Re: OT-: Military deaths by year

altar@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:23:15 -0400, Lon VanOstran
<lcvanostran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Military Losses, 1980 thru 2007 Whatever your politics, however you
lean, however you feel about the current administration, this report
should open some eyes.

Military losses,1980 through 2007. As tragic as the loss of any member
of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics:

The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the
armed forces from 1980 through 2006:

1980 ...........2,392 (Carter Year)
1981 .......... 2,380 (Reagan Year)
1984 .......... 1,999 (Reagan Year)
1988 .......... 1,819 (Reagan Year)
1989 .......... 1,636 (George H W Year)
1990 .......... 1,508 (George H W Year)
199120.......... 1,787 (George H W Year )
1992 .......... 1,293 (George H W Year)
1993 .......... 1,213 ( Clinton Year )
1994 .......... 1,075 ( Clinton Year)
1995 .......... 2,465 ( Clinton Year)
1996 .......... 2,318 ( Clinton Year)
1997 ............ 817 ( Clinton Year)
1998 .......... 2,252 ( Clinton Year)
1999 ......... 1,984 ( Clinton Year)
2000 ..........1,983 ( Clinton Year)
2001 ............ 890(George W Year)
2002 ......... 1,007 (George W Year)
2003 ......... 1,410 (George W Year)
2004 ..........1,887 (George W Year)
2005 ............. 919 (George W Year)
2006.............. 920 (George W Year)
2007...............899 (George W Year)

Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,000 deaths

George W years (2001-2006): 7,932 deaths

If you are surprised when you look at these figures, so was I.
These figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the
Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Bill
Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war!

And, I was even more shocked when I read that in 1980, during the reign
of President (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Jimmy Carter, there were 2,392
US military fatalities! I think that these figures indicate that many
members of our Media and our Politicians will pick and choose the
information on which they report. Of course we all know that
they present only those 'facts which su pport their agenda-driven
reporting. But why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth?
Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their
agenda?



Do you want further proof? Consider the latest census, of Americans. It
shows the following FACTS about the distribution of American citizens, by Race:


European descent ......69.12%
Hispanic .............. 12.5%
Black .................. . .12.3%
Asian .................... 3.7%
Native American ... 1.0%
Other.................... 2.6%

Now...
here are the fatalities by Race; over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:

European descent (white) 74.31%
Hispanic ......................... 10.74%
Black ............................... 9.67%
Asian ........... ................... 1.81%
Native American ...........1.09%
Other ............................... 0.33%

I was surprised again... until it became clear to me that the point here
is that our mainstream media continues to spin these figures (for political gain). Nothing more!!!

The biggest killer of troops in peacetime has been the beer and car
key combo. One of the facts of gulf war I, was that the death rate
actually fell as compared to peacetime. Deployed troops do not drink
and drive.

While deaths make the headlines and talking points… A better measure
would be comparing the discharge rates due to medical reasons. That
would show the true impact of combat operations. Nothing brings a war
home like visiting a friend who had his arm blown off.

Tom

" medical reasons" cover a wide area including those who had hidden medical problems when they enlisted. I recall a number of people in basic who were discharged during basic training due to problems such as bed-wetting, depression, TB etc. An enlistment physical is pretty basic, not a very fine-toothed comb.

Why not just be up front and post battle casualties?
LZ
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT| Sobering statistics
    ... >> It doesn't get NEWS ratings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... death comparisons of AMERICANS in Iraq to ANY kind of AMERICAN deaths here in the homeland, ... But, the problem with these daily American body counts in Iraq is that, when compared to the ... But then, why doesn't the so-called OBJECTIVE nightly news report BOTH American body counts here, ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Fatalities/ Military Losses, 1980 through 2006
    ... These figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Bill Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war! ... I think that these figures indicate that many members of our Media and our Politicians will pick and choose the information on which they report. ... American against American for a vote. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT| Sobering statistics
    ... >>> It doesn't get NEWS ratings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... >death comparisons of AMERICANS in Iraq to ANY kind of AMERICAN deaths here in the homeland, ... >But then, why doesn't the so-called OBJECTIVE nightly news report BOTH American body counts here, ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: 151,000 Dead (NDC)
    ... Lancet was right, or even close to right and so we can't consider a lower ... reported, many entire families die and there's nobody to report, apartment ... You have objected to this lower number of deaths in terms that suggest you ... fact I consider it one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in American ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Re: Deadly Restraint- Part II, Hartford Courant
    ... Subject: Lisa was hacked by an All-Jewish Law firm in New York...Re: ... Many Restraint Deaths Unreported ... Don't, Report Says ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)