First, the author’s evaluative comparison makes no sense: he compares the world as it is to an imaginary world in which Iraq is perfectly peaceful and prosperous. He ought to compare the world as it is to the world that would have been had the US not liberated Iraq.

Second, the author takes the results of worthless advocacy research as an accurate depiction of the number of casualties in Iraq. No responsible analysis should be based on results from obviously falsified data.

The first blunder is rather basic. Counting the number of casualties since the US liberation of Iraq and using that total in a vacuum as the human cost of the liberation is silly. It smuggles in an assumption that there would have been exactly zero Iraqi casualites had the US not liberated Iraq. That assumption is absurd on its face. In fact, it is rather likely that if the US had not liberated Iraq that Saddam and Sons would still be in power in Iraq, and that regime murdered about 750,000 of its own citizens in the last 15 years of its existence. A simple starting point thus looks at about 50,000 Iraqis murdered per year if the US had not liberated Iraq: that comes to about 225,000 dead persons if the US had continued to do nothing.

Reputable analyses of the number of dead since the US liberated Iraq place the total at about 80,000. Even economists who can’t do math can do this math: about 150,000 Iraqis are alive today NET who would have been murdered absent the US liberation. Even if one DOUBLES the most reputable estimates, that still leaves, NET, about 60,000 more Iraqis whose lives have been saved.

The only way to make the comparison turn Rockwell’s way is to gin up huge numbers of casualties…

The second blunder is a simple insistence that ludicrous advocacy research is accurate. The author uncritically endorses the ORB survey’s estimate of 1.2 million casualties. That is not an accident but a conscious choice to use an estimate that is 20 x the estimates of the UN, IBC, DoD, Brookings, and nearly every other evaluation.

The ORB data collection was conducted by Dr. Munqeth Daghir. The ORB has a couple of videos of him which make clear his opposition to the liberation of Iraq. Daghir has explained that he has no formal training in polling and only began polling after the 2003 liberation after “reading a book by Dr. Gallup.” Why the ORB or anyone else would rely on data presented by him is never explained.

I will point to just 2 obvious indicators that the ORB data was ginned-up.

1) car bombs everywhere

The ORB Study reports that 21.6% of its estimated deaths were from car bombs. They estimate that of 1,220,580 Iraqi casualties, car bombs have killed 264,126 of them. If the average of 7.5 deaths per car bomb that is reported in the media held for the 250,000 unreported car bomb casualties, that means there have been about 35,000 car bombs over the past 4 1/2 years. That comes to about 21 car bombs a day… or 20 times as many exploding cars every day in Baghdad than are ever mentioned in any radio, tv, or newspaper story.

And where did those 250,000 car bomb victims’ bodies go after the phantom car bomb explosions? Dr. Daghir explains with a straight face in the ORB video that they never made it to the Baghdad morgues because their families must have buried them secretly to avoid militia attention. That explanation completes the circle: phantom car bombs in Baghdad killed an extra 250,000 people but those bodies disappeared because their relatives buried them secretly.

2) more deaths than injuries

The ORB study estimates 1,220,580 deaths but only 1,106,591 total injuries. That ratio of injuries to deaths, .907, is less than 1/2 of the general rule of thumb: expect 2 or more civilian injuries for every civilian death in a war zone. It is simply not believable that more civilians are killed than are injured by car bombs, aerial bombardment, or gunshot wounds: that would make Baghdad the only place on Earth where bullets and shrapnel behave that way.
That ratio alone is a clear indicator that the underlaying data has been falsified.

To recap, among the several obvious blunders of the analysis, 2 that should jump out at anyone who shares von Mises’s love of rationality are:
1) the real world is compared against an impossible counterfactual fantasy rather than against a continuing nightmare.
2) the analysis relies on obviously nonsensical results just because the authors used numbers.

Ludwig von Mises would have been appalled.

Michael Korcok

At least with genocide, there is an acknowledgment of humanity, albeit of the wrong “race” or type; but with mega-murder it is only statistics. In mega-murder, they don’t even deserve to be counted.

