How fitting a title, then, when one considers the discussion that takes place in the public forum on casualty statistics, most particularly in the ongoing hotzone of Iraq. No one with regular access to global news except in the most isolated or insulated of places on Earth can be unaware of the constant bloodbath that is taking place on Persian soil. With the information age flooding the networks, reports become obsessed with statistical numbers. I sometimes wonder if this is some sort of macabre desensitization to the impact of civil war, atrocities and unrest that we find suitable much as a physician might look at a patients biochemistry profiles to determine different meanings. The analogy isn't quite square on the mark since presumably a healthy patient would have a statistical norm with numbers; body counts usually never indicate a healthy norm except when reviewing natural birth and death rates.
Ever since the conflagration in Iraq began to unfold - depending on what point you want to start with - numbers have played a key role in both policy making and public opinion.
Governments like the United States and Great Britain stated early on that they do not do body counts. Why? Is the reality of the impact of a war on a personal and individual level so unpalatable that the governments dare not embrace the full reality of their collective decisions because it would undermine their foreign policy objectives? Would it erode confidence by the public and increase accountability toward decision makers and the impact of their choices? The Lancet Report produced by (x) details a rather large and ghastly figure of deaths as a consequence of the ongoing war. Regardless of whether one believes the figures to be 600,000+ individuals or 100,000 individuals the response are what become interesting and instructive. I'm not being foolish enough to suggest that governments don't precisely know what they are doing in trying to control and disseminate all information coming out of a theater of conflict because they clearly do. My observation is the stupidity (that is to say knowing better and doing it anyway) with which the leaders try to influence that information.
When the report was initially released, President George Bush responded that the science behind this was discredited and...(through in the Field Commanders like Gen. Tommy Franks ) that we (the US) doesn't do body bags. Now in March of 2007, it appears that the science by most experts is quite sound and reliable - thought there may be some variations in the information gathering process. This admission puts a curious spotlight on the initial detractors as either entirely ignorant or deliberately deceptive - which is it? The further review by the government of the the United Kingdom states that they prefer to rely on the statistics brought forth by the Ministry of Health in Iraq(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6495753.stm)
How nice. The part to that statement of reliance on the ministry of Health that was not also included was its current state of affairs. It is not surprising that a government official would say something like this since it gives easy cover and no responsibility for any conflict oriented decisions. An if we knuckle under that preference then the next question is how reliable are the statistics coming from the Iraqi Ministry of health? One only has to obtain a snapshot view of on scene reporters to get a flavor of absolute gangsterism and chaos. For additional insight read http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6479997.stm), by BBC reporter John Leyne.
Given the environment described, how could anyone in their right mind honestly and sincerely state that the Health Ministry statistics are more reliable.
Statistics are normally collected by qualified individuals in the medical community. Does anyone really believe that such a consistent staff exists on a regular basis in Iraq? How? 80% of the country's qualified personnel have fled the country and in the Ministry of Health itself one floor is governed by Shiia and the next floor Sunni. Morgue personnel readily admit that death statistics are skewed because only the unclaimed dead are counted as statistics not those claimed by relatives. Even with only these three observations and the US and Britain not making any real effort to keep track of civilian dead, how could the ministry dedicate any time, resources or personnel to a cooperative and reliable mortality tracking system? Only the most cynical of individuals I would advance.
This apparent flexibility, shifting dodging and rope-a-dope* with the numbers has a curious echo to the American President's prior use of the term fuzzy math**. Why is it that when the math suddenly turns against the war decision makers, the math is wrong?
The point in these comparisons is not so much to find faults in a chaotic and brutal environment where numbers, hard facts and decisions are anything but easy to attain and maintain. Nor is it a diatribe to lay at the feet of the US and Britain as having blood on its hands, no vision for settling the problem except what can only be considered a kill them all until they come around mentality. Rather, I would advance that since the leaders of the US and Britain insist that the current course is the only one, why not define what standards you are using to determine what is good science. What standards will be acceptable from both a scientific and statistical standpoint that has the highest probability for accuracy and the least room for confusion or inaccuracy. If one accepts that bodies in a morgue that died a violent death are to be counted, why count only those NOT claimed by the families? If one wants to have reliable information, why rely on two warring factions responsible for the continued exodus of medical professionals and jointly controlling the Ministry of Health and each having very different reasons for manipulating statistics? What defines success? What defines failure...specifically...and I say again...SPECIFICALLY. If one takes the logic of not leaving until success is achieved (without a clear definition) then is is very possible that tens of thousands of US Personnel with die and come home maimed and trillions upon trillions will be spent until there is no more. Is victory attainable at the cost of our own economic health? How much money is enough until we cannot take care of our own business and future promises made by the government?
