people Soros is in everything!!!LOL

Carmen Jacobs, indianapolis, INdiana

Whether it is 600,000 dead or 150,000 dead, it is a huge number in anyones language. To recall that this many people died for a lie (weapons of mass destruction) further makes a mockery of the deaths of these souls. Yet petty journalists and spin doctors continue to make moot points that are irrelevant , at least to those who are dead and to their families.

alan rooney, canberra, Australia

Let's see.... the U.S. and the U.K. put Saddam in place back in the late 60's. Then they looked the other way when he took ministers away and killed them. Then they sold him weapons and helicopters through an agricultural act in the 80's that he used to gas Kurdish people. They supported him against the Iranians. Then they grew annoyed with him after he invaded Kuwait and found him more useful as an "iconic bad guy" they can feed to the masses thru their media machine. Then they invaded Iraq under false pretenses. Colin Powell lied at the U.N. The world knows they were lying. They even bugged the U.N. to know who to bribe. They couldn't buy the Turks off though even after a 20 billion dollar bribe. Then they screwed up their invasion. They had no plans for rebuilding. They hanged Saddam quickly so the past deals they did with him would dissapear with him. They aided and abetted in the killing of not only those who have died since the invasion of 2003 but also of many more. Bad USpolicy

Grif Harrison, Darien, Georgia

I laugh at all of my fellow US citizens foaming at the mouth at the "liberal media". Perhaps they've forgtotten Dick Cheney's famous prediction that we would be "greeted at liberators", or the very reason we supposedly invaded Iraq in the first place. I ask them all: WHERE ARE ALL THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION? This was the Bush Administration's dire reason for it's unprecedented pre-emptive invasion in the first place. I apologize to everyone else for the complete ignorence of my fellow Americans - who, if they support really the war, should be writing from Baghdad, not Texas and Virginia.

truepatriot, Little Rock, Ark/USA

Does no one see the irony in a billionaire socialist?

Glen, Austin , TX

There is no such thing as Peace without War

Mark, Palm Springs, Florida

my goodness. with all these accusations and "left-wing conspiracy" claims. you'd think some one would post a link to SOMETHING to back them up. but, nope. just like bill o'riellys book, which i purchased.\ just to see what he had to say. many claims and accusations, but not a single footnote to back them up.

chicken little, anyone?

Tim McVeigh Jr., Nashville, tn

The Lancet study was co-sponsored by MIT, which gets hundreds of millions of dollars yearly from the US Department of Defense for weapons research, and has helped developed many of the advanced weapons technologies used in the Iraq War.

MIT's Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington, MA is weapons development center funded by the US Air Force, while the University's faculty and corporate officers include the likes of former CIA Director John Deutch.

MIT is hardly a neutral party.

Prof. Spagat's decision to remain silent about MIT's financial connections to the US DOD while attacking George Soros proves he's merely a dishonest critic pushing a political agenda.

Frank Campos, Boston, USA

I just got back from Iraq, the Al Anar province is where I worked, all over the place. I waded through the dead bodies, the headless children when I went into schools blown up by us, saw plenty of things that would make any man sick. I think the death toll is even higher than what Soros' report found.
Funny thing is, I didn't see any of that. i was part of the "surge" of troops and after everything was said and done, we did our jobs and now the al anbar province is one of the safest places in Iraq. The local people, sure they don't care for us, but they see that we are there to help them and not just mow them down with our machine guns as the media would portray us. We have better cooperation from local leaders and the local people there than we have the entire time of the war. I don't think that we would have that kind of cooperation if the death toll was what MIT reported. Plus, how much of those deaths were from us and how much from the terrorists? Anyone know?

Chris, Tulsa, Oklahoma

I love how other folks... like Tony in Japan are lecturing America about what we should say or do.. The Japanese continue to deny the Mass Murder of Koreans and Chinese. The important factor in this discussion is the vast majority of Iraq's were killed at the hands of their own people. The American Troops have done more than any other army to limit casualties... Name me one war in which or one country that has worked as hard as the USA to limit civilian casualites.

doug, haddonfield, NJ

I don't know how much this is being covered outside of the USA, but here this news is virtually non-existent. Only far-right blogs and such talk about this. Mainstream media? Absolutely NO mention of it. Very sad.

brad, chicago,

So let's understand this.

The only reports we're getting is from "official" sources placed by government interests with blood on their hands, and that's just fine and dandy and should be accepted as gospel. But let a man with the means and the interest provide funding for an independent view, and the right wingers go apoplectic in a vain attempt to bolster their own pack of lies.

I think you'd best seriously reconsider your critique, because, frankly, the side for which you shill cannot endure the scrutiny.

Duane Galensky, Beallsville, PA US

Please tell me why Tony Blair & George Bush cannot be tried for war crimes.....

