctions on Iran, the same kind of sanctions that killed millions in Iraq.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990


Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990
#HumanRights


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades

Nafeez Ahmed
Wednesday 8 April 2015 15:12 UTC
Monday 18 April 2016 7:50 UTC
reddit googleplus 65.2K
Topics:
HumanRights
Tags:
war, USA, Humanitarian Crisis, IDP's, Refugees
Show comments
Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

Mind the gaps
The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.

The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.

For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.

Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.

According to the PSR study, the much-disputed Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraq deaths up to 2006 (and over a million until today by extrapolation) was likely to be far more accurate than IBC’s figures. In fact, the report confirms a virtual consensus among epidemiologists on the reliability of the Lancet study.

Despite some legitimate criticisms, the statistical methodology it applied is the universally recognised standard to determine deaths from conflict zones, used by international agencies and governments.

Politicised denial
PSR also reviewed the methodology and design of other studies showing a lower death toll, such as a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine, which had a range of serious limitations.

That paper ignored the areas subject to the heaviest violence, namely Baghdad, Anbar and Nineveh, relying on flawed IBC data to extrapolate for those regions. It also imposed “politically-motivated restrictions” on collection and analysis of the data - interviews were conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which was “totally dependent on the occupying power” and had refused to release data on Iraqi registered deaths under US pressure.

In particular, PSR assessed the claims of Michael Spaget, John Sloboda and others who questioned the Lancet study data collection methods as potentially fraudulent. All such claims, PSR found, were spurious.

The few “justified criticisms,” PSR concludes, “do not call into question the results of the Lancet studies as a whole. These figures still represent the best estimates that are currently available”. The Lancet findings are also corroborated by the data from a new study in PLOS Medicine, finding 500,000 Iraqi deaths from the war. Overall, PSR concludes that the most likely number for the civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 to date is about 1 million.

To this, the PSR study adds at least 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, killed as the direct or indirect consequence of US-led war: a “conservative” total of 1.3 million. The real figure could easily be “in excess of 2 million”.

Yet even the PSR study suffers from limitations. Firstly, the post-9/11 “war on terror” was not new, but merely extended previous interventionist policies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secondly, the huge paucity of data on Afghanistan meant the PSR study probably underestimated the Afghan death toll.

Iraq
The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime.

An early PSR study by Beth Daponte, then a US government Census Bureau demographer, found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians. Meanwhile, her internal government study was suppressed.

After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.

Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.

The mass death was seemingly intended. Among items banned by the UN sanctions were chemicals and equipment essential for Iraq’s national water treatment system. A secret US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) document discovered by Professor Thomas Nagy of the School of Business at George Washington University amounted, he said, to “an early blueprint for genocide against the people of Iraq”.

In his paper for the Association of Genocide Scholars at the University of Manitoba, Professor Nagi explained that the DIA document revealed “minute details of a fully workable method to ‘fully degrade the water treatment system’ of an entire nation” over a period of a decade. The sanctions policy would create “the conditions for widespread disease, including full scale epidemics,” thus “liquidating a significant portion of the population of Iraq”.

This means that in Iraq alone, the US-led war from 1991 to 2003 killed 1.9 million Iraqis; then from 2003 onwards around 1 million: totalling just under 3 million Iraqis dead over two decades.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties could also be very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele revealed that anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a reviewpublished by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Denial
According to the figures explored here, total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.

I'll let you know when 'what you are tired of' rises to any level of concern for Me.

It's hilarious that so many Americans brush off, or worse support the genocide we've been doing against the Muslims.

Then they are led to believe that Hitler was so evil, hilarious.

Such a double standard.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So, you admit the Zionist actions of Israel + U.S.A wars are akin to a Crusades?

No. Can't you read plain American?

I've always thought of Israel + Zionist wars from the U.S.A as just a new era Crusades.

 

[saltydancin]

Catholics should take back what's there's, considering that America was mostly France, and Spain before it was the U.S.A, and England was mostly Rome (Italy)

I don't recognize your foul Anglo Zionists, we want a World where you are kicked to the curb, like the Palestinians.

Find cognitive dissonance amusing as this schizophrenia of a Christian Nation which had Knights of Columbus in the 1950's dictate it's one nation under God while Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" totalitarianism tautology is that of Anglo Zionists being responsible for those "death to the infidels jihads"....

