WP: War's Toll on Iraqis Put at 22,950 in '06

[kskiska]

Statistics From Health Ministry Official Show Tripling of Civilian, Police Deaths

Monday, January 8, 2007; Page A01

BAGHDAD, Jan. 7 -- More than 17,000 Iraqi civilians and police officers died violently in the latter half of 2006, according to Iraqi Health Ministry statistics, a sharp increase that coincided with rising sectarian strife since the February bombing of a landmark Shiite shrine.

In the first six months of last year, 5,640 Iraqi civilians and police officers were killed, but that number more than tripled to 17,310 in the latter half of the year, according to data provided by a Health Ministry official with direct knowledge of the statistics. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information, said those numbers remained incomplete, suggesting the final tally of violent deaths could be higher.

Much of last year's politically motivated bloodshed unfolded in Baghdad. The Bush administration is considering sending more U.S. troops there, as the newly ascendant Democrats in Congress press for a military withdrawal. Bringing stability and rule of law to the capital is a cornerstone of the administration's strategy to exit Iraq. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced over the weekend his own security push to tame Baghdad's sectarian strife.

Last year's spike in casualties occurred despite an ambitious U.S. military operation in the capital, Together Forward, that involved thousands of U.S. and Iraqi troops cordoning off some of the deadliest neighborhoods and conducting house-to-house searches.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/07/AR2007010701359.html

[daleo]

1. It seems like that is a lower limit

The Lancet study came out with much higher numbers. Nonetheless, 23,000 in a year is high by any standards.

Then there is this:
"those numbers remained incomplete, suggesting the final tally of violent deaths could be higher."

[crickets]

5. GMTA. I think about the Lancet survey every time I see casualty numbers reported.

"those numbers remained incomplete, suggesting the final tally of violent deaths could be higher."

Much higher. Article about the first Lancet survey:

Study puts Iraqi toll at 100,000 (October 29, 2004)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/

LONDON, England -- Public health experts have estimated that around 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died since the United States invaded Iraq in March last year.

In a survey published on the Web site of the Lancet medical journal on Friday, experts from the United States and Iraq also said the risk of death for Iraqi civilians was 2.5 times greater after the invasion.
___


There was a second Lancet survey published in 2006.

Baghdad Burning - The Lancet Study... (October 18, 2006)
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_riverbendblog_archive.html

The latest horror is the study published in the Lancet Journal concluding that over 600,000 Iraqis have been killed since the war. Reading about it left me with mixed feelings. On the one hand, it sounded like a reasonable figure. It wasn't at all surprising. On the other hand, I so wanted it to be wrong. But... who to believe? Who to believe....? American politicians... or highly reputable scientists using a reliable scientific survey technique? ...

For American politicians and military personnel, playing dumb and talking about numbers of bodies in morgues and official statistics, etc, seems to be the latest tactic. But as any Iraqi knows, not every death is being reported. As for getting reliable numbers from the Ministry of Health or any other official Iraqi institution, that's about as probable as getting a coherent, grammatically correct sentence from George Bush- especially after the ministry was banned from giving out correct mortality numbers. So far, the only Iraqis I know pretending this number is outrageous are either out-of-touch Iraqis abroad who supported the war, or Iraqis inside of the country who are directly benefiting from the occupation ($) and likely living in the Green Zone.
___


Lancet surveys of mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_mortality_before_and_after_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq

The Lancet has published two studies on the effect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation on Iraqi mortality, the first in 2004, the second (by many of the same authors) in 2006. The studies attempt to count all excess deaths caused by the occupation, both direct (combatants plus non-combatants) and indirect (due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poor healthcare, etc.).

The first survey <1> published on 29 October 2004, estimated the risk of death following the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq to be 50% higher than that prior to the invasion. This led to an estimate of 98,000 excess deaths (with a range of 8,000 to 194,000, using a 95% CI confidence interval). The authors called this a conservative estimate, because it excluded the "extreme statistical outlier" data from Falluja. If Fallujah were included, the estimated increased risk of death was 2.5 fold (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.2). The Falluja cluster "indicates a point estimate of about 200,000 excess deaths in the 3% of Iraq represented by this cluster", while no confidence interval is given for this point estimate.

The second survey <2> <3> published on 11 October 2006, estimated 654,965 excess deaths related to the war, or 2.5% of the population, through the end of June 2006. The new study applied similar methods and involved surveys between May 20 and July 10, 2006. More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths.
___


Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003: Overview
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_conflict_in_Iraq_since_2003#Overview

Possible estimates on the total number of people killed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq vary widely. Estimates of coalition casualties below include both the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the following Post-invasion Iraq, 2003–present.

(chart)

[IndianaGreen]

2. The Maliki regime lies as much as Baghdad's Bob

Remember when Maliki's national security advisor told the MSM that Saddam's execution had been a dignified affair, only to be made into a fool by the release of the video phone?

The Lancet Report is the most authoritative report on Iraqi casualties.

[antiimperialist]

3. Then why did they say 12,000 a few days ago?

And another figure placed it as 16,000.
Someone is trying to hide the true extent of violence in Iraq.
The Iraq Study Group already found in its report that the Pentagon is underreporting attacks in Iraq.
And bear in mind that the health minister says this figure is incomplete, and therefore could be higher.
I applaud the WAPO for shedding some light.

[struggle4progress]

4. They DO keep upping the figures

Iraqi officials report 16,273 deaths (in 2006)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2671692

They did the same thing back in the late summer: they announced a "glorious month of hardly any deaths," which the wingnutters all loudly bally-hooed as a evidence that the war was finally working -- and later released updated figures showing it was yet any bloody-slaughterhouse-of-a-month.