John, London, Uk

Because that point of view is utter and complete nosense.......

Viv, London, England

Please tell me why Tony Blair & George Bush cannot be tried for war crimes.....

John, London, Uk

The Lancet 'study' has been repeatedly and completely debunked-even by anti Iraq war groups. This article is just the latest. Read the whole thing. It is very comprehensive...

news.nationaljournal.com/articles/databomb/index.htm

Rebecca, Yuma, US

Funny how we quibble about how many Iraqi's have been killed., oh! was it 150,000 or was it 650,000.
---
Makes a big difference - Saddam Hussain was killing the Iraqis pretty quickly, so the number killed in the invasion is critical to the argument over whether life was saved by Britain, America et al's invasion. It also makes a big difference because you're talking about the death of half a million people.

Ironic to see real evidence of what I guess Chomsky would call "Media control" or "Capitalist propaganda", and to see that the Capitalist propaganda is not favouring the right, but the "liberal" agenda.

Soros should stick to making money, and if he needs something to do with it, try helping the poor like Warren Buffet or Bill Gates.

Andrew, Zurich,

This is a good example of how dangerous the far left really is. The ultra liberal power brokers are agenda driven and are manipulating the democrat base the way they always have, by promising all these benefits that will be provided by taxing the rich. They are trying to set up an aristocracy. Democrats, beware!

Robert, Moline, USA, IL

Soros plays and funds both sides of any conflict. Why? Because if you want total control, you should not only be the attacker, but also the victim. Run the entire play, and then sell it to the people as some sort of drama to distract them and get them to buy into it.

Soros is co-owner of CEDE & CO., which is an arm of the corporate-owned and pro-war US Federal Reserve. Yet Soros actively funds the anti-war MOVEON.ORG and pretends to get behind candidates who are against war.

This Iraq study is likely designed to confuse people. If 1 million people died in Iraq, but then Soros says 1 million died, this is somehow supposed to get people to think that 1 million people did not die in Iraq. Good luck with that one, buddy.

Jordan, Seattle, WA, USA

Funny how we quibble about how many Iraqi's have been killed., oh! was it 150,000 or was it 650,000.

They (muslims) destroyed a couple of buildings with the loss of around 3000 lives. Then we go on to destroy a country, it's infrastructure and the lives of it's people. I wonder what if they had killed 150,000 in the West would we have gone in and killed every last one of them?

Kris, London,

90% of the 151,000 were killed by other Iraquis or insurgents from other countries, not the allies

Geoduck, Virginia Beach, VA

The final sentance made me laugh, "The Lancet did not break any rules...." well that might be true if they didn't know about it. However, Les Roberts' name should be forever followed by an asterisk in publication, and Columbia University and MIT should be extremely ashamed. What Roberts and Soros did is equivalent to having an author not disclose that a clinical trial was funded by the drug company manufacturer. It is absolutely and completely unethical. Shame unto those responsible.

Scott, Minneapolis, US

So 150,000+ Iraqis have been killed ?!
That's not something to be proud of.

Matt, Columbus, Ohio

650,00 or 151,000 - you argue about the total and forget about human life - whatever the number it is too many. Wake up America, please grow up America. Start talking and stop the testosterone fueled adolescent crusades that you regulalry embark on. I hate terrorists and any one who takes life for that matter. Both America and the terrorists are perpetuating the cycle of violence and hate that takes generations to stop. Its time to add some humanity to that dream you call democracy.

Tony, Yokohama, Japan

So who funded the New England study?

hank, Los Altos, CA

in my opinion ( Having no proof obviously) Soros a survivor of Nazi concentration camps absorbed their philosophy of hatred to decadent western capitalism, and not withstanding his success in achieving wealth under the system he hates, is striving to destroy it for a return to a modified National Socialist (NAZI) regime.

repainter, Germantown, USA

We would have a lot less deaths if the anti-american left was not rooting Al-Queda on!

Bradley, saratoga springss,

If this is correct it is a terrible indictment of Soros' desire to bend public opinion to his position. It is very strange for a man who has made billions out of the capitalist system to be such a closet socialist.

Ellen O'Day, Toronto, Canada

Okay, so both Soros and Bush have lied....so what is the real figure of innocent people killed as a result of this war? As a soldier who has served two tours in Iraq with the 3rd Infantry, I know first hand that what is reported in the news is not exactly accurate...I know for a fact that we juggle numbers of those US KIAs to lessen the total count, that has been going on since the beginning. Is there a real way to measure civilians killed in this conflict? I doubt it, but it would be a safe bet that a minimum of 100,000 innocents have been killed who would not have been killed had we not invaded. So, what's the difference if 25 are killed or 250,000? It is still life that should not have been taken. Heck, I'm still trying to find those WMDs...so far we've only found thousands of IEDs set to kill US troops. Personally, I think we have created more terrorism that we have prevented.

