Posted July 1, 2003

Regarding "Casualties in Iraq: The Human Costs of Occupation" by Mike Ewens:

Great job counting the real cost of war. No newspaper in the country has done what you have. I was in college during Vietnam War and the casualty counts were on the news at least every other night with weekly updates. Eventually people realized too many were dying for what.

The Bush Administration realizes this potential, which is why the casualty data, which is public record under the Freedom of Information Act, is being hidden behind a fog, just the the WMD's that were not there. Unfortunately the American press has failed to do its job to bring these important facts to the public eye. You should send press releases to the major news organizations (AP, Reuters, etc.) on the data, as the casualty count continues to rise. I am sick of the conspiracy of silence that currently exists.

Keep up the important work and try and get British casualties too.

~ Ray Dall'Osto

Mike Ewens replies:

Thanks for the email. I hope that this page will keep our readers informed of the human costs of occupation. A few newspapers are also covering the news:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82432,00.html.

Regarding the British count... I would love to keep track of that too, but time constraints and workloads demand I focus on things a little closer to home.

Have you considered the number of deformed babies being born after Gulf War I due to depleted uranium, the number of children with leukemia, due to depleted uranium, medicine was refused to them due to the sanctions? This is an absolute holocaust and a genocide. We as mankind have arrived at the end of the road, if we allow that, and do not have any more feelings to sit down and be able to cry about it.

~ Ute-Marie Bauer, Germany

Mike Ewens replies:

Of course I have considered the children in Iraq. Those numbers are higher and more devastating than the ones I present, but less reliable and more difficult to confirm. The page as I have set up is a factual resource. Until I can find the same resources and datasets for Iraqi children, I can't make such a page. Please don't think that I am not ignoring the problem.

Reading the news daily, it is apparent from official news sources that casualties amongst both US and UK military personnel are mounting. Reading the Arabic website aljazeera.net, there are further eye witness accounts of attacks on military personnel that are not mentioned elsewhere. Whether or not these accounts are true, it is true to say that the war in Iraq is far from over.

How about a counter on your website that keeps a tally of Iraqi, US and UK casualties on a daily basis? If people see these numbers in black and white, it might force them to ask what all these people are dying for.

~ Neil Lowrie, UK

Mike Ewens replies:

I am working on such a thing... I just need to learn how to make the javascript work with our dataset. Thanks for reading!

You speak about American (~200) and Iraqi Civilian Casualties (~5,000 – 10,000). Don't you forget Iraq soldiers? Some estimations expect 40,000 to 80,000 casualties.

You show up this unjustified war but not all its consequences. Iraq soldiers aren't as innocent victims as American soldiers are ?

~ Clara G., France

Mike Ewens replies:

I didn't forget the Iraqi soldiers. Unfortunately, the numbers are nearly impossible to find (and the US military doesn't want to investigate the numbers).

Antiwar.com is the best!

Thanks for this column, and for setting up a central database on the human costs of our aggression using the IBC and other sources. I hope the pressure of the cost continues to build until the American people begin to take notice and fight back against the militarists in our government. Our military adventure will be painfully expensive – not only for the loss of life (expendable lives in the eyes of the neocons) on all sides, but for the loss of democratic values in our own country. I opposed this war from the beginning; I oppose it still.

~ Suzanne DeBolt

Mike Ewens replies:

Thank you! If you have any suggestions for resources, links, etc. for the casualty page, please email me. I welcome readers' ideas as I maintain the project into the future.

How certain are we that all US deaths are reported? Is there any evidence that would suggest that the US military is not disclosing deadly incidents to protect "national security"?

~ Pete Petropoulos

Mike Ewens replies:

Honestly, I have no idea. The only source of numbers – the US military/ government – has various interests in not disclosing numbers. I understand that during Vietnam, the military would release daily numbers that were averages of previous days, so as to not upset the American public with huge spikes in American deaths. Perhaps the same is going on Iraq.

I appreciate the work that you and Antiwar.com are doing, esp. as a veteran who has former colleagues that are almost certainly in Iraq now.

One suggestion. A chart of the cumulative casualties would be a great addition to your visual account of day by day casualties.

