73,846 US Iraq War Soldiers Dead How they manipulated the numbers to fool you.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Well no offense intended but both of you have sold your humanity for your words and therefore are worthless in the eyes of all.

ad

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
I think you need to review the PDF file and revise your post title, OP.

According to the pdf file this was from May 2007, and cover all service member deaths from 1990 to 2007 - a 17-year period.

The deaths directly related to those wars is here;
Operation Iraqi Freedom: 4770
Operation Enduring Freedom/Afghanistan: 2444

The way you worded your OP, you are making the claim that all service member deaths from 1990 forward have been due to those wars which is not true. 73,846 deaths over a 17-year period is crazy high, though, no matter what.

edit to add:
not blaming you for the post title OP, as that is what this Web site called it, but it's still wrong, 73,846 deaths were not caused by Iraq war alone but all deaths over a 17-year period

edit on 5-5-2011 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)

Your corrections are right, however, the true numbers likely lie somewhere in-between. It is true that we have stopped counting deaths which don't occur "on the ground" in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., as war dead the way we did in Vietnam. If you're being evacuated, or die from your injuries a month later in a military hospital, you "don't count" toward the body count. The 73k number likely includes many which should be counted as war dead, but also likely includes many deaths unrelated to Iraq/Afghanistan. The real number is far higher than 4,700, but is also lower than the 73k total.

reply to post by SirMike

Those're very reliable results too. Sandia did an extensive test on it, very professional. It seems this has been disproven in every possible way. I don't see any reason to doubt them. My opinion is people who're already against the war are using the DU as just another excuse to doomcast.

As is stated here, NO cases of cancer have been linked to DU:
fhp.osd.mil...

I'll quote since I'm a nice guy:

...Although there is a chance of developing cancer from a radioactive material, no human cancer of any type has been seen as a result of exposure to either natural or depleted uranium...

I myself have never seen a credible report where people are harmed by DU. There're claims. For example, they will say that somebody in the area of DU tested positive for it and then say that they had numerous cancers or rare diseases, but then they DON'T prove a connection between the two. That's what I mean by credible. There're lots of claims, but no proof. That's the truth.

I don't think there ever will be, either. The studies so far are very trustworthy.

I wouldnt be surprised. They will feed all types of lies that the media will also voice, so they dont lose support for their wars. It barely a drop in the bucket as far as their dirty tricks go.

reply to post by bsbray11


For example, you step on an IED, you get taken to a hospital in a neighboring country where you immediately die, you are not counted as a casualty of war. Etc.

I don't think most understand that .

In todays world of MSM , you need to listen to the words used and not the message to find any bit of truth.
"### troops were killed "IN IRAQ" this month" That is not a lie. ### died in route, or on arrival in neighboring countrys are NOT added to the total.
It's just like the unemployment numbers , 9% unemployment, if your not on the books( getting benefits) your not counted, so the other 6% who have exhausted their benefits are not added to the total.