Escalating Casualty Rates are “On the March”

By DHinMI

George W. Bush loves the term “is on the March.” Freedom is on the march.  Increasing budget deficits are on the march. Democracy is on the march. Liberty is on the march.

I’ll bet, however, that he won’t crow that rising American casualty rates in Iraq are on the march.

Today the media will spend a bit of time talking about how the death total for American troops in Iraq has passed 1,500. That’s a lot of soldiers, but it still far less than the soldiers lost in Vietnam in just 1968, when 16,895 American soldiers, sailors and airmen died in Vietnam. But even by other Vietnam comparisons, these casualty figures are getting worse. For instance, starting in October, 1957, when the first American soldier was killed in Vietnam, it took over 8 years—not until November, 1965—before American deaths in Vietnam surpassed 1,500. And the last 46 months of active American involvement in the war in Southeast Asia—from August, 1971 through May, 1975—we had fewer casualties (1,449) than we’ve now had in less than 24 months in Iraq.

But what is most troubling about the cold figures of American dead and wounded in Iraq are the trends. The folks who run the site Iraq Coalition Casualty Count have charts of dead and wounded by month, and the rate of both dead and wounded has been increasing for many months. Beginning with the first full calendar month of the war (April 2003), the first year—which misses most of the combat in occupying the country—saw 539 Americans killed in action (KIA) and 2,863 wounded. For the last 12 months of figures—for KIA, from February 2005 back through March 2004, for wounded it’s January 2005 through February 2004—the totals are 949 KIA, and a staggering 8,144 wounded.

In the first year after the defeat of Saddam’s military, about 3 American soldiers were killed and 15 wounded over an average two-day period. In the last year, the casualty rates jumped to about 5 Americans killed and 44 wounded over an average two-day period. And it continues to get worse; in the last six months, over an average two-day period in Iraq 6 Americans soldiers are killed and about 50 are wounded, often with horrific, disfiguring and paralyzing wounds that will haunt them the rest of their lives.

Yes, escalating casualty rates are on the march.  The problem is it's hard to march to Taps. 

 

Comments

[NG]

Someone with a pretty good handle about this US war thingy and a pretty good brain function at least at that time had something to say about such things!

http://www.pbs.org/greatspeeches/timeline/j_kerry_s.html

An appropo Excerpt:

"Each day, to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam, someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."

_______________

Where is the leadership?
We're here to ask where are McNamara,
Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others?

_______________

We are asking Americans to think about that, because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? We are here in Washington to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying, as human beings, to communicate to people in this country--the question of racism, which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions, such as the use of weapons: the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage at the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free-fire zones; harassment-interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions; the bombings; the torture of prisoners; all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is part and parcel of everything.

[Meteor Blades]

Depressing but essential post, DHinMI. We've been listening since the summer of 2003 about how "desperate" the insurgents are, of how they are on their last legs. This puts that propaganda into perspective. And the right says we who opposed the war hate the troops? Where are their pundits on this terrble milestone? Still talking about how more Americans are killed in Detroit (L.A., Baltimore) everyday than in Iraq?

For perspective, here's some history.

..........................Combat.....Other......Wounded...Total
Revolutionary War...4,435......Unk........6,188.....10,623
War of 1812...........2,260......Unk........4,505.......6,765
Mexican War.........1,733......11,550.....4,152.....17,435
Civil War:
Union...............110,070.....249,458...275,175....634,703
Confederate........74,524.....164,000...137,000....375,524
Indian Wars..........2,900.......Unk.......Unk.........Unk
Span-Am War..........385.......2,061.....1,662......4,108
World War I........53,513......63,195...204,002....320,710
World War II......292,131.....115,185...670,846..1,078,162
Korean War.........33,686.......2,830...103,284....136,935
Vietnam War.......47,369......10,799...153,303....211,471
Gulf War.................148.........145.......467........760

The combat dead in the Indian Wars is an utter approximation that no historian is willing to stand by. Some put the figure at 1,000 even though St. Clair lost 637 in the 1790-95 Miami campaign alone. The total could be twice as many as included here. The Civil War statistics are hotly disputed to this day. Problems arise, particularly with Confederate dead, and with regard to whether prisoners of war should be included. The difference is not insignificant, the number of total dead claimed by some is 30,000 more than the total claimed by others. Most of these statistics come from "Principal Wars in which the US Participated: US Military Personnel Serving and Casualties" prepared by Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports. US Department of Defense Records. The Korean War “other” category comes from href=”http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/news/2000/000609_aln_kor.htm”>here.

Then there’s the cost. This is a rough approximation using 1990 dollars. In parentheses is the inflation-adjusted cost per capita:

The Revolution (1775-1783) - $1.2 billion ($342.86)
War of 1812 (1812-1815) - $0.7 billion ($92.11)
Mexican War (1846-1848) - $1.1 billion ($52)
Civil War (1861-1865) - $44.4 billion ($1,294)
Spanish American War (1898) - $6.3 billion ($84)
World War I (1917-1918) - $196.5 billion ($1,911)
World War II (1941-1945) - $2.09 trilliion ($15,655)
Korea (1950-1953) - $263.9 billion ($1,739)
Vietnam (1964-1972) - $346.7 billion ($1,692)
Gulf War (1990-1991) - $61.1 billion ($235)

[Mike S]

Just yesterday I heard Abizaid(sp?) say that the insurgancy is dying down. His evidence? They didn't stop the election.

You would think that just once someone would think, "gee, the last time we tried or said such and such, we were proven wrong." Instead we get the same thing over and over again. History only repeats itself because no one is smart enough to figure out what went wrong the first 10,000 times and change it.

[Demosophist]

Actually no one who actually knows anything about what's going on in Iraq is pessimistic enough to believe that a popular insurgency is growing, even in the Sunni area, at a rate comparable to Vietnam. In addition, there's no political reason to believe such a thing. (At the very worst, we'd just surround the Sunni area and cut them loose.) Even more telling is the fact that according to the people fighting this insurgency (not just the brass, but the grunts) support for the "insurgency" in Iraq actually peaked some time ago and has been dropping precipitously ever since. The turning point occurred when Bin Laden published a widely-read letter appointing Zarqawi as the "Emir" of the insurgency. It wasn't lost on Iraqis that most of the people killed in these attacks weren't Americans but Iraqis, so here was a Saudi telling a Jordanian to kill Iraqis... and things have been going south for the insurgency ever since. Of course the enemy will fight with greater intensity when they see the end nearing, but right now is probably the peak period for US casualties... which makes it comparable in intensity to Vietnam 1968.

And since you guys are really on the side of the US troops, that makes you really happy... right? Right? Just couldn't deny you the good news.

Not to worry. Coup soon in Syria. Cedar Revolution. Etc. All the best.