Kel Roberts, Fort Stewart, Georgia USA

Not surprising at all, these are the typical left wing, liberal lies. The left has lied about the war from the beginning and unfortunately the gullible masses have accepted these lies. The scurrilous charges about President Bush have been repeated over and over and somehow that makes them true. Just remember that Sandy Berger has the truth stuffed in his socks, and his pants -- but that is just sloppiness on his part. Just can't wait to return to the times when guys like Sandy Berger are in charge of National Security and we have a class act again in the Oval Office with his pants around his ankles.

Dan Johnson, Boyertown, PA

Give it a coupel of years...

Then the reports will start coming out that there was just as much bias and hype in the global warming reports.

Lies and propaganda put out for what some activist believes is a "good cause" are still...

lies and propaganda.

john, jackson, NJ

I guess it is now ok that 150,000 are dead. 50 times 9/11, 3 times the number of US casualties in Vietnam. All for those elusive WMD.

Jason, Memphis, TN,

So the invasion has only killed 151,000 people? Not bad...at least it is less than the Tsunama a few years ago. Tsunami Bush to the rescue!

Brent , Baton Rouge, USA/La.

I also loathe the idea of "Democracy" since the USA was founded as a Republic

Bill, Ozark, MO

George Soros was behind this? What a surprise. Back in the late 90's he was implicated in attempting to sabotage the Mayasian economy by destabilizing their currency. I don't put anything past this man.

Gunbunny13, Manchvegas, NH, USA

Would some poor person Less Rich) than Soros do what he has done to undermine the US still be out of jail. When is or government going to bring these extremist under control. As long as liberals control the media and most loudly there will be no control of these people.

William D. Lilley, Virginia Beach, Va

Soros's funding isn't the story. The story is how the media promoted it as "gospel" because it had an anti-war slant. From the get-go, journalists have acted dishonestly about the Iraq War. Did you know Saddam shot down an American aircraft on 9/11---then bragged about it days later in a published document which reads as a declaration of common cause with Al Qaeda? Yep! Look it up! HIGHLY provocative, and proves Saddam was at fault for the war. in Summer of 2004, Putin admitted at a press conference that Russian Intelligence learned Saddam had commissioned terror attacks on US soil. Yep! An Iraqi Intelligence operative (Shakir) helped facilitate the Malaysia meeting where the 9/11 attacks were planned...he was photographed, under surveillance. There's tons of such material left off the radar by the media. Why is Saddam ALWAYS scrubbed out of the war debate? Journalists have lied to you thru ommission; and when historians diagnose the Iraq invasion, they'll vindicate it.

thogwummpy, Atlanta, GA

Sadamm killed 1,500,000 Iraqis and 1,500,000 Iranians. That's 150,000 per year for 20 years. It looks like we have already SAVED several hundred thousand lives since we took out this psychopathic tyrant.

david, miami, florida

As with the nuclear attacks on Japan in World War 2, you have to consider the toll in life if nothing were done. There really is no war on terror. Rather, it is a war with radical Islam. Many of the innocent people in Iraq were killed by terrorists, and many who have died are terrorists who would have gladly kept on killing innocents if left unchallenged. Terrorists must be frustrated to have so openly declared a religious war upon any who are not Muslim, and have so many deny that they want to fight. The choice for all free nations is not between war or peace, it is between fighting or surrendering. If we surrender, you can expect to pray to their god, be killed if you are gay, and lose all of your human rights if you are female - and the toll in human life will dwarf anything we have seen to date.

Andy, Cocoa Beach, FL

Yeah your right Mark of UK. 151,000 deaths is not fine. Most of which where just innocent civilians, including women and children. Oh yeah, lets not forget the elderly. But that's beside the point, the bigger picture is forcing Iraq to be a democratic government so our capitlist corporations can exploit and get there hands the Iraqi peoples natural resources. Getting a staging ground to do the same thing to the rest of the middle east is a bonus as well. Think about it, Saddam just like the rest of middle east country dictators or kings exploit their people and hoard all the money for themselves also. Why shouldn't our government due the same. We need to have those natural resources to secure our way of life and our freedom. With "Peak Oil" looming around the corner imagine Russia or China becoming the worlds most powerfull nations. They will surely trot around the globe forcing communism and opression and there will be no America to the rescue cause there is no oil for our machine.

James, Las Vegas, NV,USA

I wonder how many of these folks that are criticizing the war criticized going into Bosnia?
It's a good thing this kind of mentality was at a minimum during the world wars.

bryan, enid, US

151,000 is a lot.

steve, lymeCT,

George Soros : The enemy within , and friend of both leftist shills - of the socialist and fascistic stripes .

Oh . And you thought that one was left and the other right ? True, but he has both covered .