By the way, technically, genocide does not require that the perpetrators aim to exterminate an entire nation or race, just that the extermination is based on nation or race.

“So, because it is not Official US Policy to kill Iraqi civilians, then it is not genocide?”

If a person has the right to make words mean anything they want, then I guess it’s all right to use the words genocide and murder for what is happening in Iraq. But then, consider that most socialists consider libertarians thieves and murderers for their support of free markets. Are we to sink to the level of socialist logic out of pure hatred?

“Personally, I would rather live under a dictator who allowed me some basic freedoms, rather than try and survive in a state of complete chaos where I never knew if I was going to be shot or blown up each time I walked outside what was left of my home.”

If we don’t finish our mission in Iraq and other places, you’ll get your wish. Right here in America. One or the other. Take your pick.

The person who forces a peasant to become a makeshift steel worker who then starves to death, has just as much moral responsibility as if they put the gun to their head and pulled the trigger. And so does the person who engages in an illegal, immoral, unjustifiable invasion, which creates a state of chaos where many, many people die (are you listening, Mr. Bush?)

The US had no right whatsoever to invade Iraq. But they did it anyway, and now as many or more than a million Iraqis – the vast majority of whom would have been alive now – are now dead. And hundreds more are dying every day. Even more are pouring out of this nightmare of a country. No one can make an argument that Saddam did this kind of damage to his country, no matter whom he gassed (gas provided by the US govt, BTW)

I don’t believe it’s ‘un-PC’ to mention other mass-murders, quite the opposite in fact. But this does not change what has happened, what is happening, and what will continue to happen in Iraq, all caused by US policy.

I know most of us do not want to think that our government is capable of this, but it is happening. If we refuse to call it what it is, this sort of thing will continue happening in the future, but even worse. (Iran, anyone?)

“Bottom line: over 1,000,000 Iraqis are now dead”

But are there? Does that number really make sense. I noticed that no one wanted to deal with an actual logical objection to the study.

One of the passtimes of western countries is to drop white phosporous and atomic bombs on defenceless civilians. I believe that’s done in the name of freedom, democracy, humanity or something like that.

I suggest you make an effort and try to learn what happened during the 20th century in the west.

The most interesting feature of the 20th century to me, is the fact that America, suposedly the most capitalist country on earth, was an ally of the commies. Interesting, isn’t it ?”

Actually it’s Robert, but close enough. I suggest you learn the difference between attacking another country and killing your own citizens. I’m not saying either is right, but the examples you gave did not have anything to do with what I said.

And yes, how dare we make an alliance with the commies to stop the genocidal germans. It really isn’t suprising when you look at how much of a communist that New Deal pig was and how un-capitalist we had become.

While nuking civilians is never right, it probably saved more innocent lives than it cost. Put a quick end to japan’s genocide in asia, which was worse in numbers than germany’s. Also note that that wasnt a war of aggression.

The ONLY genocide that has happened in Iraq was the Arab and Persian attacks on the Kurds, which we have tremendously stifled. That has been my point, to call American actions wrong is okay, I agree, but to call them genocide is a complete lie.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I have long waited for someone to take this wretched government to task for the damage their leaders had ordered inflicted on Iraqis (and Afghanis) who were clearly civilians.

Some may say that the deaths (and maimings) were unintentional. Does it matter? Maybe the hijackers of the planes who crashed into the twin towers did not INTEND the deaths for EACH of the people inside the buildings who died that tragic day. Maybe Al Q’aida did not INTEND for other thousands of individual New Yorkers to die, or become horribly sick, from the toxins released by the collapse of the buildings. They died, and their families grieved, just the same!

The attack on Iraq, and even the Saddam regime, was a shameful, cowardly attack by the strongest military power in the world, inflicting completely avoidable death and destruction upon a small, backward, largely impoverished, and more-or-less defenceless little country which never attacked us, and could not defend itself.

I hope that President Bush, Fox News, Republican Presidential candidates–except for the remarkable Ron Paul–and other so-called “patriots” defending their genocide and so-called “nation building” while waving the American flag feel better about themselves now!!

