mysteryman wrote:And here is an interesting article.
http://newsbusters.org/node/9932
According to the article I just linked to,9 CITIES in the US have a higher "murder rate" then Iraqs "violent death" rate in 2006.
Yeah. But it's not an "article", it's a blog entry. And it seems to significantly underreport the civilian death rate in Iraq. To be fair, the blog entry seems to get its numbers from "Iraqi government officials".
However, the ninth bimonthly report of the UN Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI) from January 16th, 2007, states that
34,452 Iraqi civilians were killed in 2006
36,685 Iraqi civilians were injured in 2006
In November and December 2006, 6,376 civilians were killed violently - 4,731 of them in Baghdad.
That puts the prevalence of homicide at roughly 132 persons per 100,000 annually for Iraq, and at about
477 per 100,000 for Baghdad.
Now, the author seems to claim that there have been American cities that have had a higher murder rate at one point or the other - the most violent one being Washington, DC in 1991 with 83.1 per 100,000.
This is a regrettably high number for the capital of that shining beacon of democracy that the United States are. A pity you don't seem to be able to clean up your act.
However, in my book, 83.1 is still significantly lower than 132 for the whole country of Iraq or 477 for Baghdad.