Dr. Tris , Los Angeles , Cal

The best news in this story is that Soros is 77. He's already seven years above his three score and ten, and hopefully before very long mother nature will put an end to his mischief.

B. S. Davis, Morris Township, United States

hey boB- 500x 15,000 is 7.5 million. No one else remotely considers Saddam to have killed this many. What 30 % of the population of Iraq. Sorry boB

and the first George Bush predicted the result of carnage if Saddam was removed which ws why he left him in power.

So YES the "USA is responsible for all those deaths and maimings and the destrucftion of a nation.

They would not have happened if the USA had minded its own business instead of attempting to take the oil and water.

Pre-emptive strike is a euphemisn for STARTING A WAR!

Paul Recher, Lismore, australia

To the "Democrat with a Spine"
It is obvious that you are using it for a brain or you would not be demeaning Christians, our fine economy and a successful war against terrorism which we did not start, but are going to finish, no thanks to you and your ilk.

J. Mc Hale, Fort Mitchell, Kentucky, USA

it was and is an honorable and justifiable war, no matter how your politicos spin your agenda, both common sense and logic dictate this. Bush had to deal with a symptom, for the most part it was a problem inherited for the Clinton's...but ultimately lays at the doorstep of the Brits and that damnable Balfour Declaration, we're just cleaning up the mess.

david, Washington DC, DC

And if a conservative group had put 5 cents into the study with much lower numbers you would have blasted it as biased. Typical liberal double standard. I guess the U.S. military is just over there killing everything that moves, right?

JJCobb, Chicago, Illinois

Fighting over how many hundreds of thousands of people who have died? Great. Just great.

The 151,000+ deaths are 151,000 more than their should be. Period.

Doug, Maryland, USA

"The fact that the source of funding was politically interested does not prove the study is bad, it merely is a pointer that says some skepticism is required. It takes criticism of the methodology and other studies with different results to really disprove the study -- merely pointing to funding sources is not enough.


coyote, Phoenix, Arizona / USA"


Hmm, would you say the same thing for a study finding a lower death toll funded by Halliburton?

CallMeIshmael, Ft Lauderdale, Fl, USA

Even 650,000 is an understatement ! 78,000 sorties and over a billion pounds of ordinence in 8 days and Iraq´s 1.6 million man army was reduced to 400,000 Boy of boy the crusaders had a good week. So when Mr Bush claims the gospel is the american way of life and he is going to bring it to them . All he needed was the Executive Order to arm his evangelicals with there Farsi bibles and attack ! What else can you call it. As a Brooklyn born Jew even I now understand who & what christians truely are. Look at american history.... first tne native American´s.... call them savages and kill them off. Then the Black people...... boy of boy , glad they were valuable property ... or they would be gone ! Now , call the orthodox Muslims terrorists and kill them. There no threat to our way of life. Glad I could afford to live in Costa rica. There mostly Catholic here ; but , no army..... Bob

Robert Shakerdge, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA

This Lancet study was never statistically sound and dismissed early on by real statisticians. Its staying power in the media has been remarkable, maybe the Soro's link will now put it where it belongs.

Hugh Maguire, New York, NY

These comments are all about Soros and the left-right bickering from Americans.

As a professional statician I can say to you that the Lancet report verly likely is correct in it's findings. I have gone over all the details and I could not find any wrongdoing in it.

Luckily the truth is easy to find.

You can find it on the graveyards of Iraq, just from those graveyards it is easy to estimate if indeed the killing rates have gone up. And you can quantize it and extrapolate it to the entire country of Iraq.

Well , let all this idle talk in these comments just be what it is: idle talk. The graveyards will be there in the decades to come...

Reinko Venema, Groningen, Netherlands

Just because the Nazis funded the V1 and V2 doesn't mean that rockets don't fly.

While knowing the source of the funding is helpful for deciding whether there may have been a pre-ordained result, this article should have also done more to discuss the methodology of the study and why it may be flawed.

Rodney Hampton, DeWitt, US/Michigan

oh, it's all ok then. 150, 000 deaths is the name of U.S. imperialism is perfectly acceptable...

jake, CHILLICOTHE, il

The story is based loosely on a much more in depth analysis published in early January by National Journal. The link is
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/databomb/index.htm

tpbeal, Denver, CO/USA

Just imagine a scientific research claiming that viagra has no side effects and two years later you learn half of the funding came from Pfizer.

Mark, New York, USA

To DG in Florida

I see. So a concensus is proof of global warming but a concensus isn't proof that Soro's group cooked the numbers, eh?

KA, Portland, OR

Unfortunately, we will never know if we eliminated a tyrant who may have caused millions upon millions of deaths and worldwide suffering. The only thing that's left is the second guessing, which is quite easy to do from the comfort of our keyboard.