One interesting question to ponder is not so much why wars and conflicts start but why they end. I don't have the answer to all the conflicts listed below but historically the reasons tend to be financial and weather. Why did Germany stop fighting in WWI? What was happening to America near the end of WW2? When the money is gone, everyone has to go home. Where will we be then? America is already under severe pressure to meet Social Security and Medicare Medicaid obligations. Projections from these two programs gobble up most of the nation's projected budget without the long term impact of this conflict. Add this fact to the recent revelation that up to 40 million jobs may be outsourced to lower cost locations around the globe and the already smaller tax base for baby boomers is hobbled even more.*** America is the worlds biggest Debtor nation and is not leading the world in the production of highly skilled high paying jobs. Together these factors, excluding any others, should be enough of a warning to decide what standards of evaluation and statistical analysis are the most reliable. No one seems to be wanting to put the dots together in a comprehensive way and decide how much is enough, what stopping points are acceptable and unacceptable, and what the real victory or loss is likely to be.
Numbers have always been a game in the political environment and there have been reasons for manipulation and questioning. My concern is the almost willful blindness to the inconsistencies that arise and refusal to voice what those standards are likely to be and why. When the numbers suddenly demonstrate an unpleasant reality, or sticky political consideration, then the naysayers should bear the burden of proof to explain themselves and why the more reliable systems and conclusions are wrong. They should explain why transparently chaotic sources of information are more reliable than tried and tested methods. Political cover and expediency are no excuse for compounding a problem and sinking the physical, mental and economic health of nations into a tar pit. It is no wonder, then, that the title of this opinion essay is Bone Meal for your Garden. How many bones have been ground up over the course of history and depersonalized into nameless faceless statistics? The desert sands are constantly dry though they have soaked up blood, bones, dreams and billions in riches from countless human beings since the times of the Sumerians. Unfortunately, it seems to have no saturation point yet we don't appear to appreciate that lesson.
*rope a dope - see the original definition used by Muhammad Ali http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope-a-dope
**for a simple example refer to the following story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/24/politics/main601960.shtml
for comparative purposes (wikapedia compiled table of statistics of conflict related deaths. This site clearly states that the numbers contained therein include disputed sources, claims regarding neutrality, historical verifiability, and so forth - questions alone that that do not negate the impact) of the loss of human life(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll)
62,000,000 - World War II (1939–1945), (see World War II casualties)
36,000,000 - An Shi Rebellion (756–763)
30,000,000–60,000,000 - Mongol Conquests (13th century)
25,000,000 - Manchu conquest of Ming China (1616–1644)
20,000,000–50,000,000 - Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864)
17,000,000 - Timur's conquests (1370–1405)
15,000,000–66,000,000 - World War I (1914–1918) (see World War I casualties) note that the larger number includes Spanish flu deaths
10,000,000-25,000,000 - Second Sino-Japanese War (1931–1945)