~ Mitchell Young

Mike Ewens replies:

Currently, I have these charts setup, which I realize are not cumulative: http://www.antiwar.com/ewens/chart.html.

I will make a cumulative one today. Thanks for the suggestion!

Would it be possible to post the names and maybe the pictures of the soldiers killed in Iraq as mainstream media rarely report the names of the dead – a convenient way of making the victims of Bush's policy anonymous and faceless.

There is an ethical dilemma: it may invade the privacy of the family but if it is within the bounds of journalistic ethics, it may be a good idea.

~ Jessica Ramer

Mike Ewens replies:

Please see The Washington Post page that does just this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/Iraq/casualties/facesofthefallen.htm.

And my column of June 27 and casualty page.

Regarding Balkan Express:

Your website is pretty good and I like the choice of articles from the various sources. I would be very happy to donate money for your site but there is one very important issue I have with one of your regular columnists.

Your contributor Nebojsa Malic's articles are based on the outright Serbian nationalism harbored in the post Word War II Serbian immigrants' circles in the US (former Serbian Nazi collaborators) and the fascist ideology of the regime of the ex-president and war criminal Milosevic. His views reflect bias against everything that is not in line with the genocidal project of the Greater Serbia. Are you people blind to this or you do not care?

~ Semir Mehmedovic

Assistant Editor Jeremy Sapienza replies:

We can't be blind to something that doesn't exist.

As for Nebojsa's "fascism": have you even ever truly READ his articles? Nebojsa is a market anarchist who has time and again written AGAINST the State, its socialism, and its fascism. He has never defended Milosevic (a Communist, by the way), or any crimes against humanity. In fact, I challenge you to find an example of this.

Genocide? Greater Serbia? Get a hold of yourself! You're imagining things.

Nebojsa is against the Empire, in all its forms, plain and simple. If that means sticking a wrench in the gears of the Yugoslav Muslim "leadership"'s drive to domination, then SO BE IT. No cronies of the Empire escape his brutal pen, so come off the victim's throne – time to make room for all the other enemies of human liberty.

By the way, Nebojsa is not descended from Post-WWII Serbian immigrants: he is a born-and-raised Bosnian Serb, who lived under the boot of your boy Izetbegovic.

Thanks to Nebojsa Malic and thanks to Antiwar.com for providing the truth about the Wars of the Yugoslav Succession (1991-2001) because we certainly wouldn't have known it if the official record was kept by western governments and their media lackeys in Europe and the United States.

Malic's recent column on the "Serbian Lincoln" shed light on the motives for each of the parties during the early days of the war and confirmed what I knew was true, that Slobodan Milosevic had no interest in preserving the old Yugoslavia but had every interest in bringing Serbs outside the official "borders" of his republic within his fold or at least preserve them in ethnic enclaves. That he felt this way was in large due to the historical fears Serbs had about

1) the revival of the Croatian Ustasha which killed millions of Serbs during World War II and

2) the establishment of an Islamic state in Bosnia.

Unfortunately such fears were overshadowed by the JNA and Serbs misguided tactics when it came to Dubrovnik, Vukovar and Sarejevo. They were painted as the bad guys and none of their legitimate concerns were taken into account.

I for one, during the early days of the war certainly took this view, rooting for my fellow Catholic Croatians and Slovenes in their drive for independence without realizing what was really going on. It wasn't until U.S. bombing of Serbia did I realize what had happened and that all the romantic ideas about independence and self-determination in the aftermath of the Cold War and the fall of the Communist Empire had become bitter illusions and mirages.

For in reality, the "independence" of the successor states of the old Yugoslavia is as phony as the Rambouillet ultimatum. Was it worth blowing the old Yugoslavia all to hell just so Croatia could sign an IMF loan or Slovenia be a part of the socialist EU? Look at what the war has done, it pitted Christian against Christian, it allowed Islamic extremism to gain a foothold in the Balkans, it stirred up Albanian irredentism and led to flourishment of organized crime with all its drug smuggling and white slavery. Broken churches, broken homes, broken lives. No it wasn't worth it in the end.

