Thousands of Iraqis Killed During War Contributes Toward Resistance Against U.S. Occupation

Interview with Carl Conetta, co-director at the Project on Defense Alternatives, conducted by Scott Harris

The Nov. 2nd shooting down of an American transport helicopter in Iraq, which killed 16 and wounded 20 soldiers, was the most deadly attack on U.S. forces since President Bush's military invasion of Iraq last March. The assault on the helicopter, carried out with a shoulder-fired surface-to-air missile, is just the latest evidence of an escalating guerrilla war being waged against America's occupation army.

But despite a campaign carried out by the White House to emphasize all that's positive in occupied Iraq and the Pentagon's dismissal of guerrilla attacks as, "strategically and operationally insignificant," there is growing concern among the American people and the diminished prospects of foreign military assistance.

While the increasing number of U.S. soldiers killed and injured in Iraq are duly covered by the nation's media outlets, the press has paid little or no attention to the cost of the U.S. war on Iraqi soldiers and civilians. A new independent report released by the Project on Defense Alternatives in late October estimates that 13,000 Iraqis were killed during the initial combat phase of the ongoing war in Iraq. The study found that between 3,200 and 4,300 of the dead were unarmed civilians. Between The Lines' Scott Harris spoke with Carl Conetta, co-director at the Project on Defense Alternatives, who summarizes his group's report and explains why he believes it is important for U.S. policymakers to consider how the war's death toll among Iraqis contributes to the armed resistance confronting the American occupation.

Contact the Project on Defense Alternatives by calling (617) 547-4474 or visit their website at www.comw.org/pda

Related links:

"The Wages of War: Iraqi Combatant and Noncombatant Fatalities in the 2003 Conflict," by Carl Conetta, PDA Research Monograph #8, Oct. 20, 2003 www.iraqbodycount.net

*"Will U.S. Bring Back the Draft? Defense Web Site Seeks Volunteers; Conscription Abolished in '73 by Tim Harpe, the Toronto Star, Nov. 5, 2003

*"How Many Body Bags?" by Robert Scheer, the Los Angeles Times, Nov. 4, 2003

*"Deadly Tunnel Vision in Iraq," by Holly Sklar, Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, Oct. 31, 2003

*"Helicopter Down: The Weekend Deaths in Iraq-and the Pentagon's Response-Remind One Former CIA Analyst of Vietnam," by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com, Nov. 3, 2003

*"Progress in Iraq? Shot Down, Killed, Wounded, Depressed," by Frida Berrigan, Nov. 4, 2003 by CommonDreams.org

*"Escalation of Guerrilla Attacks on U.S. Occupation Force in Iraq Shakes White House Confidence," Between The Lines interview with Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies, Week Ending 11/7/03

LISTEN to this week's half-hour program of Between The Lines by clicking on one of the links below:

http://www.btlonline.org

*

"Between The Lines" is a half-hour syndicated radio news magazine that each week features a summary of under-reported news stories and interviews with activists and journalists who offer progressive perspectives on international, national and regional political, economic and social issues. Because "Between The Lines" is independent of all publications, media networks or political parties, we are able to bring a diversity of voices to the airwaves generally ignored or marginalized by the major media. For more information on this week's topics and to check out our text archive listing topics and guests presented in previous programs visit: http://www.btlonline.org

*

"Between the Lines," WPKN 89.5 FM's weekly radio news magazine can be heard Tuesdays at 5:30 p.m. ET; Wednesdays at 8 a.m. ET and Saturdays at 2 p.m. ET (Wednesday's show airs at 7:30 a.m. ET during fundraising months of April and October).

*

For an email subscription of "Between The Lines Weekly Summary" which features a RealAudio link to the week's program for Between The Lines, send an email to btlsummary-subscribe@lists.riseup.net

*

For an email subscription of "Between The Lines Q&A" which features a RealAudio link and weekly transcript to one of the interviews featured on Between The Lines, send an email to btlqa-subscribe@lists.riseup.net

*

betweenthelines@snet.net

*

Distributed by Squeaky Wheel Productions

*

©2003 Between The Lines. All Rights Reserved.

**

"The study found that between 3,200 and 4,300 of the dead were unarmed civilians."

As the folks at Indymedia continually pointed out, UNICEF stated that 5,000 Iraqi children were dying each month because of the sanctions. For those of you who believe Saddam was actually a bad guy (there must be a few of you), add some more people to the monthly total -- you know, those tortured and murdered by the regime for political reasons.

Now do the math. Tens of thousands of lives saved since the war began.

The United States was almost single-handedly responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children by sanctions.

The mass killings occurred about 12 years ago, when Bush I encouraged uprisings in Iraq after the Kuwait war and then betrayed the insurgents (Shia, Kurds, others) by not backing them up. Instead, he set them up.

The Iraqis know all of this even if most Americans do not.

Get our troops out of Iraq alive, now. Let the UN take over. Get a low-gas-mileage vehicle and forget about stealing the oil.

>Let the UN take over.

A sure recipe for failure.

>Get a low-gas-mileage vehicle and forget about stealing the oil.

Don't even consider tying to tell me what to do. You won't like the results.

We're staying the course. You don't like it, tough.

First you impose sanctions that take the lives of thousands of people, the majority of them children. Then you launch a bloody military attack on the country and justify it on the grounds that it will end the sanctions - that you imposed in the first place. Truly something worthy of Hitler's propaganda department.

Saddam knew what he had to do to end the sanctions.

He had to abide by the terms of the '91 cease-fire that HE AGREED TO.

And abide by the UN resolutions.

It's not like he didn't have a way out.

Understand now? It's Saddam's fault his country turned into a charnel house.

