61,000 Baghdad residents 'executed'

Lefty Wilbury

Active Member
Nov 4, 2003
1,109
36
36
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8110691%5E1702,00.html

61,000 Baghdad residents 'executed'
From correspondents in Baghdad
December 09, 2003

SADDAM Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a number significantly higher than previously believed, according to a survey obtained today by The Associated Press.

The bloodiest massacres of Saddam's 23-year presidency occurred in Iraq's Kurdish north and Shi'ite Muslim south, but the Gallup Baghdad Survey data indicates the brutality extended strongly into the capital as well.

The survey, which the polling firm planned to release tomorrow, asked 1178 Baghdad residents in August and September whether a member of their household had been executed by Saddam's regime. According to Gallup, 6.6 per cent said yes.

The polling firm took metropolitan Baghdad's population - 6.39 million - and average household size - 6.9 people - to calculate that 61,000 people were executed during Saddam's rule. Most are believed to have been buried in mass graves.

The US-led occupation authority in Iraq has said that at least 300,000 people are buried in mass graves in Iraq. Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million were executed.


Without exhumations of those graves, it is impossible to confirm a figure. Scientists said during a recent investigation that they have confirmed 41 mass graves on a list of suspected sites that currently includes 270 locations.

Forensic teams will begin to exhume four of those graves next month in search of evidence for a new tribunal, expected to be established this week, that will try members of the former regime for crimes against humanity and genocide. More graves will later be added to the list.

But nobody expects all the mass graves to be exhumed, and nobody expects to ever know the full number of Iraqis executed by their government.

Richard Burkholder, who headed Gallup's Baghdad team, said the numbers in Baghdad could be high for two reasons: People may have understood "household" to be broader than just the people living at their address; and some families may have moved to the capital from other areas since the executions occurred.

"Anecdotal accounts start to support it, but they don't get you to 60,000," he said in a telephone interview from Princeton, New Jersey.

Even reducing the numbers slightly because of those possibilities, however, Burkholder said the number of executions the data suggest is higher than previously estimated, in the low tens of thousands.

The deadliest atrocity associated with Saddam's government was the scorched-earth campaign known as the "Anfal", in which the government killed an estimated 180,000 Kurds in Iraq's far north. Many were buried in mass graves far from home in the southern desert.

Another 60,000 people are believed to have been killed when Saddam violently suppressed rebellions by Shi'ite Muslims in the south and Kurds in the north at the close of the 1991 Gulf War.

Sandra Hodgkinson, director of the US-led occupation authority's human rights office, estimated that some 50,000 others were executed during Saddam's reign, including Kurds killed in chemical attacks and political prisoners sent to execution.

That 50,000 figure also would include prisoners killed in Baghdad.

The survey, which had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, was conducted in face-to-face interviews in Baghdad residents' homes from August 28 and September 4.

The people were selected at random from all geographic sectors of the Baghdad metropolitan area, and more than nine in 10 agreed to participate. That's at least double the response rate for many US telephone polls.
 
this is reason enough for the U.S.of A and the few other brave countrys to be in the middle east right now. we should of stopped the brutal reign of saddam and co long ago. shame on us.:(
 
Originally posted by jon_forward
this is reason enough for the U.S.of A and the few other brave countrys to be in the middle east right now. we should of stopped the brutal reign of saddam and co long ago. shame on us.:(
Hey Jon, Cuba is 90 miles away, bright sunny beaches, warm friendly people. Same thing happens every day. The difference that stands out for me is the fact the Cuba isn't sitting on the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve.
Brave is not the adjective I'd use to describe our actions....
 
are you to imply that castro is killing like saddam? I am sure that if castro was doing this there would not be a cuban left in cuba, they would all be in maimi! your flawed logic is right up there with a few others that use this board but your opinion is respected, how ever flawed it may be. to think that we would allow something of this nature to happen so close to our borders is pure fantasy on your part.
 
this is reason enough for the U.S.of A and the few other brave countrys to be in the middle east right now. we should of stopped the brutal reign of saddam and co long ago. shame on us.

so now all we have to do is define 'brutal regime'. where do we cut off the body count? 50,000? 20,000? maybe we can cut it down to 100, that would certainly qualify the US as a brutal regime as well, do you think?

Also, did we not form this country to be independent of others? In the beginning did we not respect another sovereign countries right to rule as they see fit? When did the US change its policy of enforcing benevolent rule throughout the world? It certainly wasnt during the nicaraguan conflict. We certainly don't support all democracies, legitimate ones anyway.

Do we need to amend the constitution of the united states so that we can correct injustice everywhere?
 
if we dont care, who will??? also this isnt the 1700's and times have changed even from the nicaraguan conflict. While I am not calling for open season on below par regimes per se, would it not appear that almost all terrorism seems to be rooted in 'sub-standard' countrys where these below par regimes flourish? While I dont claim to have all or even one answer, idly standing by and watching this country come under attack is not in my playbook, nor is it an option!
 
if we dont care, who will???

admirable, but I daresay thats why the league of nations and later the UN, was founded, was it not? To not only contain less than hospitable regimes and protect/provide for those civilians as they work to change the regime?

also this isnt the 1700's and times have changed even from the nicaraguan conflict.

and obviously our thinking patterns haven't. we still havent gotten the idea that force doesn't solve all our problems.

