UPDATE: Here is a story addressing some of the criticisms of the Lancet study and results. It also stresses the point that the 100,000 Iraqi casualty figure is a conservative estimate.

Many people have no idea how many Iraqis have died since March 2003. One reason is that, unlike Vietnam where body counts of the enemy killed were de rigueur (and often inflated), these figures in Iraq are very inconvenient and troubling. The US forces have said it's not their responsibility to keep track of the Iraqi casualties. Here's a quote from a new estimate from a story in The Independent:

"The first scientific study of the human cost of the Iraq war suggests that at least 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives since their country was invaded in March 2003.

More than half of those who died were women and children killed in air strikes, researchers say. Previous estimates have put the Iraqi death toll at around 10,000 - ten times the 1,000 members of the British, American and multi-national forces who have died so far. But the study, published in The Lancet, suggested that Iraqi casualties could be as much as 100 times the coalition losses. It was also savagely critical of the failure by coalition forces to count Iraqi casualties."