Support NeoGAF

[Leguna]

My question is this: Are fewer people being killed (NOT JUST AMERICAN LIVES!) before the US went into Iraq or are more lives being saved after we went in and removed Sadam?

I need numbers and the reliable source they came from to proof a point. Thanks in advance!

I was under the impression that fewer people were being killed after removing Sadam, because when Sadam was in power he was killing his own at an alarming rate. But I'm being told now that more poeple are dying now (both Iraquies and Americans) after the US went into Iraq than before we went in.

 

[Leguna]

bump

 

[Banjo Tango]

One problem with getting accurate numbers is that the military doesn't track civilian casualties; not sure if there are any organizations that do provide such estimates. American Red Cross, maybe?

Edit - I can't remember if it was that the military didn't officially track the numbers, if they just didn't make them publically available... or if they didn't track them at all. I know part of the reason offered was that it was often very difficult to differentiate a civilian casualty from an enemy combatant.

 

[iapetus]

I'm pretty certain Saddam didn't track his numbers for public viewing either.

 

[Leguna]

TO ALL:
Appreciate the info guys. Seems the answer isn't out there. I was going to base my opinion on whether we did the right thing in going into Iraq on that answer.

 

[Phoenix]

TO ALL:
Appreciate the info guys. Seems the answer isn't out there. I was going to base my opinion on whether we did the right thing in going into Iraq on that answer.

That would be a mistake. Whether or not we did the right thing isn't really related to how many people die in the process and its most definitely not a question that can be answered for at least 20 years. All of the 'success' scenarios will take decades before they can be sorted out.

One thing is certain though... we may end up doing the 'right thing' for the 'wrong reasons'.

 

[FightyF]

The number of deaths from violence in Iraq (during the last 10 years, including the bombing of Iraq by the British and Americans) doesn't compare to the number that died as a result of the inneffective sanctions.

As far as the "right thing" goes, the numbers wouldn't tell you much. You also need to look at the average Iraqi's attitude, as well as the pace of reconstruction. Both of these elements would have been far more positive if the UN (and other Arab countries) were involved in the invasion.

 

[Dilbert]

My question is this: Are fewer people being killed (NOT JUST AMERICAN LIVES!) before the US went into Iraq or are more lives being saved after we went in and removed Sadam?

I need numbers and the reliable source they came from to proof a point. Thanks in advance!

I was under the impression that fewer people were being killed after removing Sadam, because when Sadam was in power he was killing his own at an alarming rate. But I'm being told now that more poeple are dying now (both Iraquies and Americans) after the US went into Iraq than before we went in.

I would think that the answer would CLEARLY be that fewer people died under Saddam per year. Do you really think he was killing his own people at a rate comparable to that of a full-fledged invasion and occupation?

 

[Drinky Crow]

This is typical Leguna -- trying to shore up some poor semblence of factual objectivity without grasping the larger holistic issues involved. Ho ho!