documented deaths from voilence since 2003 are about 1840,000. The actual number is probably higher, but a million seems very high - indeed, about as many as were estimated to have died in Saddam's wars and atrocities.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Gotta love the blatancy of the Pilger process.

>>Scientific studies report that up to a million Iraqi men, women and children died...<<

"Scientific studies", Mr Pilger? Whose?

Add to this the weasel qualifier, "up to", and you have presented an evidence-free - yet incontrovertible, thanks to the "up to" part - argument, from which you can proceed to assume a million casualties.

That's not journalism. That's propaganda in its purest for.

m

sorry, should be 184,000

do scientific studies say who killed most? Was it Muslims killing muslims?

Hi Rhian

Pilger's first para "Scientific studies report that up to a million Iraqi men, women and children died in an inferno lit by the British government and its ally in Washington."

looks like it originated from the British Lancet's two journal articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_Iraq_War_casualties :

"The Lancet, one of the oldest scientific medical journals in the world, published two peer-reviewed studies on the effect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation on the Iraqi mortality rate.

...The studies estimate the number of excess deaths caused by the occupation, both direct (combatants plus non-combatants) and indirect (due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poor healthcare, etc.)."

Assassinating Saddam Hussein and Sons would have saved a lot of deaths and treasure. But after 9/11 the US Gov felt it had to demonstrate it was taking action - using the full weight of the US military - more than avenging the deaths of the 3,000.

Planta