As Malic stated in his article, there were legal ways for the Yugoslav republics to secede from the union and perhaps wiser persons and cooler heads could have come together to work out a looser federation and or a readjustment of the republic's politically drawn and gerrymandered "borders" to prevent bloodshed and to keep the "empire" out of the Balkans. I still do believe in the right for Croatia and Slovenia for self-determination. But as Malice pointed out, the dreams of Tudjman and Bosnian Muslim extremists inevitably led to war as did Milosevic's dreams. No one was innocent of anything in this case and to make Milosevic the scapegoat for entire war is mindboggling and deceitful. But that's typical of the empire, trying to reduce the complex down to a simple equation to justify their own sins in this situation.

But thanks to Malic and Antiwar.com we can see right through their game at the Hague to the truth of what happened in Yugoslavia. No longer do we need to be a prisoner of war in Christiane Amanpour's Stalag 13.

~ Sean Scallon, Arkansaw, Wisconsin

Regarding Pledge Week:

I have been an active participant in your Backtalk program. Thank you for publishing most of my letters and giving me the opportunity to express my opinion publicly. Your website is true democracy in action.

I am sending you a donation in appreciation. Keep up the good work.

~ Kenneth D. Curry, Alberta, Canada

Associate Editor Mike Ewens replies:

Thank you for you donation and active support in Backtalk – both are important to keep Antiwar.com going!

Like NPR and Public TV pledge drives, you need some gifts for various pledge levels. Here are a few suggestions that your readers could proudly display:

A coffee mug with the words "I support our troops but not the liars and fools who got them stuck in Iraq"

The WMD Intelligence Cook Book

The bright red anti Iraqi WMD protective umbrella that can be easily found by any one

A CD of combat challenged Neocon Tenors singing martial songs

Playing cards with all the usual neocon suspects

~ PTG

Mike Ewens replies:

Great suggestions, but we hope that the services we provide – news and viewpoints updated daily and antiwar resources – are enough!

You should try to sell these ideas on www.cafepress.com.

I wish to congratulate your efforts to provide the public with such important and current information on the imperial war effort as well as efforts to check it. In this, pledge week, I have posted my (modest, student) contribution to your site; however, it would be nice if you provided a page with a full accounting of expenses and revenues.

~ Stephen Lamb

Mike Ewens replies:

Thank you for your donation to Antiwar.com! ...

On the disclosure issue: this is not an accepted policy for non-profits such as Antiwar.com. Running a web site with three full-time staff and 12 columnists, coupled with traffic of tens of thousands of visitors results in huge expenses. I personally assure you that all funds are spent responsibly and prudently. Unfortunately, if we disclose all of our costs/ revenues, we will have people hounding us over each and every dollar spent and thus impeding our work. So instead, we hope that our readers can trust us with their donations.

Regarding M. Johnson's letter posted June 20:

"Looking into the face of Sharon (or any of his smug underlings) is like contemplating pure evil... When are our people going to wake up and realize we are aiding and abetting some of the vilest criminals this planet has ever produced?"

This is a fair representation of the pure, palpable and visceral hatred that 99 percent of Arabs have felt toward Israel since day one. Today, many false humanists (see quotes above) feel this same hatred. In fact, this very hatred justifies Israel's intransigence – and their fear. And in fact, everything that Israel's enemies have done since 1948 has justified it. Israel will never let its guard down, and your hatred is the surest guarantee of that.

~ David Batlle

The Other Side

Although I don't agree with your positions, I appreciate your intentions, and I read your website to hear the other side of. I also feel that your reports and the links you display have balanced themselves as the war as gone on. God Bless America, and God Bless your quest for a true civil world.

~ MU

Mike Ewens replies:

Thank you for keeping an open mind.

Regarding "The Culture of Imperialism" by Justin Raimondo:

Thanks for the continued effort to counter the lies we are being told. "Empire" abroad is spelled "Totalitarian" at home and we are in a frightening period when the danger to America is perhaps at its greatest since Richard Nixon. Our hope is that the true American system will right itself as it has in the past and rise up and kick Bush and his buddies out of office at the next election.

Right now I fear that the strategy of the neocons is to lay low until Bush gets reelected. Then, with 4 years to operate with virtually no constraints, I am afraid we ain't seen nothin' yet. All we can do now is "throw a small balance weight on the other side" and you are doing that. Keep it up.