So, it's "Cool" when Jews take back their land, but "Not cool" when Catholics take back their land?

What are the Catholics taking back ? Since SCOTUS declares the USA is a "Christian Nation" which Christians dictate is "one nation under God" courtesy of the Catholics Knights of Columbus & Eisenhower, must be cool to be legends in their own minds scapegoating Anglo Zionists & Jews for an under God national religion of "it's not my job" as a Christian to accept any blame since they're all walking on water & not killing Muslims in a land grab......?[/QUOTE]

try not to obsess[/QUOTE]

The compulsive-obsessive Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" second coming crusade of 9/11 in the burning Bush's patriot act for a Christian Nation to war against Muslim "death to the infidels" Islam certainly leaves Anglo Zionists & Jews subject to being in the middle of sociopsychological warfare in yet another Islamo-Nazi-Christian more perfect business union.[/QUOTE]

nothing new ---jews have been caught in the cross-fire between
muslims and Christians for the past 1400 years[/QUOTE]

What's new is compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance behavioral cognitive dissonance tends to stimulate more methods of continueing on a 1400 years old treadmill

 

[irosie91]

No matter the total, it's far too much.

Why do so many Zionists call for genocide?

I'm tired of this country calling for more death, and despair (Genocide)

Now here go the Zionists calling for Sanctions on Iran, the same kind of sanctions that killed millions in Iraq.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990


Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990
#HumanRights


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades

Nafeez Ahmed
Wednesday 8 April 2015 15:12 UTC
Monday 18 April 2016 7:50 UTC
reddit googleplus 65.2K
Topics:
HumanRights
Tags:
war, USA, Humanitarian Crisis, IDP's, Refugees
Show comments
Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

Mind the gaps
The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.

The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.

For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.

Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.

According to the PSR study, the much-disputed Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraq deaths up to 2006 (and over a million until today by extrapolation) was likely to be far more accurate than IBC’s figures. In fact, the report confirms a virtual consensus among epidemiologists on the reliability of the Lancet study.

Despite some legitimate criticisms, the statistical methodology it applied is the universally recognised standard to determine deaths from conflict zones, used by international agencies and governments.

Politicised denial
PSR also reviewed the methodology and design of other studies showing a lower death toll, such as a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine, which had a range of serious limitations.

That paper ignored the areas subject to the heaviest violence, namely Baghdad, Anbar and Nineveh, relying on flawed IBC data to extrapolate for those regions. It also imposed “politically-motivated restrictions” on collection and analysis of the data - interviews were conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which was “totally dependent on the occupying power” and had refused to release data on Iraqi registered deaths under US pressure.

In particular, PSR assessed the claims of Michael Spaget, John Sloboda and others who questioned the Lancet study data collection methods as potentially fraudulent. All such claims, PSR found, were spurious.

The few “justified criticisms,” PSR concludes, “do not call into question the results of the Lancet studies as a whole. These figures still represent the best estimates that are currently available”. The Lancet findings are also corroborated by the data from a new study in PLOS Medicine, finding 500,000 Iraqi deaths from the war. Overall, PSR concludes that the most likely number for the civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 to date is about 1 million.

To this, the PSR study adds at least 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, killed as the direct or indirect consequence of US-led war: a “conservative” total of 1.3 million. The real figure could easily be “in excess of 2 million”.

Yet even the PSR study suffers from limitations. Firstly, the post-9/11 “war on terror” was not new, but merely extended previous interventionist policies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secondly, the huge paucity of data on Afghanistan meant the PSR study probably underestimated the Afghan death toll.

Iraq
The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime.

An early PSR study by Beth Daponte, then a US government Census Bureau demographer, found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians. Meanwhile, her internal government study was suppressed.

After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.

Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.

The mass death was seemingly intended. Among items banned by the UN sanctions were chemicals and equipment essential for Iraq’s national water treatment system. A secret US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) document discovered by Professor Thomas Nagy of the School of Business at George Washington University amounted, he said, to “an early blueprint for genocide against the people of Iraq”.

In his paper for the Association of Genocide Scholars at the University of Manitoba, Professor Nagi explained that the DIA document revealed “minute details of a fully workable method to ‘fully degrade the water treatment system’ of an entire nation” over a period of a decade. The sanctions policy would create “the conditions for widespread disease, including full scale epidemics,” thus “liquidating a significant portion of the population of Iraq”.