All together now, U-S-A!!, U-S-A!!, U-S-A!!…

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller

We have troops in S. Korea and Germany. People die every day in both places. Are we guilty of genocide and murder in those countries?

Because we’re not the government… it’s not OUR war (even though we may be paying for it)! Democracy in the middle east? Yeah right, keep dreaming, but not libertarian democracy!

Some people are trying to tell us something else in this forum however. They seem to be saying that there is an enforceable condition for a nation to be in, that is a good preliminary for libertarian democracy (which in turn is a good preliminary for libertarian anarchy).

I always thought the best preliminary was education.

“A far cry from murder and genocide”? What, pray tell, do think is going on over there, in our name? “Whoops, sorry about that, Haji!” Oh, wait, I think that’s what they said in Vietnam! “Sin Lao, Victor Charlie!”

I think murder and genocide are going on. But I don’t think its going on because we are there as much as its going on because we invaded in the first place. And Americans for the most part aren’t doing it. If American soldiers really thought they were aiding genocide, would they continue to serve? I seriously doubt it. I wonder if the troops believe their leaving will ease the violence? I have no idea.

My point is that no one went into this mess expecting genocide. I don’t attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance. And the bottom line is that it is still, for the most part, Iraqis killing other Iraqis. That doesn’t take all or maybe even most of the blame away from American politicians, but its a lot different from carpet-bombing Baghdad.

Don’t get me wrong, I think we should leave as soon as possible, but I don’t think you can say the politicians who want to remain are “pro genocide” or anything like that.

This country has been torn to pieces in every way imaginable. In addition to the Iraqi ‘insurgents’, foreigners pour in to take shots at the US occupation, resulting in daily gunfights, explosions, car-bombings, and carnage. How would you feel if all this was happening in YOUR neighborhood?

As long as you did not criticize the govt (ie: Saddam), you could pretty much do what you wanted. You could drink alcohol, women could dress like in the West, gun laws were more liberal than the US. It was a secular state – yes, like the West – in a sea of theocracies and quasi-theocracies. Yes, he was brutal to his enemies, but most of these enemies were the same ‘Islamofascists’ that we are supposedly at war with. Maybe that’s why he was our buddy in the 80s?

Some of you seem to be buying into the war propaganda. Personally, I would rather live under a dictator who allowed me some basic freedoms, rather than try and survive in a state of complete chaos where I never knew if I was going to be shot or blown up each time I walked outside what was left of my home.

One of the passtimes of western countries is to drop white phosporous and atomic bombs on defenceless civilians. I believe that’s done in the name of freedom, democracy, humanity or something like that.

I suggest you make an effort and try to learn what happened during the 20th century in the west.

The most interesting feature of the 20th century to me, is the fact that America, suposedly the most capitalist country on earth, was an ally of the commies. Interesting, isn’t it ?

As each of the Towers fell, people were horrified, because they understood that thousands of people were dying before their very eyes.

Let’s say that the ORB study is accurate. Four times as many people have died as a result of the war in Iraq than were killed in the Tsunami, yet the average person will not react as they did with the Tsunami or the WTC. That’s because they’ve had time to process what’s going on and may even be inured to four+ years of daily reports of body counts. They’ll just shrug their shoulders and say “there’s a war going on…what do you expect?”

I’m not saying it’s right, it’s just how people can be.

What good does getting mad do? What we need is a plan to end the killing. Of course, we could pull our troops out, which I hope will happen soon, but that won’t stop the killing. What would you suggest.

This site and LRC are among the few places where those genocides are talked about frequently. As I’m sure you are aware, ‘un-pc’ is kind of a hallmark here, so that line doesn’t work so well. For instance: you ought to be allowed to kick puppies so long as you own them. And: you ought not be allowed to go to someone else’s part of our world and shoot them for (poor) reasons that are no longer applicable anyway.

“A far cry from murder and genocide”? What, pray tell, do think is going on over there, in our name? “Whoops, sorry about that, Haji!” Oh, wait, I think that’s what they said in Vietnam! “Sin Lao, Victor Charlie!”