~ David Heck, Florida

You may want to reexamine this just a bit. It isn't the hedonists or pagans who put forth nor blindly took in the lies about WMD's or quietly accept that the administration can pin a label on a citizen and take away his rights.

It is the conservatives, most of which are 'good, god-fearing' people. They have 'faith' our leader, who regularly consults his god, is right and has our best interests at heart.

Those of us who require more than just the unsubstantiated writings in an old book or the mere word of our leader are somewhat more dubious.

~ Michael S. Bayne, Florida

Regarding "The Road to Coverup Is the Road to Ruin" by Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D – WV):

It is a pathetic and shameful chapter in this country’s history that of a hundred senators, only one, the 85 year old Senator Byrd, has the courage to speak up and speak the truth, which most of us above the Fox Channel moron grade know already. Half the Senators (Republican) are squirming but bravely supporting the Administration’s lies, by “salami tactics”: each day they take a little bit off the edge of the lies and misstatements, to eventually arrive at the conclusion that there were just some slight misunderstandings of the intelligence reports, understandable and excusable under the stressful circumstances. I predict that this will be the result of the phony committee “inquiries” they will conduct.

The other half of the Senate, the Democrats, are cringing and gutless – they worry that one day maybe something credible will be found after all, maybe another rusty trailer that Bush will claim as a mortal threat to the US – (didn’t Rumsfeld and Co. claim they knew exactly what the weapons were and where they were hidden?) and then they stand exposed as unpatriotic, attacking the beloved “warrior” (in my books, draft-dodger) President, and lose their seats.

The country is surely in a desperate state when its Senate turns out to consist of 51 liars and 48 prevaricators – and one truthful old guy!

~ Peter Brody, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Senator Byrd is absolutely right with his observations about how the people were duped about Iraq. It is sad to think that the majority of the people of this country actually believed that Iraq was a threat to our security. I am a Vietnam Veteran and was and still am opposed to our strikes in Iraq. It is time as the Senator said for a complete investigation or inquiry into this matter. It is nice to know those in Great Britain are putting the heat on PM Blair and standing up and demanding answers. The problem in this country is the lack of courage by the people, the media, and congress to stand up and say enough.

~ Gary Brown

Regarding "Cover Your Hair" by Nicholas Kristoff (New York Times):

Nicholas Kristoff makes a good point in that Bush's blundering may have actually set back the Iraqi people and not "liberated" them. The main point to consider here is that it never was the Bush gang's intent to liberate, find weapons, change regimes, fight terror, etc. These were just a myriad of obfuscations used to rally myopic Americans in support of their "war". The bottom line is that they want to control the Middle East, it's oil and it's politics. The well being of the Iraqi and other Arab peoples is far down the page on their hot list. The Bush people were deluded from the start. Their experiences with a complacent and cooperative American news media and it's easily gulled peoples led them to believe that they could just waltz into Iraq and everyone would roll over once the dust settled. They have totally underestimated the mindset of the Iraqis and Muslims in general. If they expect to impose their wills on these peoples and nations they will have to conquer the whole area and turn it into an American fortress. The British should know better, they've been there and done that before. It didn't work for them and will not work for US.

~ KW

Nice article. You should have included these additional quotes from other “liars” about the WMD.

"It (the inspections program) is ineffectual; it is not able to do its job by its own judgment…It doesn't provide much deterrence against WMD activity."
– Sandy Berger, National Security Advisor

“For the United States and Britain, an Iraq equipped with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons under the leadership of Saddam Hussein is a threat that almost goes without description… France, on the other hand, has long established economic and political relationships within the Arab world, and has had a different approach."
– John Kerry, U.S. Senator

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow… This is not a time free from peril, especially as a result of the reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals. We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century."
– President Bill Clinton

I shouldn’t have to remind YOU that the major disagreement prior to the war centered on which method was best for disarming Saddam Hussein – continued inspections or force. The possibility that Saddam didn’t have any WMD was never mentioned by any UN member, not even once. Of course, now it is politically expedient to for Bush’s opponents to shriek “liar!” and it has been demonstrated time and time again that the left will never let pesky little things like facts or hypocrisy get in the way of their agenda. ...

~ George Baxter