Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Forums: Politics, Iraq
Email this Topic • Print this Page

[size=7]Monday, May 29, 2006 1:22 p.m. EDT[/size]

Iraq Less Violent than Washington, D.C.

Despite media coverage purporting to show that escalating violence in Iraq has the country spiraling out of control, civilian death statistics complied by Rep. Steve King, R-IA, indicate that Iraq actually has a lower civilian violent death rate than Washington, D.C.

Appearing with Westwood One radio host Monica Crowley on Saturday, King said that the incessantly negative coverage of the Iraq war prompted him to research the actual death numbers.

"I began to ask myself the question, if you were a civilian in Iraq, how could you tolerate that level of violence," he said. "What really is the level of violence?"

Using Pentagon statistics cross-checked with independent research, King said he came up with an annualized Iraqi civilian death rate of 27.51 per 100,000.

While that number sounds high - astonishingly, the Iowa Republican discovered that it's significantly lower than a number of major American cities, including the nation's capital.
"It's 45 violent deaths per 100,000 in Washington, D.C.," King told Crowley.

Other American cities with higher violent civilian death rates than Iraq include:

Detroit - 41.8 per 100,000

Baltimore - 37.7 per 100,000

Atlanta - 34.9 per 100,000

St. Louis - 31.4 per 100,000

The American city with the highest civilian death rate was New Orleans before Katrina - with a staggering 53.1 deaths per 100,000 - almost twice the death rate in Iraq.

Source

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 16,299 • Replies: 379

No top replies

Oh. That would make it all right to keep on in Iraq, then. Good show. Pip pip.

0 Replies

The point isn't whether it is or is not alright to "keep on in Iraq." The point is that the picture presented by some liberals, indicating that civilians are being slaughtered left and right is simply wrong. The fact that the death rate in place A is lower than in place B doesn't mean that the deaths in A are alright, it means that the death rate in A is lower than in B.

0 Replies

oopsie

Quote:

2) According to Pentagon's own data released today, there have been 94 violent casualties per day in Iraq between February and May of 2006. (see p.33). That translates into 34,310 deaths per year in Iraq. For an Iraqi population of about 26.7 million, plus another 150,000 coalition forces, the violent casualty rate in Iraq is 128 deaths per 100,000.

Quote:

1) The King report uses 2002 data for Washington, D.C., finding a violent casualty rate of 45.9 deaths per 100,000 people. That number is badly outdated. Using the most recent 2004 data, the violent casualty rate in D.C. is 35.8 deaths per 100,000. There were 198 homicides total in D.C. for the entire year.

Quote:

3) Lastly, the King report is trying to conflate the data for one urban area in the U.S. with the entire country of Iraq. As OpinionJournal writes, "The comparison with U.S. cities poses a problem of scale. Just as some municipalities here have high concentrations of crime, Baghdad and some other Iraqi cities have high concentrations of military, guerrilla and terrorist activity. A comparison of Baghdad with Los Angeles or a similarly sprawling U.S. city would be more enlightening than a comparison of Iraq as a whole with cities of well under a million people."

It was a nice effort, til someone looked at his numbers.

I wonder where Mr. King did his degree in statistics.

