mainer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:07 PM
Original message |
What are the TRUE US military death counts? |
|
According to this site, which lists each death with name and circumstances, 90 U.S. soldiers have died in the month of April. Yet all the up-to-the-minute news reports state there are "about 70 deaths." That's a big difference, 90 vs. 70. Whom to believe? http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties_apr04.htm
|
HEFFA
(414 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:15 PM
Response to Original message |
1. This might be helpful.... |
|
http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspxThey list the total for April thus far at 76 U.S. troops and 2 others*
|
laruemtt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. it was 675 a few hours ago |
|
and now it's 677 - don't remember hearing anything in the media about any more incidents. must be some more injured dying.;(
|
Striker Davies
(88 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:17 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Lots of evidence that the Pentagon is sharply understating the stats. |
|
A couple of Australian journalists spent some time visiting the hospitals, making themselves very unpopular with the US Commanders, but actually counting the bodies, both Coalition and Iraqi.
At the time when the US death rate was given as 500, the journalists provided data showing the real death toll was over 1,000. The figures on wounded are worse, never mind that the term "wounded" covers everything from minor injuries to multiple limb loss, lost eyes, paralysis, etc. Evidence suggests over 6,000 Coalition wounded.
|
Amerpie
(380 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:19 PM
Response to Original message |
|
We still can't get a good count on the maimed (the press calls them wounded)
|
shockingelk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. odd that there's no reported wounded |
|
No reported wounded or even non-hostile deaths yet this month - despite the fact that KIA numbers are horrible.
|
bloom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. They don't want us to know. |
|
It makes sense to me that the number of killed would be at least twice what is reported because of those who died of their injuries days after the initial injury.
Wounded - 5-10 times that number?
|
mainer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:22 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Global Security says total of 697 US deaths for the war |
|
Both hostile and non-hostile. Again, this is a large discrepancy with the "official" number. I'm inclined to believe this site because it does list each death by name and circumstances. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties.htm
|
m-jean03
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
9. I have never read the names, one by one like that before and |
|
it really truly made my heart ache, really. You keep scrolling, and they keep coming...
|
GeorgeGist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:24 PM
Response to Original message |
|
That unless the death occurs on the 'battleground' they are not counted as killed in action. So if a medic gets a wounded soldier to shelter and then he dies, it doesn't count. Probably an idea from Arthur Anderson. Makes the books look better.
|
mainer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Then I think we should all be following Global Security's site |
|
At least we're getting a truer number.
|
bloom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
10. that's my impression...n/t |
alcuno
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
lunaville has names listed of military personnel who later died in Kuwait, England, Germany and the US. I believe that their record-keeping is correct; 677 US deaths. http://www.lunaville.org
|
alcuno
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-12-04 09:12 PM
Response to Original message |
11. I compared globalsecurity to lunaville. |
|
The reason for the higher count on globalsecurity appears to be because of names not listed due to lack of notification. The earliest one is April 2. I think they have overlapped listings and believe that the lunaville number is correct; 677 US deaths. http://www.lunaville.org
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 09:00 PM
Response to Original message |