janelane wrote:
] Jello wrote:
] ] janelane wrote:
] ] ] Jello wrote:
] ] ] ] 10,706 total U.S. casualties. Why don't we hear
] THIS
] ] ] ] number more?
] ] ]
] ] ] ...because you made it up?
] ] ]
] ] ] 1380 (coalition deaths) + 9236 (wounded US troups) = 10706
]
] ] ] [unit error]
] ] ]
] ] ] In the same vein as your comment, however, I have noticed
] a
] ] ] major increase in the number of human interest-related war
]
] ] ] stories in the news (e.g. this soldier died the same day
] his
] ]
] ] ] son was born, etc.).
] ] ]
] ] ] -janelane
] ]
] ] Okay, okay. Woops. But I didn't "make it up." A casualty
] ] includes a serious injury that takes a soldier out of
] combat.
] ] Dead + Injured = Casualties. It should have read 1,234 +
] 9236
] ] = 10,470 total U.S. casualties. That number is huge.
]
] ] Seems like it would be quoted.
] ]
] ] If a guy loses a leg, or takes schrapenel in the ass, or
] is
] ] blinded... isn't that as significant as a death? 10K
] lives
] ] seriously and horrendously altered is pretty damned
] ] significant. But its like only the dead count.
]
] Again, you're a little off-target with your argument.
] Blindness (or any handicap) doesn't equate to DEATH. My great
] uncle was blind from birth and lived one of the most
] interesting lives of anyone I've ever known. He worked in a
] broom factory when he was a kid (in the 20's), he learned
] almost every popular dance from the 20's through the 60's, and
] he lived to be a blissful 86. Acidus can attest to the fact
] that I'm no buddy of blue-hairs, but you gotta give the guy
] some credit.
]
] ] I think its fucked up. Its like noone cares about the
] ] injured. They're just forgotten and left to the VA.
]
] It is fucked up. It's fucked up that "Our Leader" uses those
] wounded individuals for photo-ops. It takes awhile for the
] way we conduct ourselves _during_ a war to catch up to the way
] we conduct ourselves _after_ a war. How many benefits were
] passed just to encourage the enlistment numbers? How many do
] you think will arise if Bush starts another 2 wars? I hope
] that, in the next administration, the horrors of war will be
] better dealt even while they are simultaneously being further
] obscured.
]
] -janelane
]
] If there really had been a Mercutio, and if there really were
] a Paradise, Mercutio might be hanging out with teenage Vietnam
] draftee casualties now, talking about what it felt like to die
] for other people's vanity and foolishness.
] --Kurt Vonnegut's Hocus Pocus p151

I don't mean that blindness is death. It certainly isn't. But it is certainly a very traumatizing casualty. Its another soldier thats had parts of him mutilated in combat by flying bits of metal. And we've had 10 times as many casualties as we have deaths. Which is pretty important, especially since our troops are pretty well armored be it in a Kevlar vest (assuming they have them by now) or in vehicles. The number of casualties tells us more about the beating our troops are taking than does the number of deaths.

I think that were we still employing Vietnam era technology, if soldiers and marines had on Flak jackets instead of Kevlar, or drove Jeeps instead of armored Hum-Vs, then there would be many more deaths. Focusing on the number of deaths instead of the number of casualties understates the thickness of the "shit" in Iraq.

RE: Casualties List at CNN.com