I was one who did see the TBR site and stop at your warning. The question I ask now, What about the numbers of soldier that commit suicide in Iraq reported as?
Army Sent Mentally Ill Troops to Iraq
by Mark Benjamin at Veterans for Peace
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Army_sent_mentally_031304.htm
not stupid,
All suicides in Iraq and one at Walter Reed have been reported. We are trying to compile a list of soldiers that have returned from Iraq, left the service and since committed suicide. We know of at least 3 in the US and one in England.
Posted by Michaelw at June 19, 2005 12:04 PMExcellent post, excellent point. With all the verifiable lies and missteps in this aweful war, we only do ourselves [those of us against the war] damage when we allow gross exaggerations or falsehoods to go unchecked.
Thanks,
Posted by dK at June 19, 2005 01:02 PMThanks Michaelw. I do check your site. I think the numbers are too much. As in the DSM hearing it was said that cheney said the same at the end of GW1.
The raw story is now saying: Brits knew Iraq raids illegal
Not that it really matters, but I've read different things on the criteria for how the count is done. Are these solely battlefield casualties or does it include those that are shipped out and later die as a result of injuries?
Does it include those that have died due to non-combat related incidents?
I've never found a clear, reliable answer.
Posted by Simp the Biodiesel Pimp at June 19, 2005 02:07 PMI talked to someone today with the National Guard and they said that WIA (wounded in action) includes everything from cuts to dead. This may be where the confusion is happening. What I'm not sure of is whether they are moving the status of WIA who died to KIA's.
Posted by ga6thdem at June 19, 2005 02:52 PMYou should be reminded that the US military lied in initially underreporting casualties in Vietnam by a factor of around 3. There have been articles in the past year (not in TBR) directly quoting medical people @ Landstuhl, which, if one takes the normal range of wounded to dead, would indicate serious underreporting of the number of dead from Iraq.
Posted by Dick Fitzgerald at June 19, 2005 04:25 PMThere are 300,000 to 500,000 vets roaming the streets, homeless. 1/2 are severely mentally ill. About 40% of those in prison are mentally ill, in for crimes committed while mentally ill, many of whom are vets. A growing portion of these two populations are the vets from Iraq II. The primary reason for Iraq II vets to be homeless is that their jobs are gone when they get home, and/or housing is unaffordable for the money they do make. These are as important to consider as battlefield casualties, IMHO.
Posted by phidipides at June 19, 2005 07:12 PMThe Wounded who die in hospitals in the US and Germany are counted. The inforamtion is available on the site for those who actually bother to look.
You can see a list of these post Iraq victims on the detail page by applying the filter country of death (select "USA" or "Germany"). The totals by country of death can be seen by going to the Metrics page and selecting view totals by country of death.
Michaelw: I checked the country of death numbers at both pages. They agree that there have been 24 total deaths in Germany.
Over at Seeing the Forest, I posted the number of casualties in Iraq from Global Security.org US Casualties In Iraq in a comment to Dave's post 9,000 Americans Dead in Iraq?
How do you explain 7,767 wounded GIs evacuated from Iraq and only 24 deaths in German hospitals? Because of their kevlar jackets, the percentage of traumatic head injuries is higher than in any other war. I think 24 deaths is way too low, no matter how good the medical facilities in Germany are.
I have no idea what to make of 10,452 cases of disease casualties that were excavated from Iraq. Depleted uranium exposure perhaps?
9,000 deaths out of total injury evacuations of 18, 219 is definitely too high. 24 deaths on German soil looks equally ridiculous.
Posted by Gary Boatwright at June 20, 2005 12:54 AMThe field hospitals in Iraq are very excellent, and they help to ensure that they are sending stable patients to Germany. 24 sounds reasonable (though sad) to me.
Posted by Andy at June 20, 2005 01:31 AMClearly, all wounded Iraq med evac's do not die. They don't all live either. What would be nice is if we had a government that simply told the truth. That would clear things up, wouldn't it? But instead we have a government that orders the bodies of returned GI's to be hidden from public view. We have a government that has lied about every facet of the Iraq War, and continues to do so daily. Whether the number is 24,or 7000, the plain fact is that if BushCo were operating out in the open....we'd know the truth, instead of rumor-mongering and speculation. p.s. by "out in the open" I refer to information easily accessed by everyone...not obscure DOD websites that have to be navigated to uncover an easily manipulated version of the story (DOD- that would be Rumsfeld's dept. He's an honest guy, right?)
Posted by T2 at June 20, 2005 06:47 AM24 sounds reasonable (though sad) to me.
let's see. 10,000 soldiers are medivac'ed; a quarter of 1% die. look, i know you want to put a smiley face on your war, but a quarter of one percent? come on
Posted by benjoya at June 20, 2005 02:05 PMI think someone on this website should check the facts before they go blasting someone else.
Talk about the government and the way it list casualties has been going around for quite some time and there is a lot of doubt about the numbers they present. Even the occupation resistance has questioned the government's count on casualties.
I read an article that said medics were told to list casualties as wounded as long as they were still warm. And how can anyone forget what the government did in Vietnam to the casualty figures there, so it's not so far-fetched that they would be lying about casualty figures in Iraq.
Posted by Ron at June 21, 2005 11:34 AMClearly, all wounded Iraq med evac's do not die. They don't all live either. What would be nice is if we had a government that simply told the truth. That would clear things up, wouldn't it?
That's the whole point. Bush has lied about everything he's said since taking office except his comments to the "Have More's" that they are his "base."
Is the death toll really 9,000? Maybe not, but it is probably much huigher than the admitted number of 1700.
How can you tell when Bush is lying?
His lips move.
Posted by D at June 22, 2005 04:15 AM