While I am not calling for open season on below par regimes per se, would it not appear that almost all terrorism seems to be rooted in 'sub-standard' countrys where these below par regimes flourish?

Most terrorism comes from sub-standard countries because these people feel like they have nothing left to lose. Its not necessarily attributed to the ironfisted rule of its leaders, but how economically disadvantaged these people are. Case in point is Palestine. While there is Hamas that has latched on to the BS ideology of no peace, most of its volunteer bombers come from economic disadvantage. If these people were given opportunity to change that via honest and lawful means then there would be much less volunteers.

While I dont claim to have all or even one answer, idly standing by and watching this country come under attack is not in my playbook, nor is it an option!

Are you saying that we should only change those regimes who allow terrorists that attack the US while those that attack others (chechnya) can do fine without our assistance?
 
we intervened in bosnia and kosovo for far less.

But we did so at NATO's request, did we not? Is that not supporting our european allies request as well as a humanitarian gesture?

I'm not suggesting that we abandon humanitarian ideas but we cannot be the worlds policemen unless every country on the planet wishes to help us, either financially or with personnel and equipment. Unilateral choices to change the leadership of countries who's methods we don't agree with makes us little better than the romans or egyptians.
 
in the case of bosnia we went as the un as for kosovo it was clinton pushing us into it. at first he wanted the un in on it but russia threated a veto so we said we would go it alone then nato hoped on board literally at the last minute. it was the first time nato went on the offensive in it's history.
 
the U.N. has turn into a comedy show, we cant do this or that because we cant step on someone toes..we may be wrong, lets wait another 12 months and see if we have there attention. I say B-S!!! If the country/terratory whatever is flat out told by the U.N. to do something/make changes said country had better do so or risk ???? from the U.N.... nothing nada..now if the USof A asks/tells said country to make changes what happens if they thumb their nose at us... they get their collective asses handed to them..if we are to be the police of the world so be it...to be a pacifist is to risk ruin, when do you pull you head out of the sand, when they bomb the beath ? that would be a tad late. I guess wewill have to see how the cards play out in Iraq after we leave. I wager we wont HAVE to return there, maybe somewhere else in middle east. And I believe that once things calm down we will be welcomed there for all time as friends/liberators of the people of Iraq
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
admirable, but I daresay thats why the league of nations and later the UN, was founded, was it not? To not only contain less than hospitable regimes and protect/provide for those civilians as they work to change the regime?

The "less than hospitable regimes" are the majority in the UN. Do you really think they care about helping out the downtrodden?

Most terrorism comes from sub-standard countries because these people feel like they have nothing left to lose. Its not necessarily attributed to the ironfisted rule of its leaders, but how economically disadvantaged these people are. Case in point is Palestine. While there is Hamas that has latched on to the BS ideology of no peace, most of its volunteer bombers come from economic disadvantage. If these people were given opportunity to change that via honest and lawful means then there would be much less volunteers.

You can blame Yasser Arafat for that. He was offered 93% of the West Bank as an independent state, and turned it down. Why? Because he himself is a terrorist. Hamas' motives are not a better standard of living; they are to destroy Israel. Nothing short of that, or their utter destruciton, will stop their actions.

Are you saying that we should only change those regimes who allow terrorists that attack the US while those that attack others (chechnya) can do fine without our assistance?

Russia is fighting their own war in Chechnya. They didn't invite us, and I'm not sure we really have a stake in that fight.
 
Originally posted by jon_forward
are you to imply that castro is killing like saddam?

I don't think he tosses them off buildings, and I have never heard of an instance where he shoots them himself but other than that, dead is dead.
I am sure that if castro was doing this there would not be a cuban left in cuba
300,000 deaths in a population of 24 million, would mean 150,000 murders in a population 1/2 that size...Oh yeah, Castros killed that many Cubans.
they would all be in maimi! your flawed logic is right up there with a few others that use this board

Approximately 4500 try every year. According to the CIA. I might check that flaw you see in my logic again. It appears my logic is supported by historical fact, which is an attribute your argument lacks.
but your opinion is respected, how ever flawed it may be. to think that we would allow something of this nature to happen so close to our borders is pure fantasy on your part.
Allow it? What are you 12 years old or something? We support it. You really don't remember Marcos, Batista, Pinochet, All the Apartheid Regimes, Pahlavi...stop me when I hit a peice of US history that rings a bell. Pure fantasy? You may certainly wish our history of supporting repressive regimes was pure myth but unfortunately it is well documented.
 
where do you get these numbers? op/ed from some out of the way paper printed by fanatics? past is past, never said as a whole this nation was perfect but we do learn from mistakes made however slowly.. please show were you got this info, I dont care about old history, show me that castro is a killing machine...not 30 years ago.... today
 