5,000,000–9,000,000 - Russian Civil War (1917–1921)
3,800,000 - Second Congo War (1998–2004)
3,500,000–6,000,000 - Napoleonic Wars (1804–1815) (see Napoleonic Wars casualties)
3,000,000–8,000,000 - Thirty Years' War (1618–1648)
2,500,000–3,500,000 - Korean War (1950–1953)
2,300,000–3,800,000 - Vietnam War (entire war 1945–1975)
300,000–1,300,000 - First Indochina War (1945–1954)
100,000–300,000 - Vietnamese Civil War (1954–1960)
1,750,000–2,100,000 - American phase (1960–1973)
170,000 - Final phase (1973–1975)
175,000–1,150,000 - Secret War (1962–1975)
2,000,000–4,000,000 - French Wars of Religion (1562–1598)
1,700,000–2,300,000 - Khmer Rouge (1975–1979)
1,500,000–2,000,000 - Afghan Civil War (1979 -)
1,000,000–1,500,000 Soviet intervention (1979–1989)
1,300,000–6,100,000 - Chinese Civil War (1928–1949) note that this figure excludes World War II casualties
300,000–3,100,000 before 1937
1,000,000–3,000,000 after World War II
1,000,000–1,200,000 - Seven Years' War (1756–1763)
1,000,000 - Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988)
1,000,000 - Second Sudanese Civil War (1983–2002)
1,000,000 - Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970)
970,000 - American Civil War (including 350,000 from disease) (1861–1865)
900,000–1,000,000 - Mozambique Civil War (1976–1993)
800,000 - Congo Civil War (1991–1997)
600,000 to 1,300,000 - First Jewish-Roman War
580,000 - Bar Kokhba’s revolt (132–135CE)
550,000 - Somali Civil War (1988 - )
500,000 - 1,000,000 - Spanish Civil War (1936–1939)
500,000 - Angolan Civil War (1975–2002)
500,000 - Ugandan Civil War (1979–1986)
400,000–1,000,000 - War of the Triple Alliance in Paraguay (1864–1870)
371,000 - Continuation War (1941-1944)
300,000 - First Burundi Civil War (1972)
300,000–3,000,000 - Bangladesh Liberation War
300,000–2,000,000 - Mexican Revolution (1910–1920)
270,000–300,000 - Crimean War (1854–1856)
255,000-1,120,000 - Philippine-American War (1898-1913)
230,000–1,400,000 - Ethiopian Civil War (1974–1991)
220,000 - Liberian Civil War (1989 - )
200,000–800,000 - Warlord era in China (1917–1928)
200,000 - Sierra Leone Civil War (1991–2000)
200,000 - Guatemaltec Civil War (1960–1996)
190,000 - Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871)
150,000 - Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990)
150,000 - North Yemen Civil War (1962–1970)
150,000 - Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905)
148,000-1,000,000 - Winter War (1939)
125,000 - Ethiopia–Eritrea War (1998–2000)
120,000 - Bosnian War (1992–1995)
120,000 - Algerian Civil War (1991 - )
100,500 - Chaco War (1932–1935)
100,000 - 1,000,000 - War of the two brothers (1531–1532)
100,000 - Gulf War (1991)
100,000–1,000,000 - Algerian War of Independence (1954–1962)
100,000 - One Thousand Days War (1899–1901)
75,000 - El Salvador Civil War (1980–1992)
75,000 - Second Boer War (1898–1902)
69,000 - Internal conflict in Peru (1980 - )
60,000 - Sri Lanka/Tamil conflict (1983-)
55,464 - 655,000 - Iraq War (2003-Present) As of 2007, this conflict is still ongoing; the death toll is extremely disputed; the number of 655,000 deaths only includes deaths up to July 2006; it is the most scientific estimate published in the second of two surveys backed by Johns Hopkins University et alia; the surveys were very publicly disputed following publication in The Lancet; many parties contend that the actual death toll is significantly lower; as of February 4th 2007, a tally of minimum civilian deaths that were reported in English-language media stands at 55,464; the Iraqi health ministry has said that at least 150,000 civilians and about 60,000 insurgents and Iraqi soldiers –ie. soldiers who fought during the initial phase of the war when Saddam was still in power– had died by the end of 2006.