Craig, Las Vegas, USA/NV

The fact that the source of funding was politically interested does not prove the study is bad, it merely is a pointer that says some skepticism is required. It takes criticism of the methodology and other studies with different results to really disprove the study -- merely pointing to funding sources is not enough.

However, for those commenters eager to defend the study despite the bias of its funding, I ask you to question your own actions vis a vis climate studies. My guess is that the same folks who are defending the Lancet study and Soros are the same ones who are first to scream "oil industry funding" at every climate change skeptic.

I am willing to make a deal. I will criticize the Lancet study at face value, based on its methodology and results rather than its funding, if Soros-partisans are willing to do the same for climate research that contradicts the reigning orthodoxy.

coyote, Phoenix, Arizona / USA

When the facts don't work for the anti-war activists, they create their own. It's clear the Democrats will stop at nothing to take power. That includes having one of their biggest donors funding a skewed study.

Rob, New York, New York

Soros is neither anti-capitalist nor anti-US, as anyone who has read any of his books or is familiar with his personal history would know. Soros repeatedly attributes the economic success of the USA throughout most of the 20th Century to the "level playing field" provided by American law, which used to protect small- and medium-sized businesses from predation by huge conglomerates and multinationals. His plans to promote capitalism in eastern Europe use features of the American economy as a model.
Those individuals who regularly disparage Mr. Soros' aims or intentions are almost invariably either rightwing propagandists (who oppose any taxation or regulation of the largest multinational corporations), or those members of the public taken in by their propaganda.

DonRoberto, Louisville,

The Lancet "study" was debunked virtually the moment it was published.

The radcial left relies soley on the Big Lie since the facts are in opposition to their stated goals.

Stephen Smith, Bangor, MA

I wonder how many other studies or media reports have been influenced to be in opposition to the war due to Soros' money? I would be willing to bet that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Cory, San Diego, CA

Oh ok, so only 150,000? Well that's alright then.

So who is the New England Journal of Medicine funded by?

Owen, London, UK

That George Soros is a hero and financier to leftist academia tells you all you need to know about those "studies" dictating to the American populace what are America's 1st tier universities.

Brent, Tulsa, OK,

If The Lancet, MIT and Columbia were listed on a stock exchange, you would do well to go short on all three.

Will Thompson, Chicago, Illinois, USA

So I guess most posters to date are overjoyed that we only killed 151,000 innocent civilians.

Great result folks - you must feel mighty proud of what we've achieved.

Mighty proud.

Ned Parsnip, Queensland, Australia

RE: “In retrospect, it was probably unwise to have taken money that could have looked like it would result in a political slant. I am adamant this could not have affected the outcome of the research."

I believe him -- because he was already slanted so far to the anti-war left. For all we know, Soros' involvement may have had a moderating influence on the results.

MMR, Iraq Study and Soros-bought research: NOW will the Lancet fire Horton?

SMSgt Mac, Fort Worth, Texas

Columbia U. Figures.

Nancy S, Huntington Bch , USA/CA

Well the second study showed that teh US killed 151,000 Iraqis. Am sure thats all collateral damage to all your western right wing state terrorists. All of your governments and armies should be brought to court for their gratuitous killing which is but a mere reflection of the lowly intelligences of their own nations.

Rihard Alego, mexico, mexico city

The truth is whatever Soros wants it to be.

Terryl, Monroe, NY

In perfect hindsight the U.S. should have used assassination against terrorist organizations and their leadership.
However, once we were in Iraq we shouldn't have been so timid and undermanned. But, those shortcomings rest fully on the shoulders of Donald Rumsfeld, the latest version of Kenndey and Johnson's Secretary of Defense, Robert Strange McNamara.

zev goldman, Parsons , Kansas

OH, please they had a huge op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that described in detail how the numbers were fiction, how corrupt the reach and it's finding were, how they were discredited by every reputable international organization., and how Soros made sure the report came out just before the 2006 election, which he has admitted to.

sam, brampton, canada

OK..so we don't rely on the intelligence of the world and we don't
invade Iraq. We then allow Iraq to cause havoc in the middle east and continue their atrocities again their own people.

I can just hear the hew and cry about how, golly, that damn Bush should have done something. After all, he had intelligence from around the world.

You whiny clowns make me sick.

greg miller, Westminster, Maryland USA

To "Hooray for Soros":

You do realize that the alleged voter fraud that you mention was actually done by the democrats. There is a reason our founding fathers created rules to prohibit foreigners from ruling our country and getting too involved in it's politics and Soros is proving them right. Good luck with Hillary... or is she to conservative for you. Wake up and realize that socialism (and socialists like you and you comrades) can not sustain a productive society.