This means that in Iraq alone, the US-led war from 1991 to 2003 killed 1.9 million Iraqis; then from 2003 onwards around 1 million: totalling just under 3 million Iraqis dead over two decades.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties could also be very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele revealed that anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a reviewpublished by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Denial
According to the figures explored here, total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.

I'll let you know when 'what you are tired of' rises to any level of concern for Me.

It's hilarious that so many Americans brush off, or worse support the genocide we've been doing against the Muslims.

Then they are led to believe that Hitler was so evil, hilarious.

Such a double standard.

WE are not engaging in a genocide against muslims. Do you have
something AGAINST ECONOMIC SANCTIONS? Economic sanctions
enacted by the USA have NEVER KILLED A SINGLE MUSLIM.
Have economic sanctions against Israel resulted in the genocide
of jews? I have bad news for you-----NOPE, however genocide has
been the intention since 1949. Muslims managed a genocide against
the Christians of Nigeria by economic sanctions----PROUD OF YERSELF?

 

[irosie91]

Find cognitive dissonance amusing as this schizophrenia of a Christian Nation which had Knights of Columbus in the 1950's dictate it's one nation under God while Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" totalitarianism tautology is that of Anglo Zionists being responsible for those "death to the infidels jihads"....

So, it's "Cool" when Jews take back their land, but "Not cool" when Catholics take back their land?

What are the Catholics taking back ? Since SCOTUS declares the USA is a "Christian Nation" which Christians dictate is "one nation under God" courtesy of the Catholics Knights of Columbus & Eisenhower, must be cool to be legends in their own minds scapegoating Anglo Zionists & Jews for an under God national religion of "it's not my job" as a Christian to accept any blame since they're all walking on water & not killing Muslims in a land grab......?

try not to obsess[/QUOTE]

The compulsive-obsessive Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" second coming crusade of 9/11 in the burning Bush's patriot act for a Christian Nation to war against Muslim "death to the infidels" Islam certainly leaves Anglo Zionists & Jews subject to being in the middle of sociopsychological warfare in yet another Islamo-Nazi-Christian more perfect business union.[/QUOTE]

nothing new ---jews have been caught in the cross-fire between
muslims and Christians for the past 1400 years[/QUOTE]

What's new is compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance behavioral cognitive dissonance tends to stimulate more methods of continueing on a 1400 years old treadmill[/QUOTE]

^^^^^ almost very true

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

No matter the total, it's far too much.

Why do so many Zionists call for genocide?

I'm tired of this country calling for more death, and despair (Genocide)

Now here go the Zionists calling for Sanctions on Iran, the same kind of sanctions that killed millions in Iraq.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990


Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990
#HumanRights


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades

Nafeez Ahmed
Wednesday 8 April 2015 15:12 UTC
Monday 18 April 2016 7:50 UTC
reddit googleplus 65.2K
Topics:
HumanRights
Tags:
war, USA, Humanitarian Crisis, IDP's, Refugees
Show comments
Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

Mind the gaps
The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.

The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.

For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.

Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.

According to the PSR study, the much-disputed Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraq deaths up to 2006 (and over a million until today by extrapolation) was likely to be far more accurate than IBC’s figures. In fact, the report confirms a virtual consensus among epidemiologists on the reliability of the Lancet study.

Despite some legitimate criticisms, the statistical methodology it applied is the universally recognised standard to determine deaths from conflict zones, used by international agencies and governments.

Politicised denial
PSR also reviewed the methodology and design of other studies showing a lower death toll, such as a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine, which had a range of serious limitations.

That paper ignored the areas subject to the heaviest violence, namely Baghdad, Anbar and Nineveh, relying on flawed IBC data to extrapolate for those regions. It also imposed “politically-motivated restrictions” on collection and analysis of the data - interviews were conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which was “totally dependent on the occupying power” and had refused to release data on Iraqi registered deaths under US pressure.

In particular, PSR assessed the claims of Michael Spaget, John Sloboda and others who questioned the Lancet study data collection methods as potentially fraudulent. All such claims, PSR found, were spurious.

The few “justified criticisms,” PSR concludes, “do not call into question the results of the Lancet studies as a whole. These figures still represent the best estimates that are currently available”. The Lancet findings are also corroborated by the data from a new study in PLOS Medicine, finding 500,000 Iraqi deaths from the war. Overall, PSR concludes that the most likely number for the civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 to date is about 1 million.

