Afghanistan War death toll?

[Marxach-Léinínach]

How many civilians have actually been killed in Afghanistan since 2001? Official figures say 35,000. Now that seems kinda suspect to me, over 1 million civilians are meant to have died during the Soviet-Afghan war, I find it somewhat hard to believe that the USA and Britain and the rest of NATO would be so many hundreds of times more restrained and careful of civilian deaths than the USSR. Can anyone help me out here?

[scarletghoul]

Yes that figure seems absolutely ridiculous. It's the smallest estimate I've seen and is pretty unthinkable for a full scale war that has been going on for ten years in one of the world's poorest countries and where indiscriminate bombing is the dominant method.

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2010/10/15/afghan-war-afghan-holocaust-and-afghan-genocide-9th-anniversary-4-9-million-dead-3-2-million-refugees-report.html calculates the figure to be 1.2 million violent deaths and 3.7 million avoidable non-violent deaths due to deprivation. This is the highest estimate I've seen, though it could easily be correct.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Yes that figure seems absolutely ridiculous. It's the smallest estimate I've seen and is pretty unthinkable for a full scale war that has been going on for ten years in one of the world's poorest countries and where indiscriminate bombing is the dominant method.

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2010/10/15/afghan-war-afghan-holocaust-and-afghan-genocide-9th-anniversary-4-9-million-dead-3-2-million-refugees-report.html calculates the figure to be 1.2 million violent deaths and 3.7 million avoidable non-violent deaths due to deprivation. This is the highest estimate I've seen, though it could easily be correct.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was correct

[thriller]

Yes, I've also read (sorry, don't have the source handy) that the Afghan death toll since 2001 is around 1 million killed by military actions.

[crazyirish93]

i thought it was Iraq where 1 million had died

[Marxach-Léinínach]

looks like its both

[crazyirish93]

i wonder do any normal Americans think its right that the death of around 3000 justifys the deaths of so many afghan and Iraqi citizens ...

[thriller]

i wonder do any normal Americans think its right that the death of around 3000 justifys the deaths of so many afghan and Iraqi citizens ...

Well, can't speak for normal Americans, since I'm not normal (aka commie lol). However, to most Americans, it is justifiable since Iraqi's and Afghans aren't Americans, so there lives are worth less.

[FreeFocus]

I don't think it's 1 million. Remember, for most of the war, the number of troops wasn't as high as the Soviets' during their occupation. I also think if there were 1 million casualties, Afghan support for the occupation would have declined much faster than it has (where opinion really started shifting against it from 2006-2007 onward).

More realistically, the figure might be 100,000 dead from military actions and more from non-Coalition terrorist attacks, starvation, etc.

[thesadmafioso]

Though it is quite likely the figures have indeed been altered, I highly doubt they have been that they have been toned down from a million deaths from direct military action. It should be accounted for that the scale of the Soviet Afghan war was a great deal larger, as it was in essence a proxy war between the two superpowers of the cold war. The Soviets were mechanized and supported heavily by close air support in the form of the Hind, and they had a far more forceful presence in the region. This combined with the massive financial support which the Mujahideen received from the west led to a much larger scope of combat, and thus greater casualties. The two conflicts were simply very different, and it is hard to compare the death tolls of both in any meaningful manner.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

If the death toll for Afghanistan including violent and non-violent avoidable deaths is 5 million, what's the full death toll for Iraq?

[Bardo]

i wonder do any normal Americans think its right that the death of around 3000 justifys the deaths of so many afghan and Iraqi citizens ...

What we're doing is stablizing the region and liberating the people of Iraq and Afghanistan by killing many of them and completely destroying much of the area. If we hadn't invaded these countries they would look like warzones. Not to mention the 100 million Americans that would have been killed by now due to nuclear explosion. They're going to have McDonalds pretty soon so you cant say it wasnt worth it for the locals.

/sarcasm

[Political_Chucky]

Has wikileaks had an impact on the figures at all?

[Reznov]

Well, can't speak for normal Americans, since I'm not normal (aka commie lol). However, to most Americans, it is justifiable since Iraqi's and Afghans aren't Americans, so there lives are worth less.

Actually, to most Americans, they just dont really care.

And for the Soliders of our Military, it pays for their college.

[FreeFocus]

Actually, to most Americans, they just dont really care.

And for the Soliders of our Military, it pays for their college.

Yeah, they don't care because Afghan and Iraqi life is cheap. When it's Americans dying, people start to care. No one opposed the war against Afghanistan until they realized 2,000 troops died - i.e., the imperialist occupation is becoming costly.

[Palingenisis]

Yeah, they don't care because Afghan and Iraqi life is cheap. When it's Americans dying, people start to care. No one opposed the war against Afghanistan until they realized 2,000 troops died - i.e., the imperialist occupation is becoming costly.

God if He or She exists only knows how many Iraqies of Afghanis have died as a result of those Imperialist "adventures"....Which makes opposing them because "our boys" are dying a bit sick.

Good point.

[9]

No one opposed the war against Afghanistan until they realized 2,000 troops died - i.e., the imperialist occupation is becoming costly.

This is not true. I know plenty of people - outside of the leftist ghetto, incidentally - who were opposed to the war from the very beginning.

[FreeFocus]

This is not true. I know plenty of people - outside of the leftist ghetto, incidentally - who were opposed to the war from the very beginning.

Actually, it's quite true. Look at the polls right before the war started and up until very recently. It was never a campaign issue before 2008, which is, incidentally, when it started going badly for the occupation.

Moreover, most of the opposition outside the Left premised its arguments on the fact that no one has conquered Afghanistan successfully. That's the extent of the opposition. For most people, it wasn't a matter of whether or not it was moral to invade and occupy a country.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Actually, it's quite true. Look at the polls right before the war started and up until very recently. It was never a campaign issue before 2008, which is, incidentally, when it started going badly for the occupation.

Moreover, most of the opposition outside the Left premised its arguments on the fact that no one has conquered Afghanistan successfully. That's the extent of the opposition. For most people, it wasn't a matter of whether or not it was moral to invade and occupy a country.

Good way to see that is by comparing it to the NATO war against Yugoslavia. Now the official version of the war against Yugoslavia is just as much complete and utter bullshit as the official version of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, but because there were few NATO losses in that one no-one gives a flying fuck.

[crazyirish93]

in the end it does not matter how many have died in Afghanistan and Iraq they are dead and we are in no position to stop more deaths until we unite