ES, Atlanta, GA., USA

From what I remember of the Lancet study a few months after it came out a statistician studied the methodology and found that with the statistic of number dead, they also released a definition of the accuracy of the number, I can't remember what it was called. But the result was that although some 150,000 or so (first study) who were estimated dead, the numbers were based on such a small pool of sampling and interviews because of the difficulty of sampling and interviewing in a war zone and the difficulty of getting Iraq residents to agree to be interviewed (and whether they were honest or not) that the margin of error (was called something else, can't remember what, something like precision/sigma) made the survey results some 150,000 dead as the result, but it was possible that the low end (but statistically still accurate) was 15,000 dead, and the high end was 1,500,000 dead. So the result was actually that 15,000 or 150,000 or 1,500,000 were all equally accurate as to number dead in the survey, the authors simply used the median of the statistic as the headline/survey result

Lisa, Grand Rapids,

Have you all forgotten that this "great man" once deliberately tried to break the Bank of England through his currency manipulations without so much as a thought for what that would do to the English public and way of life?

Steve B., monroe, ny

Does anybody know how many Iraqis died annually BEFORE the US went in? There was that war with Iran. And the invasion of Kuwait must have cost a few Iraqi lives. And then many more Iraqis must have died getting them out of Kuwait. And of course Saddam's day-to-day repression. Any numbers? It would be interesting to contrast those numbers with various of the estimates since we went in.

/Bob Metcalfe

Bob Metcalfe, Boston, USA

George Soros is short the dollar. His idealism is fueled by his desire for money. He has a history of doing this to currencies of several countries when they get into trouble.

ezag, Georgetown, tx

Rather pathetic, isn't it, that the peace-at-any-price crowd can't make its case based on 151,000 dead. What does this need to exaggerate speak to? And Soros doesn't fund studies when the "results" are in doubt. MIT and The Lancet should be appropriately chagrined. Which in the end is more important to them, an honest examination and critique of the invasion and its aftermath or a result that will support their a priori narrative of events?

Kyda Sylvester, Auburn, CA, USA

Bet your life american will never see this report.

California is cutting it's budget ten percent and the madman Bush still thinks he can win the WAR.

Is an Iraqi baby that is killed worth more than a dead american?

Where are the WMDs?

Edward, Calgary, Canada

The research itself is in doubt because all others including the UN show 150K dead. Now even that is horrendous, but 90% of those are from the internal attacks among their own groups (according to the UN and I have no sympathy for them because of that). So 15K are from our attacks. But Saddam killed 500X that many so we SAVED that many lives. This war was worthwhile and will be seen as such down the line.

boB, Sunrise, fl

Soros may have American citizenship (shame on us) but he is no American. I wish he would get out of our country.

abbey, springfield, vt

The Lancet also published findings autism findings by Andrew Wakefield, a researcher at a London children's hospital. Wakefield forgot to inform Lancet that he had been commissioned by a consortium of trial attorneys to find a relationship between MMR vaccines and incidence of autism. When the situation was discovered, Lancet disavowed their series of articles. Looks like Lancet is more a political opinion publication, than a medical journal.

Leah Lipschultz, Woodland Hills CA, USA

Jeff in Arnold, CA. Actually, the Russians hate Sorros because he destroyed the ruble in the late 1980's early 90's. He profits on market/currency instabilities so he is no friend of anybody except the trouble makers of this world. And he is a socialist, just read his bios.

JIM, Ramsey, NJ

The "mainstream" news media (CNN, the major networks, AP, Reuters, etc.) does not report the situation in Iraq accurately. They slant the news to make it appear that the US liberation of that country has failed. There's no mention of all the good things that the US has done and is continuing to do there. There's no mention of school construction, buildup of infastructure, etc. The tragic civilian deaths in Iraq are the responsibility of terrorists, not the US. Likewise, the Lancet study is a bogus peice of propaganda, largely funded by Soros who hates the US. Evem iraqbodycount.org, an obviously anti-liberation website, disputes the Lancet study.

Voice of Reason, Medford, NJ

Dennis Fennelly, Medford, NJ

What's really funny is the fact that the so-called "anti-war", "left", crowd depends on an international capitalist for their support. This study was debunked within days of its publication back then. Yet, the looneys have and still quote it as dogma. Aaaaahh, where is Joseph Goebbels when you need him?

J. Alejandro, Grand Rapids, MI, USA

Who cares that he funded it? George Soros is a highly intelligent, very politically active, and willing to (thank god) part with huge sums of money to help put back out country again. To say that and MIT prof. would be involved in such nefarious duties as statistical forgery or whatnot is absurd. What about all of the studies/media/papers that are funded by right-wing, Christian wacko republicans that don't stand up to public criticism?

The Lancet times their releases for elections? How about there being documented voter fraud in the last two presidential elections, which have led to a rather unfortunate 8 yeas in our country? Republicans need to start answering questions about why they have systematically turned our great nation into a nation of hate (which coincidentally is hated around the world), with pathetic foreign policy and an even worse economy. These are the types of problems our elected officials need to be dealing with.

