Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990

[Jefferson23]

4/8/2015


Landmark research proves that the US-led ‘war on terror’ has killed as many as 2 million people, but this is a fraction of Western responsibility for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two decades.

Last month, the Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PRS) released a landmark study concluding that the death toll from 10 years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million.

The 97-page report by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning doctors’ group is the first to tally up the total number of civilian casualties from US-led counter-terrorism interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The PSR report is authored by an interdisciplinary team of leading public health experts, including Dr. Robert Gould, director of health professional outreach and education at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center, and Professor Tim Takaro of the Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University.

Yet it has been almost completely blacked out by the English-language media, despite being the first effort by a world-leading public health organisation to produce a scientifically robust calculation of the number of people killed by the US-UK-led “war on terror”.

in full: http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/unworthy-victims-western-wars-have-killed-four-million-muslims-1990-39149394

Physicians for Social Responsibility
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicians_for_Social_Responsibility

[Thinkingabout]

1. Western wars?

Not every Muslim killed has been from western wars.

[Jefferson23]

2. You're certainly free to add anything you like to dispute the OP.

Not every Muslim killed has been from western wars is their claim.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Their claim, no data to back up this statement, likely is not true data.

this is the title of this thread.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990.

How many have been killed by country leaders and terrorism among themselves. These can not be included in the figures.

[Jefferson23]

4. I think you're confused, I will

say again to you, post what you believe is not backed up.

Their data is all substantiated, your negative presumptions about them is telling.

http://www.psr.org/assets/pdfs/body-count.pdf

[Thinkingabout]

9. Where are the numbers?

[Jefferson23]

10. In the pdf file, in my previous post and that same link is embedded in the OP. n/t

[cprise]

12. This criticism closely parallels the "Noble Native Myth" strawman

...which asserts a range of claims about Native Americans being too 'warlike' to be considered peaceful, and therefore a danger to themselves. E.g. the Indians suffered the battles they inflicted on each other, so protests against white colonialism are the disingenuous romanticizing of indigenous peoples.

This is a staple tactic of conservatism in postmodern discourse, and it ignores the fact that colonial and neo-conservative policies seek to exacerbate divisions among any number of groups perceived as 'other'. It also steadfastly ignores data about the relative well-being and demise of people that were living in the areas subject to Western invasion.

[geek tragedy]

5. I dunno about this report, the authors are very ideologically slanted.

Sample conclusion:

Meanwhile, the US administration has affirmed that it's going to continue its murder operations unchanged and at the same level.

Page 94.

Their methodology also assumes that zero war-related deaths would be happening in Pakistan and Afghanistan had the US not intervened in Afghanistan. And that civilian malnutrition, medical deaths would have remained constant. Which is dubious (childhood mortality rate is way down in Afghanistan under the same time period).

Also, the report lists 1.3 million (with 1 million coming from Iraq alone). Where do you get the 4 million figure?

[Jefferson23]

6. Ideologically slanted? Not sure how a physician based group is going to conclude otherwise.

The 4 million figure is estimated here: *In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million. ( end )

There is no doubt this subject is controversial, I will give you that and as the OP points out, there
was/is little incentive to fund studies for it. With that said, this group has presented evidence that
gives us more information not less. When I hear complaints, I hope those in the international community
will fund more research on it not less. Historians work on these matters as well, the numbers tell a story
and I doubt this report will be found in years to come as that off the mark.

I recall when I began reading this report an interview done by 60 Minutes with Madeline Albright,
she was asked was it worth it? ( sanctions in Iraq..500,000 children dead ) She did not hesitate
for a moment, nor did she dispute the number, she said, yes, it was worth it.

This is why I voted for Obama in the primaries, and why I believed then as I do today, he
would not be the one to bomb and or invade Iran. I have my differences with policies he has
carried out, but I felt he would not ever do such a thing. It is far past time to end this insane
foreign policy approach to the ME...we can't dominate the world and expect there to be no
serious consequences.

[geek tragedy]

7. The article is a lot sloppier than the report.

Let's just look at this claim:

In his book, Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950 (2007), Professor Gideon Polya applied the same methodology used by The Guardian to UN Population Division annual mortality data to calculate plausible figures for excess deaths. A retired biochemist at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Polya concludes that total avoidable Afghan deaths since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around 3 million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under five.

Although Professor Polya’s findings are not published in an academic journal, his 2007 Body Count study has been recommended by California State University sociologist Professor Jacqueline Carrigan as “a data-rich profile of the global mortality situation” in a review published by the Routledge journal, Socialism and Democracy.

As with Iraq, US intervention in Afghanistan began long before 9/11 in the form of covert military, logistical and financial aid to the Taliban from around 1992 onwards. This US assistance propelled the Taliban’s violent conquest of nearly 90 percent of Afghan territory.

In a 2001 National Academy of Sciences report, Forced Migration and Mortality, leading epidemiologist Steven Hansch, a director of Relief International, noted that total excess mortality in Afghanistan due to the indirect impacts of war through the 1990s could be anywhere between 200,000 and 2 million. The Soviet Union, of course, also bore responsibility for its role in devastating civilian infrastructure, thus paving the way for these deaths.

Altogether, this suggests that the total Afghan death toll due to the direct and indirect impacts of US-led intervention since the early nineties until now could be as high 3-5 million.

Two problems with this:

1) The Taliban didn't originate until 2004
2) The Taliban wasn't supported by the US, but rather by Pakistan's ISI.

The lesson of Iraq is plain enough. But inaccuracy and wild exaggeration don't help teach that lesson.

[Jefferson23]

8. Some sloppy language in the OP, not report..true. n/t

[yurbud]

11. yeah, I'm pretty sure we've killed about seven people and all of them were worse than Hitler...