"Indirect" is kind of a sneaky term, but we'll let that go for now.
A United Nations report, discussed in this Times article, calls it between 18,000 and 29,000, with a 95 percent figure of 24,000. However, this data was taken in the spring and summer of 2004, so while it would include casualties from the actual major combat phase, it would not include casualties since then. More on this report here.
Iraqbodycount.net has a current estimate of between 27,000 and 30,000. While they have some problems with their methodology--they include deaths from criminal activity and health-related issues--they at least document their numbers, and of course, these numbers would be more current.
Neither of these sources is pro-war, and you can bet they did not lowball any of their numbers.
re: 100,000
The whole thread (48 posts)
- Getting ready for the Big 2K Bash
- We shared quite a "bash" at the 9/11 death toll.
- You haven't lost your ability to amaze me, Tom
- 100,000
- Yeah, the Quakers are such party animals.
- This is a perfect opportunity for you to nail me down good.
- Since when do you set the standard?
- That has got to be the most well-written rationalization I have ever seen.
- Yeah!
- Since when do you set the standard?
- I have proof the Quakers are developing WMD...
- This is a perfect opportunity for you to nail me down good.
- "the Left"