Hooray for Soros, A Democrat with a spine

Evan, Seattle,

Only 151,000, that's alright then!

Mark, Haywards Heath, Uk

Whew! A mere 151,000!

Any able-bodied person who ever spoke out in favor of invading Iraq before we invaded should have gotten their masturbatory-talking cowardly ass over there to fight.

Cowardly, cowardly, cowardly members of the public supported this war. Now that we're there I'm not sure that cutting out is necessarily the best thing, but god knows invading was the worst humanitarian and strategic catastrophe ever perpetrated by my dear hijacked country.

David, New York, NY

As a conservative I can opine with some conviction... This so-called war on terrorism cannot be justified as the administration has claimed. The US in this case, abandoned its philosophy of defense and took the offense against people of a nation that had not done anything (to my knowledge) against our people. We are in the wrong here. Once our politicians realized that there were no MWDs, our forces should have been withdrawn immediately. To continue on this path is morally, militarily and fiscally wreckless. After all, how would be react to being invaded by a foreign power? Our leaders never seems to consider the consequences of their actions before hand. They leave our military men and women in harms way and kill and maim countless numbers of innocent civilians with whom were really have no quarrel. This is the problem when leaders do not fight battles but send others to do their bidding. Shame on them!

Alex, Los Angeles, CA

That study was conducted in the same manner using the same methodology as many other, taken as credible, studies.
The fact that Soros wrote a check means nothing regarding its validity.
Find fault with the results or the methodology and then we'll have something to consider here.

Don in boston, Boston, Mass. USA

I attempted to post a reply 12 hours ago and it is not visible. Hmmmm. I commissioned the second Lancet survey. "Soros" had nothing to do with the origination, conduct, or findings. The foundation he created funded part of the public education effort. The researchers nor the Lancet needed to know that---no ethics violated, sorry. Les Roberts, btw, did not lead the study. And the new survey from the Iraq Ministry of Health shows 400,000 excess deaths. All of this was explained to the reporter who apparently could not see clear to an accurate report. Wonder why.

John Tirman, Cambridge, MA - USA

It has been so long since we have had an educational system that wasn't anti USA that I have no respect for anyone connected with it! Teachers, administrators, the whole lot no matter whether grade school, high school or go called higher education seems to be the worse. They all want peace but none discussed what rights they are willing to give up for peace. Is is freedom of education, or speech, religion or just what do they plan on erelquinshing to gain this so called peace. To have someone tell me what to wear, how to act and what God to worship is more than I am willing to tolerate and my grandaughters to be considered as worth nothing more than as breeders? I don't think so, The majority of these so called peace advocates have never had to give up anything in their lives.

Ruth Skidmore, Mountrin View , Ca.

It is a sorry state of affairs that the U.S.A. has to rely on the generosity of philanthopists to find out the truth instead of its own government. Even then the right cannot face the enormity of the massacre even when published by a publicatiion with the repututation of the Lancet. This is country with some of its citizens still in a state of denial. Lets not forget the hundreds of thousands of malnourished by sanctions and those dying of radiation from uranium depleted weapons dropped in the preceding 10 years the U.S. and U.K.

Ben, London, Kent

Shimrod, Democracy is a Centerpiece of Socialism. To say that Sorros loathes Democracy is to say that he loathes Socialism. The US was founded upon a Republic, rule by The Law. Democracy is rule made the Majority. Our country was founded on Democratic elections but, originally, democracy ended there. That we have become more Socialistic over the last 100 years is the result of allowing our country to become democratic instead of following the Laws of Our Land.

John, Dallas, Tx

The Lancet also has a fun tradition of releasing it's "findings" at a regularily scheduled time on the calendar. Namely, in October of 2004 and October of 2006.

Astonishingly enough, there were very significant US elections within a couple of weeks of EACH RELEASE!!!!

This is simply an amazing coincidence, and it would be cynical to think that there might be any particular motive to such timing. I mean, the Lancet would never dream of doing something that mendacious.

Would they?

Andrew, Arlington, Virginia

Notice that they don't attack the scientific method used by the Lancet. It's a diversionary tactic to go after Soros' funding.

The US likes to claim the missing as "in exile". How convenient?!?!?

DG, Jupiter, Florida

It looks as though 151,000 Iraqis killed in our war is too small a number to be noticed.
Let's say half were killed by terrorists, so-called, known as insurgents fighting an occupying force by others, that brings the number down to 75,500 (please do remember that Americans accept the killing of humans as acceptable losses when their carpet bombing does the killing).
Now let's say that only half of America see the Iraqi people as human beings (and that is giving the American people more humanity than they are worth), that brings the number of humans killed down to 37,750.
Take away blood for blood: 3,000@WTC+5,500US military=-8,500+37,750=29,250, then obviously the Iraqi people have not yet paid their full price in blood for hosting America's war on terror.
So what's all the rumble about?

