Daily Herald Non-combat Bush agenda propaganda

The propaganda never ends.

Wednesday, 26 March 2008
IN OUR VIEW: Measuring losses in Iraq
Daily Herald
The U.S. has passed a sad milestone in Iraq. The news media have had stories ready for days: "4,000th U.S. death in Iraq." And Americans should mourn every one.

But the numbers must be fully understood if we are to fully honor the fallen. Figures from the Defense Department's Defense Manpower Data Center show that hundreds or thousands of service personnel die every year, whether the United States is fighting a war or not.

Death strikes the armed forces, even in peacetime. In 1980, for example 2,392 active duty personnel died, most in accidents, but also from illness, homicide and suicide.

In the first five years of the Clinton administration, U.S. active duty military deaths totaled 5,119, a thousand more than the first five years of the Iraq war. Only one was from hostile action.

Yet politicians didn't howl about the death toll. TV commentators were silent as the 4,000th and 5,000th deaths were recorded. Activists didn't make demands.

There were headlines, sometimes -- usually small ones -- buried in the back pages. "Navy jet feared lost." "Two die in truck crash on Marine maneuvers." "Authorities investigate slaying of soldier."

Are these non-combat deaths somehow easier to accept? Of course. Combat deaths are viewed differently because (depending on your politics) they "didn't have to happen." Blame is assignable to political leaders.

Karl von Clausewitz was right when he said that war is politics by other means. And so the political objectives of war -- and the politicians who push them -- are properly subject to the roiling waves of domestic opinion.

Certainly, the politics of war are complex; and there are always detractors. Even World War II had its critics and pacifists. Only in hindsight do we all agree that the decision to go to war was correct in 1941. There are simply times that the consequences of avoiding war are worse than the consequences of war itself.

That may be the case with worldwide terrorism. The question is not the number of deaths but the purposes achieved. If the Iraq war helps to keep terrorists off our soil -- and by unseating Saddam Hussein it has, according to a detailed report by the Institute for Defense Analyses -- then it might be seen as a responsible move.

Life in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps is always dangerous. Pilots land airplanes on ships at sea. Helicopters fly at night over rough terrain. Soldiers train with machine guns loaded with live ammo. Sometimes they just drive fast on bad roads or live in unsanitary conditions. And service personnel are largely young men, who tend toward risky behavior whether or not they're wearing a uniform.

Every year hundreds of young men and women will lose their lives in service of our country -- and will do so whether we are in Iraq or not.

We do not downplay the sacrifices made in combat. Accidents are quite different from deployment in places where an enemy is actively trying to kill you. Still, it's good remember that everyone in uniform is risking his or her life, whether in Anbar Province or up at Hill Air Force Base.

The scope of the losses in Iraq, while heart-wrenching, should not be measured against an impossible ideal in which service personnel are invulnerable. It should be measured against the risks we ask our men and women in uniform to take every day in war and peace.

More important, the losses in Iraq must be measured against gains. Yes, the Iraq war has seen blunders and tragedies; so does every war. It has also unseated a murderous tyrant, pushed another to give up nuclear weapons, and sent a fair number of fanatics to an early and well-deserved grave. It has also raised the hope that Iraq can become a foothold for democracy and a beacon of hope in the Mideast.

The best way to honor the 4,000 fallen is to do all that can be done to help their mission succeed.

As President Bush just said, "One day people will look back at this moment in history and say, 'Thank God there were courageous people willing to serve, because they laid the foundations for peace for generations to come.' I have vowed in the past, and I will vow so long as I'm president, to make sure that those lives were not lost in vain."

That is not just the president's responsibility, but also our own.
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/260014/3/

Non-combat deaths, let me count the ways this piece is a POS. First what is not even addressed is that there are 120 veterans committing suicide each and every week that are not counted. If they commit suicide while deployed, they are counted as a non-combat death however if they do it back in the states, they are not included, although they would not have committed suicide if they were not deployed, developed PTSD or other psychological illnesses, suffered the added stresses associated with serial deployments over and over again, were treated better by the DOD and the VA for the wounds they received not to mention treated better by the Bush administration when they are responsible for starting two military operations at the same time without providing for the wounded these two operations would cause.

To report the deaths of military members during the Clinton administration that were non-combat in comparison proves the desperation of the Bush supporters seeking to justify instead of address the problems this administration created.

Now for the big news, this piece also does not include those who have died in Afghanistan. I doubt they remember that Afghanistan is still going on and as of today there have been 490 US lives lost there. By 2001 there were 12 lives lost invading Afghanistan. This was a monumental accomplishment for the military forces in response to the attacks of 9-11 ordered by Osama from his base in Afghanistan. Never once do the Bush supporters mention or include the deaths from Afghanistan in any of their numbers while they consistently attempt to blend Iraq into those attacks when the fact is, there was no connection.

Here are the numbers out of Afghanistan;
2001 12
2002 49
2003 48
2004 52
2005 99
2006 98
2007 117
2008 15 in three months.
http://www.icasualties.org/oef/

Why they would avoid even mentioning Afghanistan deaths is astonishing. Why they would avoid the topic of suicides is even more astonishing but very educational. They do so because that would remind the public that Afghanistan is still going on, the Taliban are still seeking to take back territory and are doing so at the same time NATO took over operations there and have been screaming for more troops, more equipment and more plans to finally, once and for all accomplish the mission there.

I would really like to see where the figures stated about the non-combat deaths during the Clinton Administration came from. But here is an eye opener.

Military Casualty Information
ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY DEATHS. Calendar Years 1980 through 2006 ... of Total Deaths Per 100000 Strength - by Fiscal Year and Military Service, 1980-1999 ...

On more thing to consider is that the numbers out of Iraq, are numbers out of Iraq only. Do you think they are counting the deaths of other military people not deployed into Iraq? Or those deployed to Afghanistan? No. While they want to cover their eyes to the fact they are not even counting any of them yet want us to look at what they want us to see, they think their propaganda will work. The problem with statistics is that they are only good when they include all figures available. If not they are just a bunch of numbers plucked out of thin air. When it comes to the desperation of the 'right" to support Bush instead of the troops, they are full of hot air! When will the lives of the troops matter to these people?
I don't know what the answer to Iraq is any more than I know what the answer to Afghanistan is but denial is not about to settle either occupation. Denial is not going to prevent the suicides in combat or because of combat either. It will not solve the problems the veterans face when they come home. Time to remove the blinders off these people before more and more of our troops pay the prices they should not have to pay.