Inflated Iraq 'Body Count'

Are you tired of the skewed accounts of what is going on in Iraq. Here is a copy of the letter I sent to the 'Iraq Body Count' web site which asks them a few questions that they will never be able to answer. Enjoy. ----------------------------------------------------

I stumbled upon your website regarding the Iraq Body Count and was rather amazed at the claims made: aprox 82,000 - 89, 000 civilian deaths.

The reason I have doubts about such a fantastic number is because all of our military actions in Iraq have been in a tactical capacity, consisting of isolated raids, battles and what not. Can you name one major battle where more than 1000 'civilians' died at the hands of the troops. Or would you rather have us believe that we are just carpet bombing Iraqi neighborhoods on an everyday basis? With this perspective in mind it is next to impossible to believe that some 82,000+ deaths have resulted from our 'tactical' operations in Iraq. And how do you distinguish a dead terrorist or insurgent from a 'civilian'? And how do you distinguish the 'civilians' who have provided aid, supplies, intelligence and safe houses to terrorists and insurgents from those who haven't? Are they wearing terrorist dog tags?

"Data is drawn from cross-checked media reports, hospital, morgue, NGO and official figures to" produce a credible record of known deaths and incidents."

Media reports? Of course you must know that most of the journalists over there are only reporting the car bombings, deaths and what have you. Rarely, if ever, do we hear about the dozens of hospitals and schools that have been built and/or repaired, new infrastructures, and things of this nature, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that their accounts have been skewed and are rife with oversights, omissions and outright distortions. Virtually none of the troops are ever interviewed because most 'journalists' only want to portray the war (and it is a 'War', not a picnic) in the worst possible terms.

NGO's? Which NGO's? 'Official reports'? What official reports? The military's? For 'some reason' you failed to say. Do they include the 1000's of accounts taken from the troops over the past few years? (No, they do not.)

Morgues? When visiting such places how does one determine which 'civilians' were killed by our troops and which ones were killed by terrorists and insurgents? For 'some reason' you failed to say.

I noticed that your website doesn't include a chart * NAMING * your sources and the numbers they provide and their methods of counting casualties. All you have given us are generic claims on their behalf. Can you name one NGO that has eyes and ears all over Iraq and who are always in a position to go into battle zones and monitor ALL the activity? For 'some reason' you failed to say.

As for 'civilian' deaths...are you bearing in mind that terrorists and insurgents are 'civilians', and that they (very) often operate by setting up their operations surrounded with women and children, and that many of the terrorists and insurgents have the phone numbers of their favorite journalist(s) so that in the event that the women and children they hide behind happen to get killed, the first thing they do is call these 'journalists, knowing full well many of them operate with an agenda?

It would also be interesting to know who your largest supporters are. For 'some reason' you failed to say. Are they United States citizens... or are they people like George Soros? And of course to keep your supporters happy, and the funds coming in, you are no doubt compelled to report what they want to hear. Aren't you? From a mile away, guys.

2 posted on 03/20/2008 1:52:06 PM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)

Matt,

That count includes those killed by the insurgency. If you dig deep enough on their website they say that the coalition is responsible for 526 innocent deaths in 2006 and some 350 innocent deaths in 2005. I think they do a good job of actually counting the deaths.

Even though they’re definately not for the war, they seem to be somewhat grounded. I’d take the IBC’s estimates far more than that ridiculous Lancet study people throw around all over the place.

A couple weeks ago I had a drink with an old liberal friend (former bandmate). He stated that the US had killed over half a million Iraqi civilians. I told him that his number was nonsense. He cited the Lancet tally and some other garbage. I told him the number was actually much, much higher- that we had, so far, killed all of Iraq's civilians and that once we'd succeeded in killing all refugees from Iraq we'd begin to kill all Iranian civilians.

All he heard was Iran and started in on how they aren't a threat to anyone and that we shouldn't bomb them. There's a reason I don't talk to this guy on a regular basis...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.