There were not weapons of mass destruction. That was a war of bloody aggression, no more justifiable than the Nazi invasion of Poland.

Hey, Meyer London!

Who planned the attack on the World Trade Centre on 9/11?

> The United States was almost single-handedly responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children by sanctions.

The sanctions were United Nations sanctions.



> The mass killings occurred about 12 years ago, when Bush I encouraged uprisings in Iraq after the Kuwait war and then betrayed the insurgents (Shia, Kurds, others) by not backing them up. Instead, he set them up.

An unfortunate betrayal, indeed. But the killing was conducted by Saddam's thugs. Estimates suggest 50,000 civilians murdered.



> The Iraqis know all of this even if most Americans do not.

Many Iraqis also know that night-vision goggles can see through women's clothes.



> Get our troops out of Iraq alive, now. Let the UN take over. Get a low-gas-mileage vehicle and forget about stealing the oil.

But wait. Didn't you just say you were against the United Nations (sanctions)? You just blamed the reported 5,000 per month Iraqi children deaths on the UN.

Stealing oil? How do you figure? Didn't you read that the oil industry will state-owned?



Are you really this ill-informed? Or are you just trying to be cute?

Saddam had no WMD?

Then why didn't he prove it?

He certainly went to a lot of time and trouble to give the entire world the impression that he did have no-no stuff.

Couldn't he have just submitted an accurate report and give the inspectors the free reign (like he was supposed to), and so prove to everyone's satisfaction he didn't have WMD, and thus save himself the trouble of getting restaurants blown up around himself?

Yeah, you'd THINK so...

Care to explain that, Meyer?

Hey Meyer - You obviously hate America and are miserable here.

And with the Republicans taking over California, winning other governorships, Senate and House seats, looks like it's going to be a long winter for you.

Why don't you move to Cuba. If you would do that you'd be amongst your own kind and America would be a better place too. It's a win win suggestion.

Can I come over and help you pack?

Just like the rest of these leftist losers, he's a bloodsucking leech, a parasite that you couldn't burn off of the flesh of America with a blowtorch.

In short, he is a fifth columnist intent upon destroying the common culture and the American way of life.

And he'll have to do it over my dead body.

You mean the worship of commidities, racial conflict, hierarchical workplaces, massive disparities in income, imperialism, war, jock worship, the seeking of consolation from financial worries and hating one's job in alcohol or reading about "celebrities," the lowering of the national IQ by Fox News and other idiot television fare? I certainly hope so.

You could only qualify for that title if the mental and emotional age of adulthood was lowered to nine. By the way, the Republicans have hadly "taken over" California; they don't control either house of the legislature, the majority of the voters voted against Arnold Schwartzenazi, and the new Feurher may well find himself on trial after the legal review of those sexual harassment claims. Maybe you could help him pack when he leaves Sacramento for prison.

As has been explained here on several occasions (not enough, I guess, to penetrate certain thick skulls) you cannot prove a negative. For example, there is no way to prove that Santa Claus does not exist. And there are no wmds - certainly even you must realize that by now. Or are you still in the Bekka Valley digging?

No. I said you were intent up it. But much the say as a mosquito is typically only a minor annoyance to it's host, much the same can be said for you and your ilk. Although, mosquitos can carry diseases such as SARS and malaria, without anything good coming from their parasitic existences. Therefore I believe all mosquitos should be exterminated.

The mosquito reference seems like a clear, unambiguous death threat to me. Should not this person be removed from the board? If he made such a threat on a non-anarchist message board his IP would probably be turned over to the police. So maybe he should not be so quick to diss anarchism as an ideology.

>For example, there is no way to prove that Santa Claus does not exist.

That's your comparision as to why Saddam didn't come clean on wmd's? Because you can't prove Santa Claus doesn't exist?

You can disprove a negative. He could have come clean and let the inspectors go anywhere they wanted to go. He didn't. Major miscalculation on his part.

There was never any credible evidence that Sadam had wmds. The alleged threat was used as an excuse to attack Iraq and gain control of its economy, especially its oil. Anyone claiming the existence of wmds (or the existence of Santa Clause) is under obligation to produce proof, or at least strong evidence. Where is it? The UN inspection team itself said that there was no justification for an invasion. And there was not any.

El wrongo. There was never any doubts of wmd's. None of the nations in the UN security council (including France, Germany and Russia) ever claimed that wmd's didn't exist. Not a single one. You can't find documentation otherwise because it doesn't exist. They only claimed that Iraq wasn't a threat. Saddam had a history of using wmd's on other countries and on the Iraqi people. So to say there was no credible evidence is a farce. The question with France, Germany and Russia wasn't whether or not he had them, but whether or not he would use them.

Your lies catch up with you again and again.

It was.

I was threatening to kill all mosquitos.

Do you not agree that mosquitos are a nuisance? I think the police would agree. I hate the little bastards.

I find it amusing that ML, an avowed socialist who's very id seethes with rage for the American way of life, threatens to call the cops at even the most minor insinuations of violence.

What a pussy.

Dealt with any cockroaches lately Meyer?

"Why didn't Sadam prove he had no wmds?"

Unlike Meyer's lame response ("you can't prove a negative"), the United Nations resolutions provided a clear protocol for the Iraqis to disarm of their WMD.

The reason Saddam didn't attempt to end the sanctions (assuming he did get rid of the WMD) is simply for political reasons. The oil sales allowed under the sanctions (plus the revenues gained from the smuggling) provided enough revenue for his regime. The people suffered. But he could blame that on the sanctions. Hell, even a lot of you people continue to blame others for Iraq's pre-war problems.