US Military Casualty Statistics

[Vegas]

Ever have the feeling you're being lied to?

These are some rather eye-opening facts:

As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics.

Annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2004:


1980 ......... 2,392

1981 .......... 2,380

1982 .......... 2,318

1983 .......... 2,465

1984 .......... 1,999

1985 ......... 2,252

1986 .......... 1,984

1987 .......... 1,983

1988 .......... 1,819

1989 .......... 1,636

1990 ......... 1,508

1991 .......... 1,787

1992 ......... 1,293

1993 .......... 1,213

1994 .......... 1,075

1995 ......... 1,040

1996 .......... 974

1997 ......... 817

1998 .......... 826

1999 .......... 795

2000 ......... 774

2001 .......... 890

2002 .......... 1007

2003 .......... 1,410 ----- 534*

2004 .......... 1,887 ----- 900*

2005 ......... 919*

2006 ......... 920*

*Figures are Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom fatalities only

Does this really mean that the loss from the two current conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr.Clinton's presidency? Were we at war?

Now, are you confused when you look at these figures? I was.

Especially when I saw that in 1980, during the reign of President "Nobel Peace Prize, Jimmy Carter" himself, there were 2,392 US military fatalities.

What this clearly indicates is that our media and our liberal politicians pick and choose, and they tend to present only those facts that support their agenda driven reporting.

Another fact our left media and politicians like to slant is that these brave men and women losing their lives are minorities. Wrong again
-

The latest census shows the following:

European descent (white) ..... 69.12%

Hispanic .... 12.5%

African American ..... 12.3%

Asian ..... 3.7%

Native American ..... 1.0%

Other ..... 2.6%

Now, the fatalities over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom are:

European descent (white) .... 74.31%

Hispanic ..... 10.74%

African American ..... 9.67%

Asian ..... 1.81%

Native American .... 1.09%

Other ..... 2.33%

These statistics are published by DOD and may be viewed http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

[LSU]

Does it have economic class of the soldiers? Cuz that's another one thrown around...

[swordfish]

You guys probably didn't realize that many people join because they want too. The free school is just a bonus to them.

edit: Well and you got the losers with DUI that want to avoid child support too.

[Hotpapa666]

You guys probably didn't realize that many people join because they want too. The free school is just a bonus to them.

edit: Well and you got the losers with DUI that want to avoid child support too.

There are. But, I hang out with a lot of Air Force Docs and Dentists and I tell you, with one exception, none of them would be in if it weren't for the money for school, or money during residency.

[Hotpapa666]

Ever have the feeling you're being lied to?

These are some rather eye-opening facts:

As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics.

Annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2004:


1980 ......... 2,392

1981 .......... 2,380

1982 .......... 2,318

1983 .......... 2,465

1984 .......... 1,999

1985 ......... 2,252

1986 .......... 1,984

1987 .......... 1,983

1988 .......... 1,819

1989 .......... 1,636

1990 ......... 1,508

1991 .......... 1,787

1992 ......... 1,293

1993 .......... 1,213

1994 .......... 1,075

1995 ......... 1,040

1996 .......... 974

1997 ......... 817

1998 .......... 826

1999 .......... 795

2000 ......... 774

2001 .......... 890

2002 .......... 1007

2003 .......... 1,410 ----- 534*

2004 .......... 1,887 ----- 900*

2005 ......... 919*

2006 ......... 920*

*Figures are Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom fatalities only

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

This would be more meaningful if it listed ratios of military personel who died/total military personel. I seem to remember that our armed forces have gone through some slashing in the past two decades. It is apples and oranges to compare raw death totals in a very large peace time military to a smaller war time military. Unless the take home message is that "those guys would've died anyway, which, of course, is bullshit.

Comparing the three years previous to 9/11 the average # of deaths is just below 800. The average in 03-04 is just below 1650. An average increase of 850 dead military personel/year.

[Emmanuel]

This would be more meaningful if it listed ratios of military personel who died/total military personel. I seem to remember that our armed forces have gone through some slashing in the past two decades. It is apples and oranges to compare raw death totals in a very large peace time military to a smaller war time military. Unless the take home message is that "those guys would've died anyway, which, of course, is bullshit.

Comparing the three years previous to 9/11 the average # of deaths is just below 800. The average in 03-04 is just below 1650. An average increase of 850 dead military personel/year.
Not to mention the article that talks of the liberal media picking and choosing what statistics they show did just that.

[Hotpapa666]

Not to mention the article that talks of the liberal media picking and choosing what statistics they show did just that.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I asked for some normalized numbers that weren't in the orginal post. You, and the orginal author want to bring partisianship into a a discussion about numbers. I just want to talk about apples in relation to apples, not, apples in relation to oranges as you and the author of Vegas' post want to.

[Emmanuel]

I have no idea what you are talking about. I asked for some normalized numbers that weren't in the orginal post. You, and the orginal author want to bring partisianship into a a discussion about numbers. I just want to talk about apples in relation to apples, not, apples in relation to oranges as you and the author of Vegas' post want to.
Ah, sorry I left out an and there at the end, since the article cherry picked what numbers they used.

[IBC]

What is the point of this? To show that casualties are relatively low? To say that 3600 servicemen dead is no big deal? What of the over 20k wounded? What of the PTSD? What of the other effects from war? If the right wing news media could somehow get a hold of this wouldn't it just blow the cover off the whole thing, and make the war seem a great success? How are we being lied to anyway, Vegas?

[Hotpapa666]

What is the point of this? To show that casualties are relatively low? To say that 3600 servicemen dead is no big deal? What of the over 20k wounded? What of the PTSD? What of the other effects from war? If the right wing news media could somehow get a hold of this wouldn't it just blow the cover off the whole thing, and make the war seem a great success? How are we being lied to anyway, Vegas?


The point is to confuse. Using raw numbers because the normalized numbers make the war and those who lied to bring it look bad. Whereas using just the raw numbers makes the Bushies look not as bad.