IGNORE (OOPS!) SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
Posted by dag at July 27, 2005 12:48 PMHi. I have been visiting the www.urukinfo.net web site and reading their daily Iraq Resistance Report for Events for (day)(date). The three daily print newspapers that I read, the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Jose Mercury News and the Contra Costa Times, have recently dropped any daily listing of U. S. military casualties in Iraq. If you check the Iraq Resistance Report for Events and tally up the numbers of U. S. killed and wounded, the numbers seem to be several times higher than numbers given on any Western news media tallying. Are we being lied to by the Pentagon and the Bush Administration about the numbers of U. S. casualties in Iraq? It wouldn't be the first lie about Iraq.
Comparing these daily numbers would be a good project for someone to do and report on later.
Yours truly,
James K. Sayre
www.bottlebrushpress.com
27 July 2005
Iraq??? Iraq? ummm, never heard of the guy before.
Posted by bush administration officials at July 27, 2005 01:03 PMUnfortunately, the MSM are still toeing the line of "if it's not MY son, father,brother or husband, it really doesn't matter." I remeber Time doing a cover story w/pictures and personal details of US KIA in VietNam during one week in the late 60's that had an incredibly powerful impact on me and my 20-something friends. Imagew the firestorm from the right if any national media had the "gall" to do something similar today. As if the MSM would have the balls...
Posted by David O at July 27, 2005 01:05 PMYeah, Iraq is old news...didn't you get the memo?? Ha. Seriously though this is just sick. The press is tired of reporting on Iraq and it is becoming a "forgotten war" in the media.
Posted by james at July 27, 2005 01:14 PMA group of us here in Tampa have been wearing stickers with the most up-to-date number from icasualties.org. I was shocked at the jump the other day because there was nothing in the papers.
Posted by Susan S at July 27, 2005 01:43 PMThe big story on the morning shows was about dredging a lake in Aruba.
I don't want to demean or diminish the tragedy this must be for her family, but I couldn't help wondering how many soldiers have died unknown since the Natalee Holloway story first broke. Or why is it that the American media and its audience can't get enough of one missing college girl, but couldn't care less about the scores of of men and women we lose every month.
Goddamn, this is shameful.
Posted by Zak at July 27, 2005 01:50 PMThe disturbing thing is I do follow the news like an addict and that's the first I've heard about the 8 on Sunday.
Posted by Ron In Portland at July 27, 2005 02:19 PMI noticed that,in the last few months, ABC's "This Week" has stopped introducing the names of the soldiers killed by saying "This week X number of soldiers were killed in Iraq (and Afghanistan). The Pentagon has released Y of their names". Now ABC only says the last sentence.
Posted by Fruitfly at July 27, 2005 02:20 PMI USUALLY TRY AND WATCH THE END OF "THIS WEEK" ON SUNDAY MORNINGS. STEPHANAPOULOS DOES AN IN MEMORIAM WHICH INCLUDES THE NAMES OF ALL CASUALTIES RELEASED BY THE PENTAGON THE PAST WEEK. IT HAS BEEN RUNNING 17-20 NAMES LATELY. THE MEDIA CASUALTY TOTALS SEEM TO RUN BEHIND THIS COUNT.
Posted by MJ at July 27, 2005 02:21 PMI have been visiting the www.urukinfo.net web site and reading their daily Iraq Resistance Report for Events for (day)(date).
I've been reading similar stuff on some site hosted in Russia (Iraqwar.ru? Can't remember). And I too have been struck by how much larger the Iraq insurgency's reported US casualty numbers are.
I guess I'd be very suspicious of the insurgency's numbers, first of all, because they have 1) every incentive to exaggerate US losses, and 2) somewhat limited ability to verify -- note how often their reports talk about an IED hitting a vehicle "and all occupants were killed." Maybe, maybe not, but I'd bet the US military doesn't often let insurgents inspect the wreck for confirmation.
But clearly there's a huge discrepancy between what the Pentagon is admitting, and what's taking place on the ground.
Let alone what we're being told by the US media...