To this, the PSR study adds at least 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, killed as the direct or indirect consequence of US-led war: a “conservative” total of 1.3 million. The real figure could easily be “in excess of 2 million”.

Yet even the PSR study suffers from limitations. Firstly, the post-9/11 “war on terror” was not new, but merely extended previous interventionist policies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secondly, the huge paucity of data on Afghanistan meant the PSR study probably underestimated the Afghan death toll.

Iraq
The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime.

An early PSR study by Beth Daponte, then a US government Census Bureau demographer, found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians. Meanwhile, her internal government study was suppressed.

After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.

Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.

The mass death was seemingly intended. Among items banned by the UN sanctions were chemicals and equipment essential for Iraq’s national water treatment system. A secret US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) document discovered by Professor Thomas Nagy of the School of Business at George Washington University amounted, he said, to “an early blueprint for genocide against the people of Iraq”.

In his paper for the Association of Genocide Scholars at the University of Manitoba, Professor Nagi explained that the DIA document revealed “minute details of a fully workable method to ‘fully degrade the water treatment system’ of an entire nation” over a period of a decade. The sanctions policy would create “the conditions for widespread disease, including full scale epidemics,” thus “liquidating a significant portion of the population of Iraq”.

This means that in Iraq alone, the US-led war from 1991 to 2003 killed 1.9 million Iraqis; then from 2003 onwards around 1 million: totalling just under 3 million Iraqis dead over two decades.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties could also be very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele revealed that anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a reviewpublished by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Denial
According to the figures explored here, total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.

I'll let you know when 'what you are tired of' rises to any level of concern for Me.

It's hilarious that so many Americans brush off, or worse support the genocide we've been doing against the Muslims.

Then they are led to believe that Hitler was so evil, hilarious.

Such a double standard.

WE are not engaging in a genocide against muslims. Do you have
something AGAINST ECONOMIC SANCTIONS? Economic sanctions
enacted by the USA have NEVER KILLED A SINGLE MUSLIM.
Have economic sanctions against Israel resulted in the genocide
of jews? I have bad news for you-----NOPE, however genocide has
been the intention since 1949. Muslims managed a genocide against
the Christians of Nigeria by economic sanctions----PROUD OF YERSELF?[/

According to UN aid agencies, by the mid-1990s about 1.5 million Iraqis — including 565,000 children — had perished as a direct result of the embargo, which included “holds” on vital goods such as chemicals and equipment to produce clean drinking water.

Former assistant secretary general of the United Nations, Dennis Halliday, quit in protest in 1998 after one year at the helm as the UN humanitarian coordinator in Iraq. He described the sanctions as “genocidal”.

Sanctions killed 1.5m Iraqis: UN agencies - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

 

[irosie91]

No matter the total, it's far too much.

Why do so many Zionists call for genocide?

I'm tired of this country calling for more death, and despair (Genocide)

Now here go the Zionists calling for Sanctions on Iran, the same kind of sanctions that killed millions in Iraq.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990


Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990
#HumanRights


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades

Nafeez Ahmed
Wednesday 8 April 2015 15:12 UTC
Monday 18 April 2016 7:50 UTC
reddit googleplus 65.2K
Topics:
HumanRights
Tags:
war, USA, Humanitarian Crisis, IDP's, Refugees
Show comments
Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

Mind the gaps
The PSR report is described by Dr Hans von Sponeck, former UN assistant secretary-general, as “a significant contribution to narrowing the gap between reliable estimates of victims of war, especially civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and tendentious, manipulated or even fraudulent accounts”.

The report conducts a critical review of previous death toll estimates of “war on terror” casualties. It is heavily critical of the figure most widely cited by mainstream media as authoritative, namely, the Iraq Body Count (IBC) estimate of 110,000 dead. That figure is derived from collating media reports of civilian killings, but the PSR report identifies serious gaps and methodological problems in this approach.

For instance, although 40,000 corpses had been buried in Najaf since the launch of the war, IBC recorded only 1,354 deaths in Najaf for the same period. That example shows how wide the gap is between IBC’s Najaf figure and the actual death toll – in this case, by a factor of over 30.

Such gaps are replete throughout IBC’s database. In another instance, IBC recorded just three airstrikes in a period in 2005, when the number of air attacks had in fact increased from 25 to 120 that year. Again, the gap here is by a factor of 40.