Bob Franks, Norwich, Mohawk Valley, New York

All the death numbers thrown out by these kinds of guesswork studies are bogus. They should survey ALL hospitals, mortuaries, and the like; then, get back to us. We have the prewar numbers from mass graves and the like: Sadam killed an average of about 100,000 of his own people each year for 10 years. Thats not survey guesswork thats close to a million actual bodies found, and direct evidence of more that decayed too far to be sure of the exact additional numbers; so, it could have been higher - so thats 1,000,000 plus.

Iraq is better off for our having invaded, no matter how you slice it.

mr obvious, Ellenton, FL, US

From my reading and meeting his people I do not think George Soros is a socialist. He is an anti-communist and has funded the democratic color-named “revolutions” successfully in Ukraine, Georgia and has put a lot of money unsuccessfully into opening up the societies of Russia and Belarus. He is hated by the Russian government, who miss-call him in their press a “Jewish CIA agent.” What his ideology comes down to is he does not hold conservative Judeo-Christian moral values. He is against “family values” and his following share these liberal values with him -- mass distribution of condoms, promotion of promiscuity, government aid to take care of the diseases that result from promiscuity, pro-homosexual, no respect for traditional marriage, state education of children in these themes, anti-religion, pro-abortion, and anti-war, anti-military. But fiscally he remains a capitalist.

Jeff, Arnold, CA

Probably MORE than 1 out of 12 Massachusetts residents go to bed hungry each night. At least 1 out of 10 are on a diet. And they are the lucky ones - - they will live longer. Starvation in America? What a joke. The chief nutritional affliction of the poor these days is obesity. Ironically eating healthy is cheaper, so they best way to eliminate malnutrition is through teaching the poor how to eat healthy.

VO Reason, Rochester, NY USA

I drove past a billboard for a few months that said 1 out of 12 Massachusetts residents (komrades) goes to bed hungry every night. I believed that even less than the Lancet report. When people start throwing around numbers, you have to look at it with a jaundiced eye no matter who's presenting it, even friends sometimes.

Squishyfur, Peabody, People's Republic of MA

Soros is not anti-war. He's anti-U.S., at least until we've abandoned capitalism. He loathes the idea of democracy, and has committed his resources to converting the U.S. to socialism. In a Euro-style socialist beauracracy he'll have influence in proportion to his vast wealth. rather than having to work through front groups as he does now. That, of course, is my interpretation of his actions as reported here and elsewhere.

shimrod, Suffolk, U.S.A

Is there any consequential left-wing conspiracy or blatant lie that this convicted felon is not behind?

I must admit that I'm mildly surprised that the Lancet allowed itself to be associated with such a discreditable individual and his radical fringe views.

Richard, Springfield, VA

Nobody took that poll seriously. The fact that the study was related to a researcher at MIT suprised me.

OT: I was wondering the other day if the Left thinks we should be leaving Germany about now or perhaps Japan or Korea since they're so adamant that we leave Iraq? Why should we continue to have troops in Those countries after Those wars ended? Well, lots of reasons, but that's besides the point...

Gary, Aliso Viejo, US

Some teenager came begging at my door the other day claiming that there are " a half million homeless kids in Los Angeles alone". People throw out these huge numbers to acheive their political aims and people are daft enough to believe them

Janell, Los Angeles, , CA

2006? I read a Lancet story published online with a date of Oct 29, 2004. The author was Les Roberts and estimated 98,000 excess deaths. The article described the methods used to develop the estimate and the uncertainty. They got to 98,000 deaths by looking at their polling data and then calculating that there were between 8,000 and 194,000 deaths, with a 95% CI (confidence interval). Then they went on to discuss deaths in the Falluja area, but they were less confident about those numbers, due to more SUBSTANTIAL uncertainty. I don't think we should be looking towards these folks to predict any election winners.

John Norris, Canton, USA/GA

I am shocked, shocked!

You mean the left lies too?

John, Los Angeles, CA

yes, the lancet did break a rule, its called ethics. now, we know that it cant be trusted.

jerry, atlanta, usa/ ga

You lie by omission. This is a favorite tactic of the propagandist.

You failed to mention that the study by the New England Journal of Medicine failed to enter the more dangerous parts of Iraq.

Where would you expect the highest war related death rates? The study done by the New England Journal of Medicine, tells a distorted story, but it's a distortion favored by conservatives seeking to spin the facts.

Mike Johnson, Sacramento, CA

Gee Golly! A biased report funded by a Liberal!!! Who woulda thunk they would put a trick like this?

Bob, Cheney, Wa.

Ha Ha! What a cruel joke!

tim, dc, usa

What a joke. News is for sale, and you tell the buyer/sponsor what he wants to hear.

Joel Thomas, Corpus Christi, Texas