50,000–200,000 - First Chechen War (1994–1996)
41,00–100,000 - Kashmiri insurgency (1989 - )
35,000 - 40,000 - War of the Pacific (1879–1884)
36,000 - Finnish Civil War (1918)
31,000–100,000 - Second Chechen War (1999 - )
30,000 - Turkey/PKK conflict (1984 - )
30,000 - Sino-Vietnamese War (1979)
23,384 - Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 (December 1971)
23,000 - Nagorno-Karabakh War (1988-1994)
20,000 - 49,600 U.S. Invasion of Afghanistan (2001 – 2002)
15,000–20,000 - Croatian War of Independence (1991–1995)
13,000 - South Yemen Civil War (1986)
7,264–10,000 - Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 (August-September 1965)
7,000–24,000 - War of 1812 (1812-1815) note that the larger number includes deaths from disease and other non-combat casualties
7,000 - Kosovo War (1996–1999) (disputed)
5,000 - Turkish invasion of Cyprus (1974)
4,000 - Waziristan War (2004-2006)
3,700 - Northern Ireland conflict (1969 - 1998)
3,000 - Civil war in Côte d'Ivoire (2002 - )
2,604–7,000 - Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 (October 1947 - December 1948)
2,000 - Football War (1969)
1,975–4,500+ - violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2000 -)
1,547–2,173+ - 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
1,724 - War of Lapland (1945)
1,500 - Romanian Revolution (December 1989)
1,000 - Zapatista uprising in Chiapas (1994)
907 - Falklands War (1982)
884–6,000 - Kargil War (May-July 1999)
537–3,000 - Operation Just Cause (Panama, 1989)
Non-Combat Oriented
27,000,000-73,000,000[1] - People's Republic of China (1949-1975) under Mao Zedong [2]
20,946,000[3] - 26,000,000[4] - Democides/genocides (1933 -1945) of Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler, including the Holocaust
17,267,000[5](Table 3.1) - Atlantic Slave Trade (15th - 19th centuries)
13,778,000[6] - Democide of the Native American populations.
5,964,000[7] - 30,000,000[8] - War crimes of Imperial Japan, especially in China and other Asian regions, 1930's-1945, under Hideki Tojo and others. See also Japanese war crimes. Note: These figures are included in World War II death toll.
5,000,000 - 30,000,000 - Congo Free State (1877 - 1908) under King Leopold II of Belgium.
4,000,000 - 50,000,000 - Soviet Union (1924-1953) under Joseph Stalin[9]
2,800,000 - Soviet Prisoners of War killed by Germans (1941-42) [10]
2,000,000 - 3,500,000 - North Korea under Kim Jung Il
2,400,000 - 3,000,000 - Bangladesh (1971) East Pakistan wanted independence from West Pakistan. After the expulsion of the West Pakistan army, another 150,000 were killed by the vengeful victors.
2,000,000–3,000,000 - Cambodia (1975-1979) under Pol Pot
1,000,000–3,000,000 Armenian Genocide (1895-1923) . Most cited number is 1.5 million. Includes:
30,000–300,000 - Hamidian (First Armenian) Massacre (1895-1896)
6,000–30,000 - 1909
600,000–2,000,000 - Second Armenian Massacre (1915-1918)
250,000–500,000 - (1919-1923)
937,000 - Genocide in Rwanda (Rwanda, 1994)
800,000–1,000,000 - India-Pakistan Partition, (1947-1948)
400,000 - Darfur Genocide in Sudan. (2003-present)
~400,000 - Ustasha/Independent State of Croatia genocide of Serbs, Jews, Roma people during World War II (1941-1945)
100,000-200,000 - Jasenovac concentration camp in Croatia
Pontic Greek Genocide in modern day Turkey.
300,000 - Uganda (1971-1979) under Idi Amin
250,000–1,000,000 - Indonesia (1965-1966) under President Suharto (anti-communist purges).
225,000 - (1788 - 1888) Population decline of the Australian Aborigines in the first 100 years of British settlement *(source)
182,000 - Iraq (1986-1989) under Saddam Hussein, see also Al-Anfal Campaign
150,000 - 300,000 East Timor (1970's) under President Suharto of Indonesia
150,000 - Harrying of the North (England, 1069-1070) by William the Conqueror
130,000-200,000 - Guatemala (1962-1996), under Rios Montt and others see also civil war and highland massacres
100,000 - cumulative total attributed to Thuggee, ? - 1840
75,000 - England (1509-1547) under King Henry VIII
40,000–100,000 - Namibia (1904-1908). See also Herero massacre
40,000 - France (1793-1794) under the Jacobin Reign of Terror (estimates vary from 18,000 to 60,000 but this is the generally accepted figure).
30,000 - Haiti (1964 - 1971) under François "Papa Doc" Duvalier
10,000–30,000 - Argentina's Dirty War, (Argentina, 1976 - 1983)
3,000 - Chile (1973 - 1990) under Augusto Pinochet
(Not finished or edited_http://icasualties.org
No comments:
Post a Comment