According to the PSR study, the much-disputed Lancet study that estimated 655,000 Iraq deaths up to 2006 (and over a million until today by extrapolation) was likely to be far more accurate than IBC’s figures. In fact, the report confirms a virtual consensus among epidemiologists on the reliability of the Lancet study.

Despite some legitimate criticisms, the statistical methodology it applied is the universally recognised standard to determine deaths from conflict zones, used by international agencies and governments.

Politicised denial
PSR also reviewed the methodology and design of other studies showing a lower death toll, such as a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine, which had a range of serious limitations.

That paper ignored the areas subject to the heaviest violence, namely Baghdad, Anbar and Nineveh, relying on flawed IBC data to extrapolate for those regions. It also imposed “politically-motivated restrictions” on collection and analysis of the data - interviews were conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of Health, which was “totally dependent on the occupying power” and had refused to release data on Iraqi registered deaths under US pressure.

In particular, PSR assessed the claims of Michael Spaget, John Sloboda and others who questioned the Lancet study data collection methods as potentially fraudulent. All such claims, PSR found, were spurious.

The few “justified criticisms,” PSR concludes, “do not call into question the results of the Lancet studies as a whole. These figures still represent the best estimates that are currently available”. The Lancet findings are also corroborated by the data from a new study in PLOS Medicine, finding 500,000 Iraqi deaths from the war. Overall, PSR concludes that the most likely number for the civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 to date is about 1 million.

To this, the PSR study adds at least 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, killed as the direct or indirect consequence of US-led war: a “conservative” total of 1.3 million. The real figure could easily be “in excess of 2 million”.

Yet even the PSR study suffers from limitations. Firstly, the post-9/11 “war on terror” was not new, but merely extended previous interventionist policies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Secondly, the huge paucity of data on Afghanistan meant the PSR study probably underestimated the Afghan death toll.

Iraq
The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime.

An early PSR study by Beth Daponte, then a US government Census Bureau demographer, found that Iraq deaths caused by the direct and indirect impact of the first Gulf War amounted to around 200,000 Iraqis, mostly civilians. Meanwhile, her internal government study was suppressed.

After US-led forces pulled out, the war on Iraq continued in economic form through the US-UK imposed UN sanctions regime, on the pretext of denying Saddam Hussein the materials necessary to make weapons of mass destruction. Items banned from Iraq under this rationale included a vast number of items needed for everyday life.

Undisputed UN figures show that 1.7 million Iraqi civilians died due to the West’s brutal sanctions regime, half of whom were children.

The mass death was seemingly intended. Among items banned by the UN sanctions were chemicals and equipment essential for Iraq’s national water treatment system. A secret US Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) document discovered by Professor Thomas Nagy of the School of Business at George Washington University amounted, he said, to “an early blueprint for genocide against the people of Iraq”.

In his paper for the Association of Genocide Scholars at the University of Manitoba, Professor Nagi explained that the DIA document revealed “minute details of a fully workable method to ‘fully degrade the water treatment system’ of an entire nation” over a period of a decade. The sanctions policy would create “the conditions for widespread disease, including full scale epidemics,” thus “liquidating a significant portion of the population of Iraq”.

This means that in Iraq alone, the US-led war from 1991 to 2003 killed 1.9 million Iraqis; then from 2003 onwards around 1 million: totalling just under 3 million Iraqis dead over two decades.

Afghanistan
In Afghanistan, PSR’s estimate of overall casualties could also be very conservative. Six months after the 2001 bombing campaign, The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele revealed that anywhere between 1,300 and 8,000 Afghans were killed directly, and as many as a further 50,000 people died avoidably as an indirect result of the war.

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a reviewpublished by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Denial
According to the figures explored here, total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.

I'll let you know when 'what you are tired of' rises to any level of concern for Me.

It's hilarious that so many Americans brush off, or worse support the genocide we've been doing against the Muslims.

Then they are led to believe that Hitler was so evil, hilarious.

Such a double standard.

