A conservative estimate is that more than 40,000 Iraqis survive per year today than during the sanctions regime, and probably most of them children. The tight correlation between GDP and child mortality across countries bolsters this conclusion.
Let’s suppose that the sanctions regime had continued for 10 years, from 2003 to 2013, and further that security flattens out—it doesn’t get worse, but it doesn’t get better. Under these assumptions, 400,000 Iraqi children would have died if the war had not occurred and the sanctions regime continued. Now, almost 100,000 Iraqis died during the war, and so one of the war’s benefits is that it saves the lives of 300,000 Iraqis (over 10 years).
Let’s assume the data are correct. I have no doubt that for many Iraqis, life is far better under American occupation than under the brutal reign of the Baath Party. The incredible success of the surge combined with the Sunni Awakening has brought an amazing degree of stability to a country that just a few years ago was mired in a low-grade civil war.
That said, the cost we’ve paid in lives, treasure and reputation is hardly counterbalanced by whatever strides have been made to date in Iraq. I’m happy to know that out of this strategic blunder called the Iraq War some good might be salvaged. Still, it pains me to think how much we could have saved by not pursuing such a ill-conceived, poorly planned and terribly executed conflict.
With President Elect Obama’s signaling that he’ll retain Gates at Defense, hopefully he’ll avoid shattering the fragile peace that exists today in Iraq by rapidly leaving from Iraq and instead pursue a measured, carefully timed and planned draw down. Such a rush would no doubt erase the gains made in 2007.
The point of this article is POINTLESS. George Of The Jungle Bush made war because of the crap intel that proved to be made up that Saddam still had WMD’s. Of course none were found and sure Saddam was a mad man but helping save 400,000 people wasn’t why [Bush, Rove, Cheney, and Rumsfield] started their fight. And if you agree with this article, then it amounts to a human bailout plan just like this financial bailout plan. Which brings me to my next point, where does it end? You didn’t see Idiot Bush helping all the other people who are living under genocide dictators. if you did please enlighten me. And another point, why when Bill Clinton helped stop the genocide in Kosavo in the 90’s, the same right wingers that try to justify this mess in Iraq now, were saying then, it wasn’t our job to police the world but it’s ok now. Flip flop crap!!! Bush and his town idiots distracted away from the real fight in Afganistan and we missed our golden oportunity to get that scum ball Bin Laden.. Saddam was a secular dictator not and Muslim extremist. By ivading Iraq, we have created one of the biggest breeding grounds for terrorists. How stupid!!! Now that is the fact like it or not!!! And why did we not invade Iran? They proved to have WMD’s. Omg!! I can’t believe people are so stupid.. Shame on Bush, his idiots, and the people that supported him… And shame on you if you support this article…
Joseph
joseph – Ok, Ok. I think if you read down a ltitel bit you’ll notice that ConnScript is probably in agreement with you.
The problem I have with this article is that saying that sanctions would have killed more people than our invasion doesn’t justify the invasion. It especially doesn’t justify it after the fact, considering we still have yet to leave and thus we don’t know the full extent of the losses. As someone on Andrew Sullivan’s blog pointed out, sanctions could have been loosened or any number of other actions taken to provide a check against Saddam without punishing the Iraqi people. We will never know what the right course of action was because we had a president who has no restraint and thinks international relations is a game of ‘Cowboys and Indians’. But certainly we know this: the war was sold to us as a war of self-defense when it was actually a war of choice and a war of aggression. It’s never, ever good to engage our military in a conflict on such shoddy premises.
Aqueous,
Very good points. It’s ashame that we’ll need hit Iran and neutralize it’s nuke program at some point but we can’t because we’re tied up in Iraq. And same with Bin Laden, we need all our resources in Afganistan to get that creep but now we’re spread thin. If I didn’t know any better, it’s almost like Bush didn’t want Bin Laden found, so then he could keep the Karl Rove machine playing to the Republican political base even after his leaving office. To all, Happy Thanksgiving!!!
joseph
“we’ll need hit Iran and neutralize it’s nuke program at some point but we can’t because we’re tied up in Iraq”
Really? I’m pretty surprised to hear you say this. But I tend to think that if we do attack Iran, you’ll be damning our government for doing so.