Skip to main content

Those Killed by US-Led ‘War on Terror’ 10x Higher Than Reported by the Media

Written by Darius Shahtahmasebi; Originally appeared at theantimedia.org
At the end of May, the Washington D.C.-based Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) released a study concluding that the death toll from the American-led “War on Terror” could be as high as two million just since the years following the 9/11 attacks.
The study, entitled “Body Count,” is 97 pages long and involved tallying up the total number of civilian casualties from U.S.-led adventures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Not surprisingly, the mainstream media has paid close to zero attention to this report despite the high-profile nature of the group that produced it (they shared in the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize with the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW).
Those Killed by US-Led ‘War on Terror’ 10x Higher Than Reported by the Media
The study found that in many instances, previous estimates had “grossly” underestimated the body count. According to the researchers:
The figure is approximately 10 times greater than that of which the public, experts and decision makers are aware of and propagated by the media and major NGOs. And this is only a conservative estimate.”
The report also found previous estimates had whitewashed the culpability and responsibility of those who had done the killing. In regards to the Iraq War, PSR found that despite “all the inaccuracies…the answers still allowed for the conclusion that approximately one third of all victims of violence had been directly killed by the occupation forces.” [emphasis added]
The U.S. and its allies (particularly the United Kingdom) also bear the ultimate blame for civilian deaths, specifically, following the 2003 invasion. It was their presence that unleashed the chaos to begin with, as noted by independent journalist Ben Swann:
“Before the 2003 U.S. invasion, do you know how many suicide attacks there were in Iraq? None. In the country’s history there had never been one. But since the 2003 invasion, there have been 1,892.”
The PSR study also found some momentous flaws with a number of other death toll studies. For example, a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine ignored the areas of Iraq that were subject to the heaviest violence, including Baghdad, the capital city of Iraq.
Overall, the PSR speculated that the most accurate number for the death toll in Iraq since 2003 is about one million. Together with a conservative Afghanistan death toll of 220,000 and a Pakistani death toll of 80,000, the PSR found that the number of deaths from the “War on Terror” was at least 1.3 million. However, PSR concluded that the real figure could easily be “in excess of two million.”
Nafeez Ahmed, a journalist who was axed from the Guardian for exposing Israel’s motives for bombing the Gaza strip in 2014, has compiled a death toll of his own, noting that the war in Iraq did not begin in 2003.
“The war on Iraq did not begin in 2003, but in 1991 with the first Gulf War, which was followed by the UN sanctions regime. Ahmed writes.
Noting that the U.N. has found these draconian sanctions were responsible for the deaths of approximately 1.7 million civilians (between 500,000 and 600,000 of whom were children), Ahmed found that from 1990 to the present day, the U.S. has realistically killed close to three million Iraqi civilians.
All in all, Ahmed finds that the death toll from the U.S.-led “War on Terror” since 1990 is close to four million – the majority of whom would undoubtedly be Muslims given Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are majority Muslim nations.
Any criticism of Islam and its 1.6 billion adherents that ignores this devastating recent history is a dangerous and illusory waste of time.
Last year, leaked ISIS documents revealed that its members had an extremely poor understanding of Islam. This was further confirmed by Lydia Wilson of The Nation, who interviewed captured ISIS fighters herself:
“Why did he [an ISIS fighter] do all these things? Many assume that these fighters are motivated by a belief in the Islamic State, a caliphate ruled by a caliph with the traditional title Emir al-Muminiin, ‘Commander of the faithful,’ a role currently held by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi; that fighters all over the world are flocking to the area for a chance to fight for this dream. But this just doesn’t hold for the prisoners we are interviewing. They are woefully ignorant about Islam and have difficulty answering questions about Sharia law, militant jihad, and the caliphate.” [emphasis added]
According to Wilson’s interviews with ISIS fighters, one main reason for their radicalization was not their religion, but George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq.
“‘The Americans came,’ [one fighter] said. ‘They took away Saddam, but they also took away our security. I didn’t like Saddam, we were starving then, but at least we didn’t have war. When you came here, the civil war started.’”
If a few ragtag Muslims committing heinous acts of terrorism on Western soil are enough to radicalize Westerners to form resistant groups, surely one can understand the sheer horror and plight of a group of people who have been killed by the millions in the past two or three decades over nothing more than a geopolitical chess game of oil, money, and natural gas.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary
Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations.

However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states.

Analysis


Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria. Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was recently …

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge


In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east.

Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies.

This has forced…

In Yemen, a Rebel Advance Could Topple the Regime

Shia loyal to the al-Houthi movement ride past Yemeni soldiers near Yaz, Yemen, in May. (MOHAMMED HUWAIS/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary


The success of a rebel campaign in northern Yemen is threatening to destabilize the already weak and overwhelmed government in Sanaa. After capturing the city of Amran, a mere 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the capital, in early July, the rebels from the al-Houthi tribe are in their strongest position yet. The Yemeni government is developing plans to divide the country into six federal regions, and the rebels believe this is their chance to claim territory for the future bargaining.

The central government is nearly powerless to fend off the rebels; its forces are already stretched thin. Neighboring Saudi Arabia has intervened in Yemen before and still supports Sunni tribes in the north, but the risk of inciting a Shiite backlash or creating space for jihadists to move in could deter another intervention.

Analysis


Followers of Zaidi Islam, a branch of Shiism, rul…