Numbers are actually harder to mess with than he thinks.

~~~~~~~~~

the source for my info - the usual suspects - as was Brandon's. (I also get newsmax updates)

0 Replies

I bet it's really a picnic in Iraq and a bunch of nasty liberals perpetuate the myth there's a war going on.

0 Replies

par-tay

0 Replies

Well, let's see.

The population of Iraq is, according to the CIA world factbook, 26,074,906.

The estimated number of civilians killed in Iraq during the war, according to Iraqbodycount.org, is 38059. Note that this is the low end estimate. The high end estimate is 42434.

Since we've been at war for about 3 years, let's divide those numbers by three - 12686 and 14144 deaths per year, respective to the estimates.

The total population of Iraq, in terms of hundreds of thousands, is 260 hundreds of thousands(ten 100,000 per million * 26 millions). So, let us divide those numbers by 260 to find the annual death rate per hundred thousand.

12686/260 = 48.79 deaths per 100,000, per annum.

14144/260 = 54.4 deaths per 100,000 per annum.

I strongly suspect that the King is either using suspect numbers, or he doesn't know what the hell he is talking about and is simply making things up. Not to mention the fact that these numbers are definately low end estimates, there are other studies and estimates out there which show much higher numbers of civilian casualties. I chose the lowest reliable numbers I could find just to illustrate the point.

It doesn't take more than 5 minutes of research and a little simple math to check stuff like this before you post it, Brandon. If my math is incorrect in some way, I'd like you to point it out to me; otherwise, admit that the article you have posted is most likely incorrect.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

This is the most politicized piece of misinfromation I have ever seen. THIS is why our country is so screwed up. Because people actually believe this nonsense. The article is FALSE. And whoever is trying to pass this as reality should be ashamed of themself.

Brandon, let me help you out with something I know your uncomfortable with. The truth:

Right Wing Falsely Claims Iraq Is Safer Than Washington, D.C.

The right wing has recently been engaged in an effort to downplay the deteriorating security situation in Iraq by suggesting that the violent death rates in Washington, D.C. are higher than those in Iraq. From Newsmax:

Quote:

Despite media coverage purporting to show that escalating violence in Iraq has the country spiraling out of control, civilian death statistics complied by Rep. Steve King, R-IA, indicate that Iraq actually has a lower civilian violent death rate than Washington, D.C.

Using Pentagon statistics cross-checked with independent research, King said he came up with an annualized Iraqi civilian death rate of 27.51 per 100,000.

Rep. King's shoddy "report" has slowly gained greater circulation, appearing in the New York Sun and on the Rush Limbaugh show.

Here's why the report is deceptive and false:

1) The King report uses 2002 data for Washington, D.C., finding a violent casualty rate of 45.9 deaths per 100,000 people. That number is badly outdated. Using the most recent 2004 data, the violent casualty rate in D.C. is 35.8 deaths per 100,000. There were 198 homicides total in D.C. for the entire year.

2) According to Pentagon's own data released today, there have been 94 violent casualties per day in Iraq between February and May of 2006. (see p.33). That translates into 34,310 deaths per year in Iraq. For an Iraqi population of about 26.7 million, plus another 150,000 coalition forces, the violent casualty rate in Iraq is 128 deaths per 100,000.

3) Lastly, the King report is trying to conflate the data for one urban area in the U.S. with the entire country of Iraq. As OpinionJournal writes, "The comparison with U.S. cities poses a problem of scale. Just as some municipalities here have high concentrations of crime, Baghdad and some other Iraqi cities have high concentrations of military, guerrilla and terrorist activity. A comparison of Baghdad with Los Angeles or a similarly sprawling U.S. city would be more enlightening than a comparison of Iraq as a whole with cities of well under a million people."

Link to article

0 Replies

The fact that the two rates are even comparable would seem to belie the liberal picture of civilians dying left and right in Iraq.

0 Replies

0 Replies

Brandon proves once again that whatever scientific training he has is sadly lacking.

0 Replies

I'd say he has had good scientific training, and has shown it in these fora repeatedly. However, when the subject is politics and the Shrub, he suspends his faculties of disbelief, and sees only what he wants to see, which is only that which suggests the Shrub and his policies are right.

Brandon9000 wrote:

La la la la . . . i can't hear you ! ! !

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

It's useless, littlek, some have their blinkers srewed on very solidly ...

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

The fact that the two rates are even comparable would seem to belie the liberal picture of civilians dying left and right in Iraq.

The backpedal has gone to "even comparable" now.

Hey the death rate for civilians in Iraq is only 3 times higher than for a US city. And the death rate for US forces is only 3 times higher than the Iraqi civilian death rate..

Ain't comparisons grand? It's perfectly safe to be a US soldier in Iraq. Almost as safe as back home at the bar in Georgia.

Meanwhile Baghdad with a population of 7.4 million and almost 650 violent deaths a month only has a rate of 105 per 100,000.

