I posted then following on January 20th on Earthborn's other thread about the body count. I don't think there was any response. The site is biased.
---
Interesting site, and the data is no doubt useful. But I think a closer look is in order. (Let me admit right now that this analysis is very cursory, but it does not, imo, bode well for the objectivity of the site).
The site tracks civilian deaths attributable to the war, beginning in March 2003 and continuing until now. By “attributable” it appears they mean any civilian death which would not have occurred if the war had not taken place, though they apply this broadly, as I hope I will show.
There is one listing for five civilians killed by coalition forces targeting “bank robbers.” One assumes that bank robbers would not have been targeted under Saddam’s regime. Actually, it is reasonable to assume that bank robbery was extremely rare under that regime, though if this is a good thing is open for debate.
The list also does not differentiate between sources of the deadly fire. For instance, there are two listings, one for the Red Cross and one for a United Nations convoy, that were targeted by non-coalition forces that are included. More importantly, the listing includes casualties from all the roadside bombings and attacks initiated by non-coalition forces.
It gives both a minimum figure and a maximum figure:
MINIMUM: 8015
MAXIMUM: 9052
Here’s a quick analysis of it.
First, tally the numbers of those things completely attributable to non-coalition forces or ‘resistance’ fighters or what have you. Be strict and only include the undoubtable things:
MINIMUM: 680
MAXIMUM: 1358
Second, tally the numbers for everything attributable to Coalition Forces, being generous with what is considered attributable, and ignoring that “assailants” are counted as civilians for the purpose of this list.
MINIMUM: 1088
MAXIMUM: 1459
Now tally the numbers that are questionable, meaning they may have been caused by either Coalition Forces or someone else:
MINIMUM: 493
MAXIMUM: 635
Now comes the largest category that I pulled out of all the rest. There are 8 entries that look like the following. The first number is the minimum casualties, second is the maximum. The next is the location, next is the cause of death, next is the date or date range. Not all entries had all this information:
633______633 No location given; various causes; 20 March - 6 April
1482_____2009 Baghdad hospitals; no causes; 19 March – 9 April
224______358 Najaf hospitals; various causes; no dates
201______201 Basrah Hospital; loss of electricity; 20 March – 7 April
182______200 Basrah Teaching Hospital; no causes; 20 March – 9 April
778______1213 Baghdad morgue; no causes; 20 March – 24 April
1214_____1297 Baghdad morgue; violent deaths; date given but I can’t read my writing
362______367 Baghdad morgue; over 55% gun shot wounds; date given but can’t read it
5076_____6278 Total
Most of these eight entries have a link to details. I could only get one to lead me anywhere, though. That one is the second to last which has a min/max of 1214/1297.
It’s interesting reading. It says these things:
a) 60% of the violent deaths are gunshot wounds
b) This compares to 10% before the war
c) They estimate 15% to 20% of gun shot wounds are from coalition forces.
There are two ways to apply those percentages.
1) Take 60% of the initial number and then 15% or 20% of that for your final figure
2) Take 50% of the initial number as your final (comparing 60% postwar to 10% prewar)
But what is the initial number? The source says it is 1519. Which gives you either 182 or 760, both well short of even the minimum number of 1214.
Now if we extrapolate the same reasoning to the other of these entries (except for the Basrah Hospital loss of electricity), our numbers suddenly become for low end min/max:
76_____76
178____241
27_____72
201____201
22_____24
94_____146
146____156
44_____44
788____960 Total
or, for high end min/max
317____317
741____1005
112____179
201____201
91_____100
389____607
607____649
181____184
2639___3242 Total
Which means, I think, that the real overall minimum is: 1166
And the real overall maximum is (counting the gray area numbers): 5336
There is no ‘good’ number of civilian deaths, but it is a far cry from the 8015/9052 min/max at the site.
And this is before deducting whatever expected violent civilian deaths there would continue to have been under Saddam’s regime if it had been left in place.
As I said, though, this was done quickly. I could be wrong.
P.S. I have not had a chance to look at the site posted by espoirpaz
