Skip to main content

Total death/displacement 2025--2025

 Annual Figures for Insurgency Impacts (2015–2024)

To provide a clearer comparison, I've compiled annual data on deaths and new internal displacements (IDPs) attributable to the relevant groups: Boko Haram/ISWAP (Nigeria), ADF/ISCAP (DRC), and ISIS-Mozambique (ISMP). These are aggregated from ACLED, GTI 2025, CFR, UN OCHA/IOM, and other sources. Figures are conservative estimates; underreporting (20–50% in remote areas) means actuals may be higher. DRC totals include ADF-specific where possible but often tie into broader eastern conflicts. Mozambique insurgency started in 2017.
Year
Nigeria Deaths
Nigeria New IDPs
DRC Deaths (ADF)
DRC New IDPs
Mozambique Deaths (ISMP)
Mozambique New IDPs
Combined Deaths
Combined New IDPs
2015
11,500
2,100,000
~200
~100,000
0
0
11,700
2,200,000
2016
2,317
500,000
~250
~150,000
0
0
2,567
650,000
2017
1,967
400,000
~300
~200,000
~100
20,000
2,367
620,000
2018
2,700
300,000
~400
~300,000
~200
50,000
3,300
650,000
2019
1,200
200,000
~500
~400,000
~300
100,000
2,000
700,000
2020
800
150,000
~600
~500,000
~500
300,000
1,900
950,000
2021
700
100,000
~700
~600,000
1,400
500,000
2,800
1,200,000
2022
600
80,000
~800
~700,000
~400
200,000
1,800
980,000
2023
649
70,000
1,322
900,000
~364
150,000
2,335
1,120,000
2024
~565 (full est.)
~60,000
~1,000
738,000
~300
100,000
1,865
898,000
  • Key Trends: 2015 was an extreme outlier due to Boko Haram's peak (e.g., Baga massacre). Post-2015, deaths dropped sharply (80% by 2016) with military gains, stabilizing at ~1,800–3,300 annually—far more modest than the 2025 surge (7,000 deaths Jan–Aug alone). IDPs peaked in 2015 but rose again in 2021 (Mozambique Palma attack) and 2023–2024 (DRC escalation). For context, 2018–2020 were "less severe" years with combined deaths under 3,000 and new IDPs ~650K–950K.
  • 2025 Comparison: Jan–Aug 2025: ~6,650–8,300 deaths + ~1.2–1.5M new IDPs—exceeding most years except 2015, despite aid cuts.
  • Data sourced from ACLED event tallies, GTI 2025 attributions, IOM DTM baselines, and OCHA snapshots. For raw datasets, see ACLED's portal.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tucker anti western propoganda

 Tucker's Qatar Claim: Fact-Checking the "Zero Rapes" MythTucker Carlson recently claimed on his podcast (August 2025) that Qatar has "zero rapes" under Sharia law, using it to argue that Islamic legal systems outperform Western democracies in maintaining order. During an interview with Seth Harp, he praised Sharia for low reported crime, low abortion rates, and no same-sex marriage—positioning it as a model for conservatives frustrated with American liberalism.This is propaganda wrapped in contrarianism—cherry-picked stats that ignore harsh realities. Here’s the breakdown:The Claim's Flaw: "Zero Rapes" Isn't Safety—It's SuppressionOfficial stats vs. reality: Qatar reports near-zero rapes because Sharia-based laws make reporting dangerous for victims. Rape requires four male Muslim witnesses (or a confession), or it's treated as zina (adultery/fornication). Women who report assault often face imprisonment, flogging, or worse for "e...
Post a Comment
Read more

Qatar Anti-Anerican funding

  Qatar's Spending Overview Qatar, a major Gulf state with significant oil and gas revenues, channels funds through government entities like the Qatar Fund for Development (QFFD), Qatar Foundation, and state-linked charities (e.g., Qatar Charity). These often support humanitarian, educational, and political goals but have drawn criticism for advancing Qatari foreign policy interests, including ties to Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Below, I break down spending in the requested categories based on public reports, FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) filings, U.S. Department of Education disclosures, and analyses from think tanks like ISGAP and the Middle East Forum. Figures are approximate and cumulative where specified; recent years (2023–2025) show acceleration amid the Israel-Hamas conflict. 1. Funding to American Colleges Qatar is the largest foreign donor to U.S. higher education, primarily via the Qatar Foundation (a state-controlled entity) for branc...
Post a Comment
Read more

EU and X

 LEFT WING RESEARCHERS WANT TO LIMIT RIGHT WING DIALOGE! The EU's DSA requirement for researcher data access (Article 40) gives "vetted" researchers—typically academics or non-profits approved by national regulators—easier access to public X data like post engagement, views, and networks. The official goal is studying "systemic risks" (e.g., disinformation spread). Critics argue this can chill or deter honest/open dialogue in these ways:Broad and subjective labeling of "disinformation" or "harmful" speech: Researchers studying political topics can flag dissenting or unpopular views (e.g., on immigration, elections, gender issues, or COVID policies) as "misinformation" if they don't align with mainstream narratives, leading to reports that pressure platforms or governments to suppress them. Doxxing and harassment risks: Detailed data (e.g., who engages with controversial posts) can reveal user networks or identities, even if post...
Post a Comment
Read more