Now lets compare the violent woundings from IEDs between Baghdad and DC.. I come up with infinity.. anyone else?

0 Replies

Haditha survivors recount Marine shootings
HADITHA, Iraq, June 1 (UPI) -- A 12-year-old Iraqi orphan and only family survivor of a U.S. Marine raid on the town of Haditha last year says she now wishes she had also died.

Safa Younis Salim told The Los Angeles Times she survived only by playing dead while covered in her sister's blood during the Nov. 19 incident.

That morning, a roadside bomb hit a U.S. convoy, killing a Marine. Other witnesses told the newspaper several minutes of quiet elapsed before the Marines began going house-to-house, shooting.

Salim lost her parents, an aunt, three sisters and a brother in the raid, the newspaper said.

"I feel sorry. I was wishing to be alive," she said. "Now I wish I had died with them."

The Pentagon is conducting two investigations -- one on the shooting and the second on whether Marine reports were falsified. Results are expected in days.

The Marines had reported 15 of the 24 civilians killed died in the bomb blast, but all of the dead, including children and an elderly man in a wheelchair died of bullet wounds, coroner's records said.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

The fact that the two rates are even comparable would seem to belie the liberal picture of civilians dying left and right in Iraq.

I think you actually meant to say: "But that doesn't mean that the invasion of Iraq wasn't justified!"

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

Haditha survivors recount Marine shootings
HADITHA, Iraq, June 1 (UPI) -- A 12-year-old Iraqi orphan and only family survivor of a U.S. Marine raid on the town of Haditha last year says she now wishes she had also died.

Safa Younis Salim told The Los Angeles Times she survived only by playing dead while covered in her sister's blood during the Nov. 19 incident.

That morning, a roadside bomb hit a U.S. convoy, killing a Marine. Other witnesses told the newspaper several minutes of quiet elapsed before the Marines began going house-to-house, shooting.

Salim lost her parents, an aunt, three sisters and a brother in the raid, the newspaper said.

"I feel sorry. I was wishing to be alive," she said. "Now I wish I had died with them."

The Pentagon is conducting two investigations -- one on the shooting and the second on whether Marine reports were falsified. Results are expected in days.

The Marines had reported 15 of the 24 civilians killed died in the bomb blast, but all of the dead, including children and an elderly man in a wheelchair died of bullet wounds, coroner's records said.

Four Dead in Overnight Shootings

By Del Quentin Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
[size=7]Friday, December 2, 2005; 1:06 PM[/size]

Four people were slain in a five-hour period last night and early this morning in the District, authorities said. The killings do not appear to be related.

The first slaying occurred about 11:10 p.m. when a 17-year-old was shot at 14th and Chapin streets NW, police said. Investigators had no suspects and did not release the victim's name because they had not yet notified his relatives.

About 30 minutes later, a 55-year-old man was shot to death after an argument in the 4600 block of Blaine Street NE. Police identified him as Gregory Foster. They have made no arrests in that case.

The third killing occurred about 1:30 a.m. in what police described as a botched robbery attempt in the 2000 block of Savannah Terrace SE. A transgender person and a friend were walking in the block when they were approached by at least two men in a dark car. The men demanded money and then one of them opened fire with a handgun, police said.

The transgender person, identified as Elexius Woodland, 24, died after being wounded in the face and stomach. The other victim was wounded in the arm and treated for non-life-threatening injuries at a local hospital, police said.

Police said they had no evidence that the attack against Woodland was a hate crime. There will be a candlelight vigil for Woodland at 6 p.m. today in the 1900 block of Savannah Terrace SE, police said.

Three hours after Woodland was slain, an unidentified man was found shot to death in the 1200 block of Eaton Road SE, police said. Investigators said they have no suspects in the shooting.

Washington Post

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
The fact that the two rates are even comparable would seem to belie the liberal picture of civilians dying left and right in Iraq.

I think you actually meant to say: "But that doesn't mean that the invasion of Iraq wasn't justified!"

No, I meant to say, and said, that the image presented by many liberals of civilian bodies flying through the air every five minutes seems to be false.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

littlek wrote:

It's useless, littlek, some have their blinkers srewed on very solidly ...

Amazing that I do not succumb to the trenchant logic of littlek's airtight disproof of my thesis.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

littlek wrote:

Amazing that I do not succumb to the trenchant logic of littlek's airtight disproof of my thesis.

Not so amazing that you choose to respond to littlek's rollingeye smiley and blueflame's Iraq story, but not to any of the posts that actually doublechecked the numbers you quote and found them false - Cyclo's, JustanObserver's, Parados's.

Cherrypicking, are we? Hey, I have no valid answer whatsoever to the serious posts here, but I'm more reasonable than a rolling-eye smiley so whatever! That about it?

0 Replies

Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know