Originally posted by jon_forward
where do you get these numbers? op/ed from some out of the way paper printed by fanatics?
Where are the number in this article coming from? Extrapolations of a Baghdad poll? Is that solid evidence, you claim so...
this is reason enough for the U.S.of A and the few other brave countrys to be in the middle east right now

You just used statistical manipulation of a poll as justification for the invasion of a soverieng nation but you'd like me to prove my number? I've presented as much proof as you have, if you come up with any more proof I'll do some research. How about you give a reason to assume your number is anything other than artful extrapolation....
in the past is past never said as a whole this nation was perfect but we do learn from mistakes made however slowly.. please show were you got this info, I dont care about old history, show me that castro is a killing machine...not 30 years ago.... today
Insisting on a time constraint in consideration of a dictators acts seems a little arbitrary, you're going to have to explain why we shouldn't consider Castros acts prior to....you didn't mention a date you want the "new history" of the US to start. Hussein did most of his executing in 91/92 at the end of the Gulf War and the subsequent Shia and Kurdish rebellions. Castros executions center on his revolution, the Bay of Pigs and the subsequent attempted counter-revolution. Our puppet in Peru got tossed, what 10 years ago? Can we can considered the millions killed oe "disappeared" by his right wing death squads, paramilitary anti-insurgents or secret police or is that the old history of the US, before we "changed".
I'm afraid I can't buy the "we've learned" argument. Our main ally in the Afghan war is Musharaf, who came to power in a military coup, if I'm not mistaken. We're also support every monarch in the middle east as well as most of the despots in Africa. Consider that before you accept that the past is no longer worth considering.
 
my number??? take your pick..NY times, wall street journal, the post, usa today... guess they are tooo mainstream for you widespead manipulation of information by the press.... not here so dont even try..as for castro and cuba, you seem to forget that cuba for years was backed by the USSR...yes I remember the bay of pigs... since the fall of the USSR what has happened in cuba? castro joined the human race! he had no one to hide behind so he had no choice. you want to go tit for tat again. I have but one question..... why are you sticking up for the murdering scambag saddam? is he family??
 
Originally posted by jon_forward
my number??? take your pick..NY times, wall street journal, the post, usa today... guess they are tooo mainstream for you widespead manipulation of information by the press.... not here so dont even try..

None of those publications have named Hussein the worst dictator in the world. Appealing to them as the authority for your argument that he was is not effective.
as for castro and cuba, you seem to forget that cuba for years was backed by the USSR...yes I remember the bay of pigs... since the fall of the USSR what has happened in cuba?

Iraq was a Soviet sattelite under Hussein as well. Your revelation doesn't invalidate my analogy.
castro joined the human race! he had no one to hide behind so he had no choice. you want to go tit for tat again. I have but one question..... why are you sticking up for the murdering scambag saddam? is he family??
I could argue that Castro hasn't join the human race, he just jailed his political opposition if your following current events.
I'm not defending Hussein in this argument, I'm defending fact over fiction. Just because I didn't like Saddam Hussein doesn't mean I get to make things up and repeat them as if they are established fact. In the larger debate it serves no purpose. I also disapprove of the fuzzy logic currently being espoused by the administration. In Iraq they hung their hat on the humanitarian argument, I'm only pointing out the weaknesses of that position.
 
why does saddam have to be named the worst dictator in the world, of all time or even on his street? has nothing to do with your numbers. and why doesnt cubas backing by the USSR carry weight? I really dont think another WW over cuba would have been such a good idea. you still have not backed up YOUR numbers, which seems to be the way you do... would you think differently if there were a democrat in office? my guess would be yes.
 
Originally posted by jon_forward
why does saddam have to be named the worst dictator in the world, of all time or even on his street?

I'm looking for some independant verification that Hussein was the worst dictator presently in power on the planet, since your argument assumes he is. If we removed him on humanitarian grounds, instead of Fidel Castro for example, Hussein must be a larger threat to human rights than Castro (otherwise we'd remove Castro instead).
and why doesnt cubas backing by the USSR carry weight?

Iraq had the same backing from the USSR, it is not unique to Cuba.
you still have not backed up YOUR numbers, which seems to be the way you do...

Because I don't need to spend the time on the research or to argue the validity of my data. I need only demonstrate you are unable to quantify Mr. Husseins inhumanity to man. Remember, your argument assumes he was the worst potentate, mine assumes he is one of many.
would you think differently if there were a democrat in office? my guess would be yes.
Your guess would be wrong. I am not interested in political parties preffering adherence to stated, cohenerent policies instead.
 
no where did I state saddam was the #1 bad guy on the planet... that would be you putting words in my mouth. after the fall of the USSR castro straightened out, saddam did not. saddam was a butcher of his own people while in power. if you choose not to believe this, that is by your choice. that would leave 2 people that feel that way...you and saddam...I hope soon to be just you. as for saddams inhumanitys toward man... I dont know wether to feel sorry for you ...or laugh. actually both
 

Forum List

Back
Top