Alex146
(556 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 05:59 PM
Original message |
I read that 10% of all wounded troops die |
|
I've also read that most of the men who are declared wounded are listed as such even if they die. With more then 10,000 wounded in Iraq that would mean there are over 1,000 extra Americans dead in Iraq.
|
DrWeird
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:03 PM
Response to Original message |
1. That would be twenty percent. |
|
Ten percent of 10,000 is 1,000. We already know we've got about 1,000 dead.
|
progressiveBadger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Yeah, so what he said could be true |
|
We know we have over 1000 dead. Then there are the 10% of the 10,000 wounded that may be dead, making an extra 1000.
|
Alex146
(556 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. From what I make of the situation... |
|
a wounded man is counted as wounded and shipped off to a hpspital. 10,000 people have gotten this treatment. Ten percent of those die (1,000) they are never added to the KIA tolls that we see. That would mean there are at least twice as many dead troops as we think there are. This might not be true in all cases, it might not be true in many cases at all but it would seem that there plenty of our boys falling through the cracks.
|
DrWeird
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. I think you're misunderstanding. |
|
The fatality to injury rate is, very roughly, 1:10. So we've got around 1300 dead, and somewhat over 10,000 wounded. Holds true for "major battles." If the news says 30 dead in Fallujah the last week, you can expect around 300 wounded. The fatality numbers are much more accurate than the wounded numbers, as far as anybody knows.
|
On the Road
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
You mean that combat fatalites are limited to soliders who die immediately, and those that die in the hospital a week or a month later from battle injuries are not counted?
That would definitely undercount the total. Which is what they want.
|
coreystone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:15 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Is there anyone who would be able to provide for the "manner" in which.. |
|
DOD determines there statistics in regards to the specifics of our casualties. There must be a protocol which is clear! As of this early AM deaths were 1296; I don't know what the the "injured" totals are, nor the deaths after being taken from the battlefield.
:-)
|
William Bloode
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:28 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Wanna know whats funny? |
|
Edited on Mon Dec-13-04 06:30 PM by William Bloode
Most casualty totals from conflict i have studied count causalty total is of killed, wouned and captured, not just KIA.
If not for some armour, and the advanced infield medical treatment we would be looking at 5-8,000 at least.
|
CornField
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 06:38 PM
Response to Original message |
8. I stopped looking at the reported figures because they are lies |
|
My understanding is that the official numbers released by the Pentagon list only those soldiers who are KIA. That is, if someone gets a nasty wound and eventually dies later because of infection, that person is not necessarily added to the totals put out by the Pentagon.
|
Alex146
(556 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-13-04 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
and if 10% of the wounded die then the numbers are at least doubled.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:16 AM
Response to Original message |