Posted by stickler at July 27, 2005 02:34 PMWell, they lie about the Iraqi civilian deaths, so why not the Americans?
Posted by Judith at July 27, 2005 03:22 PMMy cynical side is vibrating at a high frequency after this
story about troops coming home next year... They've been there over 2 years and now we are suddenly deciding to reduce the force substantially just in time for mid-term elections... I'd love to see a WH reporter pose the following question: "Scott, is the President prepared to go on the record and state unequivocally that the Republican party will not use the planned reduction in force for political gain?" But nobody will... ;(
Several weeks ago there were reports of US military commanders 'in discussions' with the Sunnis regarding the presence of US forces.
Then the leak of the British memo describing a plan to draw down forces by both the Brits and US 'early in 2006' (immediately denied by BushCo).
Now Rummy is in Iraq, listening to the Iraqi Prime Minister making a strong statement about an urgently needed plan for US withdrawal, reinforced by a Rummy lecture on why the Iraqis need to do more to help themselves - and the US general in charge saying a substantial drawdown could occur before summer if things go well.
I also recall very recently saying we could not have a plan for withdrawal made public since that would allow the insurrectionists to wait us out.
So, the American people can't be told of a plan, but the Iraqis are being promised one.
"Repurposing" the GWOT as something else is just part of this gradual disengagement from Iraq to try to avoid a voter backlash in 06 that could put the House in Dem. hands (unlikely but possible). BushCo's worse fears would be realized to have the House in Dem. hands, able to control the budget and able to conduct investigations (with subpoena and impeachment power in hand).
Soon the Repubs will be attacking Hillary and Kerry for proposing more forces for Iraq as dangerous warmongers pursuing a radical agenda.
Bush was for war and against soft power before he was for soft power and against war. We just thought he was changing his mind, but really he was for a quiet US voice back in 1999/2000 and is just staying the course.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at July 27, 2005 06:19 PMArmed forces casualties don't matter; they are workers and workers don't matter. Investors matter, corporations matter, and executives matter.
Why is anyone surprised that our soldiers are getting the shaft, screwed over with their pay and benefits, re-deployed over and over again, and utterly ignored when they are injured or die? They are workers. Since when did working people ever matter to this administration?
Posted by raisin at July 27, 2005 06:47 PMI apologize for my misplaced post above, which belonged in the thread on the GWOT (where it is now posted).
Posted by JimPortlandOR at July 27, 2005 06:49 PMI remember Time doing a cover story w/pictures and personal details of US KIA in VietNam during one week in the late 60's that had an incredibly
powerful impact on me and my 20-something friends. Imagine the firestorm from the right if any national media had the "gall" to do something similar today. As if the MSM would have the balls...
Remember how pissy the right got when Ted read the list of names on Nightline?
The big story on the morning shows was about dredging a lake in Aruba.
I agree with you completely. Unfortunately, you reminded me of how other news stories have taken over and then left the reality that there are American military fighting and dying by the wayside. The right seems only to point out the sacrifice for political gain.
And raisin, I see you again. I agree, but not in the proletariate (sorry too lazy to check the spelling) kind of way. They don't care because they have never really served and have little if any experience in that line of work. But I must say that you are consistant, if nothing else :) I might suggest that you broaden your view to all of us -- workers or not -- and how this war sinks us. (Sorry, just the pacifist in me peaking out.)
That bit was posted by me the peaking pacifist :)
Posted by caroline at July 27, 2005 08:16 PMSteve - I had my teevees on all weekend as I painted the house -
nope.
Heard nothing about so many dead on Sunday.
In fact, on Mon & Tues, and maybe Wed., icasualties.org only listed six deaths on Jul 24.
It could be that CENTCOM is holding back on the reporting of the dead until a few news cycles pass and there's a fresh WWIP (White Woman in Peril) story.
Posted by old crone at July 28, 2005 10:51 AMThis is the first place I've seen this weekend's KIA news. Thanks----I guess.
So now the troops' deaths aren't reported. Just when you think it can't get any worse............
Posted by euzoius at July 28, 2005 06:25 PM