Coalition kill more civilians than insurgents

[segovius]

This BBC Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4217413.stm) details a report from the Iraqi Ministry of Health which outlines figures for the civilian deaths in Iraq for the period from 1st July 2004 to 1st January 2005.

These are figures (excluding deaths of insurgents):


3,274 civilians killed in total

2,041 by coalition and Iraqi security forces

1,233 by insurgents

12,657 civilians wounded in total

8,542 by coalition and Iraqi security forces

4,115 by insurgents


In percentage terms that is 60% (2,041) killed by the coalition against the 1,233 of the insurgents.

This raises an awkward question:

How can the coalition manage to have a 60% kill rate of civilians when the insurgents are actively trying to target civilians in an organised terrorist campaign and the coalition are (allegedly) merely hunting the insurgents ?

[NaplesX]

Originally posted by segovius
This BBC Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4217413.stm) details a report from the Iraqi Ministry of Health which outlines figures for the civilian deaths in Iraq for the period from 1st July 2004 to 1st January 2005.

These are figures (excluding deaths of insurgents):


3,274 civilians killed in total

2,041 by coalition and Iraqi security forces

1,233 by insurgents

12,657 civilians wounded in total

8,542 by coalition and Iraqi security forces

4,115 by insurgents


In percentage terms that is 60% (2,041) killed by the coalition against the 1,233 of the insurgents.

This raises an awkward question:

How can the coalition manage to have a 60% kill rate of civilians when the insurgents are actively trying to target civilians in an organised terrorist campaign and the coalition are (allegedly) merely hunting the insurgents ? The report yet another crock from the BBC. That's how.

[segovius]

Originally posted by NaplesX
The report yet another crock from the BBC. That's how.

Err...it's from the Iraqi Ministry of Health - the BBC just reported it.

[New]

John Simpson is one of the best reporters out there.

Try again...

[Aurora]

Remember lots of those civilian deaths are at the hands of the terrorists. They simply add up the deaths and dont point out how many are killed by the bad guys roadside bombs,carbombs,executions etc. This is spin. Also i would wager that many they kill with the insurgents are counted as civilians when in reality working with the insurgents but unknown to Iraq or us.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by segovius

3,274 civilians killed in total

2,041 by coalition and Iraqi security forces

1,233 by insurgents


In percentage terms that is 60% (2,041) killed by the coalition against the 1,233 of the insurgents. I don't get it. Are the deaths caused by the coalition accidental deaths? Were they killing them because they were believed to be terrorists/insurgents, but the Iraqi ministry says they're not? (That BBC link isn't working for me.)

[mattjohndrow]

Originally posted by BRussell
(That BBC link isn't working for me.)

me neither

[New]

Originally posted by mattjohndrow
me neither

The link is suddenly dead...

[MarcUK]

That will be the government raiding the BBC with an armed SWAT team.

[MarcUK]

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=56445612&p=564459y4

[Harald]

Hey Naples X

Because the figures are from the Iraqi Ministry of Health, could you explain why the article is a BBC crock?

Ta.

[groverat]

Military action v. insurgent action.

Non-story.

[pfflam]

Originally posted by segovius
Err...it's from the Iraqi Ministry of Health - the BBC just reported it. See . . . they're Iraqis . . . and we know how the Iraqis lied about the whole not having shipped their weapons to Syria . ..

They're all just anti-Americans . . . just like you!

[addabox]

Originally posted by NaplesX
The report yet another crock from the BBC. That's how.

Says the fan of Newsmax, Drudge, et al.

[Anders]

I really want to know why BBC pulled the story. Anything wrong with it?

Originally posted by groverat
Military action v. insurgent action.

Non-story.

The figures are from the second half of 2004. So the invasion was over long ago.

How can I read the figures as anything else than our troops are a larger threat to the civilians than the insurgents?

I would also like to know if "civilians" include police officers.

[Anders]

The BBC link is up again.

On Thursday, January 27 2005, the Iraqi Ministry of Health released to the BBC's Panorama programme statistics which stated that for the six-month period from 1 July 2004 to 1 January 2005:

3,274 people in Iraq were killed and 12, 657 injured in conflict related violence
2,041 of these deaths were the result of "military operations", in which 8,542 people were injured
1,233 deaths were the result of "terrorist operations"


These figures were based on records from Iraqi public hospitals.

The BBC reported these figures as meaning that the deaths and injuries resulting from "military operations" were the result of actions by the Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces.

Today, the Iraqi Ministry of Health has issued a statement clarifying matters that were the subject of several conversations with the BBC before the report was published, and denying that this conclusion can be drawn from the figures relating to military operations. It states that those recorded as killed in military action included Iraqis killed by terrorists, not only those killed by Coalition forces or Iraqi security forces; and that those recorded as killed in military action included terrorists themselves, and Iraqi security forces.

The BBC regrets mistakes in its published and broadcast reports yesterday.

I don´t get it. What is left for "terrorist operations"?

[BRussell]

:rolleyes:

[Anders]

Originally posted by BRussell
:rolleyes:
:???:

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Anders
:???: That wasn't directed at you, it was at the ridiculousness of changing the story from "these were killed by coalition troops" to "oh yeah they also include terrorist killings." To that I say :rolleyes: .

But here's one I'll give you: :rolleyes: <- that rolleyes is to Anders. :)

[Anders]

I can always use a pair of roll eyes so thanks :)

I really REALLY don´t know how to read the BBC story. Are they mocking the Iraqi Ministry of Health? "Oh yes we are SOOO sorry that we issued wrong, but coherent numbers. Here we bring the nonsence but nonetheless right way to interpreted the numbers"