BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily

Subject: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: dianavan
Date: 06 May 07 - 06:07 PM

Are the U.S. and its allies engaged in 'passive' genocide?

"According to the latest United Nations Childrens' Fund (UNICEF) report (2005) [3], in 2003 the under-5 infant mortality was 110,000 in Iraq and 292,000 in Afghanistan as compared to 1,000 in the invading and occupying US Coalition country, Australia (noting that in 2003 these countries had populations of about 25, 24 and 20 million, respectively). Non-provision by the US Coalition of life-sustaining requisites in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories is killing about 400,000 infants annually, corresponding to over 1,000 avoidable infant deaths DAILY. This mass infanticide surely constitutes a "War on Muslim Women and Children" [4]."

http://mwcnews.net/content/view/533/26

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Peace
Date: 06 May 07 - 06:12 PM

Life means little on this planet.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 May 07 - 07:30 PM

I read the article, but I'm not sure where their numbers come from. UNICEF doesn't use the term "avoidable mortality" (as is used in the article), it uses deaths per 1,000 live births. According to the current (April, 2007) UNICEF data, this rate for Afghanistan was 257/1000 in 1995, 2000 and 2005. Angola's is the worst in the world, at 260/1000, while Niger is a close third, with 256/1000. Iraq, at 125/1000 in 2000 and 2005, up from 122/1000 in 1995, doesn't even make the top ten. Perhaps there is some other reason?

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Mrrzy
Date: 06 May 07 - 07:35 PM

Well, since the US has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrial world, I doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 May 07 - 08:30 PM

Yep - the US falls right in there with Poland and Cuba.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Peace
Date: 06 May 07 - 08:33 PM

Not to open a can of worms here, but abortion causes about 100,000 per day. That doesn't excuse deaths in war, but it does explain that life on this planet isn't as sacrosanct as we'd like to think it should be.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Sorcha
Date: 06 May 07 - 10:45 PM

I have my opinions but I'm staying way way out of this one.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: dianavan
Date: 06 May 07 - 10:47 PM

I'm not sure where they get their figures. I think they are using this formula:

"Avoidable mortality (excess mortality) is the difference between the ACTUAL mortality in a country and the mortality EXPECTED for a decently-run country with the same demographics [2]."

I'm not sure what they mean by decently-run unless they mean civilized and peaceful.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Donuel
Date: 07 May 07 - 12:28 AM

A cruel reality in economics is the cost benefit equation.


The women and children mortality rates from bad water, poor medicine and depleted uranium are the justifications that Al Qaeda presented to a grand mullah, who then granted permission to bin Laden to kill as many as 10 million American men women and children.

There were 2 Islamic stipulations ordered by the grand mulah
that Ossama has since fullfilled
1 offer the infidel leader a chance to convert to Islam
2 Warn the country of the impending attack 9 times.

this happened about 3 years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 May 07 - 10:08 AM

in 2003 the under-5 infant mortality was 110,000 in Iraq and 292,000 in Afghanistan as compared to 1,000 in the invading and occupying US Coalition country, Australia

So, they add 110,000 and 292,000 to come to a figure of 402,000, subtract 2,000 (twice the figure for Australia, because Iraq and Afghanistan together have roughly twice the population of Australia) and arrive at 400,000.

This number from 2003 (the year of the Iraq war) they call the avoidable number of excess deaths, blame the West alone for the whole number and claim that it shows a war on Muslim women and children. A much better comparison would have been of course the number of infant deaths before and after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

But a sensible discussion is not what they want. They spout propaganda.

Thanks, Dianavan, to bring this piece of sloppiest thinking and arguing to our attention.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 May 07 - 10:43 AM

Very true, Wolfgang - and the fact that the percentage of under-5 deaths remains unchanged before and after (during?) the war is unchanged seems to lack relevance.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 May 07 - 11:02 AM

Sorry - grammar stutter. I meant to say that the fact that the percentage of under-5 deaths remains unchanged before and after (during?) the war seems to lack relevance to the authors.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: GUEST,SINS
Date: 07 May 07 - 11:19 AM

OK I will be the one to jump in nd point out that 100,000 abortions does not legally mean 100,000 infant deaths. It depends of course on your belief as to whether viable human life begins at conception or at birth or at any point in between.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: Peace
Date: 07 May 07 - 12:10 PM

I do not care to dispute rights/wrongs to do with abortion (as I mentioned in the post). The point was we do not respect life at any of its stages as is demonstrated by both the death in war and abortion figures.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: dianavan
Date: 07 May 07 - 04:01 PM

Maybe this is a better indicator.

Infant mortality rate (under 1), 1990
40

Infant mortality rate (under 1), 2005
102

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/iraq_statistics.html

or this:

http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator_detail.cfm?IndicatorID=25&Country=IQ

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 May 07 - 04:20 PM

Very true, dianavan - but the numbers for 2000, before the invasion and 2005, after the invasion, are identical. During his regime, and during the period of the UN sanctions, Mr. Hussein had the right to sell an unlimited amount of oil for the purchase of food and medical supplies, and choose to buy other things. I don't think the change from 40/1000 in 1990 to 100/1000 in 1995 can be blamed entirely on the "Non-provision by the US Coalition of life-sustaining requisites in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories" (sic).

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: dianavan
Date: 08 May 07 - 03:24 AM

The chance that an Iraqi child will live beyond age five has plummetted faster than anywhere else in the world since 1990, said a report released Tuesday, which placed the country last in its child survival rankings.

One in eight Iraqi children died of disease or violence before reaching their fifth birthday in 2005, said the report by Save the Children, which said Iraq ranked last because it had made the least progress toward improving child survival rates."

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=cd36f98a-6c59-4830-93fb-836c6dbaacfd&k=76629

I hope this makes the issue a little easier for some of you to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 May 07 - 09:42 AM

Yep, saw that article. It doesn't elicit an affirmative answer to your original question, "are the U.S. and its allies engaged in 'passive' genocide?" The article also said that "even before the latest war, Iraq was plagued by electricity shortages, a lack of clean water and too few hospitals." Many factors have contributed to the present sad situation. Saddam mistreated his own people for his own personal aggrandizement. The invasion destroyed some portion of the existing, already insufficient, infrastructure (the amount is subject to considerable disagreement). "The US and its allies" have been trying to rebuild, but a good bit (again, the amount is subject to dispute) of the funds allocated have been diverted, largely by the contractors, and some of the Iraqis and their allies blow things up as fast as they are fixed or replaced.

Subject: RE: BS: 1000 avoidable infant deaths daily
From: dianavan
Date: 08 May 07 - 12:44 PM

You're right about Saddam but sanctions certainly did not help the Iraqi children. At present, the war is preventing anyone from doing anything about it and is, in fact, creating what should be called a 'passisve genocide' How many infant deaths before the fighting stops, aid can be brought in and the mortality rate reduced?