WE are not engaging in a genocide against muslims. Do you have
something AGAINST ECONOMIC SANCTIONS? Economic sanctions
enacted by the USA have NEVER KILLED A SINGLE MUSLIM.
Have economic sanctions against Israel resulted in the genocide
of jews? I have bad news for you-----NOPE, however genocide has
been the intention since 1949. Muslims managed a genocide against
the Christians of Nigeria by economic sanctions----PROUD OF YERSELF?[/

According to UN aid agencies, by the mid-1990s about 1.5 million Iraqis — including 565,000 children — had perished as a direct result of the embargo, which included “holds” on vital goods such as chemicals and equipment to produce clean drinking water.

Former assistant secretary general of the United Nations, Dennis Halliday, quit in protest in 1998 after one year at the helm as the UN humanitarian coordinator in Iraq. He described the sanctions as “genocidal”.

Sanctions killed 1.5m Iraqis: UN agencies - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

the UN agencies and Dennis Halliday ----were bullshit artists. Iraq was once
the BREAD BASKET FOR THE WORLD----its children starved because Saddam
Hussein was an imperialist Baathist maniac. He murdered his own people just
as the schmuck Gamal Abdel Nasser murdered his army and just as
BAATHIST PIG Assad murdered the Syrian people

 

[irosie91]

PS----Baathist pig SADAAM HUSSEIN could have saved Iraq by shooting
himself in the head as did his mentor---adolf. In both cases their deaths
were TOO LITTLE AND WAY TO LATE

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

PS----Baathist pig SADAAM HUSSEIN could have saved Iraq by shooting
himself in the head as did his mentor---adolf. In both cases their deaths
were TOO LITTLE AND WAY TO LATE

US and British Support for Hussein Regime

Picture: Donald Rumsfeld, then special US envoy, shaking hands with Saddam Hussein during a visit to Iraq in December, 1983.


US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem. In the 1980s, the US and Britain backed Saddam in the war against Iran, giving Iraq arms, money, satellite intelligence, and even chemical & bio-weapon precursors. As many as 90 US military advisors supported Iraqi forces and helped pick targets for Iraqi air and missile attacks.

US and British Support for Hussein Regime

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

According to UN aid agencies, by the mid-1990s about 1.5 million Iraqis — including 565,000 children — had perished as a direct result of the embargo, which included “holds” on vital goods such as chemicals and equipment to produce clean drinking water.

Former assistant secretary general of the United Nations, Dennis Halliday, quit in protest in 1998 after one year at the helm as the UN humanitarian coordinator in Iraq. He described the sanctions as “genocidal”.

Sanctions killed 1.5m Iraqis: UN agencies - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

That's why WAR is a better alternative than sanctions.

 

[sparky]

Really?

Ok then, the bottom line is the buildup to just that, Islamics Vs Zionists

I figure that'll be WW3

My problem is i could give a rodent's rear end about any of 'em

~S~

 

[JW Frogen]

The US is the world's biggest oil exporter now.

We need to get out of that mad house Middle East and let them do what they have always done.

 

[saltydancin]

So, it's "Cool" when Jews take back their land, but "Not cool" when Catholics take back their land?

What are the Catholics taking back ? Since SCOTUS declares the USA is a "Christian Nation" which Christians dictate is "one nation under God" courtesy of the Catholics Knights of Columbus & Eisenhower, must be cool to be legends in their own minds scapegoating Anglo Zionists & Jews for an under God national religion of "it's not my job" as a Christian to accept any blame since they're all walking on water & not killing Muslims in a land grab......?

try not to obsess

The compulsive-obsessive Catholic Church "serve the Pope or die" second coming crusade of 9/11 in the burning Bush's patriot act for a Christian Nation to war against Muslim "death to the infidels" Islam certainly leaves Anglo Zionists & Jews subject to being in the middle of sociopsychological warfare in yet another Islamo-Nazi-Christian more perfect business union.[/QUOTE]

nothing new ---jews have been caught in the cross-fire between
muslims and Christians for the past 1400 years[/QUOTE]

What's new is compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance behavioral cognitive dissonance tends to stimulate more methods of continueing on a 1400 years old treadmill[/QUOTE]

^^^^^ almost very true[/QUOTE]

As if they all aren't so cross conditioned way beyond therapy where lynching enforcement keeps the status quo of Muslims & Christians using cross-fire.

 

[JW Frogen]

Muslims have killed more muslims than any other group or nation on Earth.

The Shia Sunni sectarian rift is a theological mass murdering fault line.

And the progressive, democratic world need not stand on it and die in the quake.

 

[flacaltenn]

Thread is a disaster from page one. Hardly a legal post in sight. Closed.