WOW, Military casualty numbers?

[1439/2000]

Found this on another forum:
________________________________

Subject: Military Casualties

US Military Casualty Statistics -- Very Interesting
These statistics are published by DOD and may be viewed at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
These are some rather eye-opening facts:
Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan , the sacrifice has been enormous. In the time period from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 through now, we have lost a total of 3,140 military personnel.
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" him self, 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 at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

[joecoolfreak]

That is a pretty slanted view of that data. The breakdown by years there is total deaths...not casualties of hostility. Not to mention that it doesn't include data from 2005, 2006, nor any from 2007 yet. So the numbers are missing several thousand. It is interesting to see the numbers though in print.

[Jkuao]

Wow, did you fail basic high school math as well as History and basic logic? Regardless if you're a liberal or a conservative, at least try to put together a salient argument when bringing statistics into play. What you stated means absolutely nothing.

If nothing else, the numbers you posted showed the Clinton years(1993-2001) reduced military deaths each year in office. As such, you proved Clinton was the greatest military president of our time since he reduced the death rate every year he was in office. Of course to do so he simply reduced the active military size each year by 6% in '93 to 1% in '99. Fewer soldiers = fewer accidents and other deaths.

Conversely, the doc you cited listed the number of combat deaths (hostile action) from a Clinton 4% in 2000 to a solid 39% in 2004 meaning Iraq significantly increased the death rate.

A more recent doc also states the number of total wounded (5/15/2006) in Iraq and Afghanistan as 17,469 + 718 = 18,187. I'm not certain but I don't think that number happened in any period during the Clinton administration.

There are plenty of evils of the last two Democrat administrations...killing large numbers of soldiers in a drawn out war isn't one of them. Come back when you figure out a better argument.

Calendar Year Active Duty Total Deaths % of Force
1980 2,050,758 2,392 0.117%
1981 2,093,032 2,380 0.114%
1982 2,112,609 2,318 0.110%
1983 2,123,909 2,465 0.116%
1984 2,138,339 1,999 0.093%
1985 2,150,379 2,252 0.105%
1986 2,177,845 1,984 0.091%
1987 2,166,611 1,983 0.092%
1988 2,121,659 1,819 0.086%
1989 2,112,128 1,636 0.077%
1990 2,046,806 1,508 0.074%
1991 1,943,937 1,787 0.092%
1992 1,773,996 1,293 0.073%
1993 1,675,269 1,213 0.072%
1994 1,581,649 1,075 0.068%
1995 1,502,343 1,040 0.069%
1996 1,456,266 974 0.067%
1997 1,418,773 817 0.058%
1998 1,381,034 826 0.060%
1999 1,367,838 795 0.058%
2000 1,372,352 774 0.056%
2001 1,384,812 890 0.064%
2002 1,411,200 1,007 0.071%
2003 1,423,248 1,410 0.099%
2004 1,411,287 1,887 0.134%


Calendar Year Total Deaths Hostile Action % by Hostile Action
1980 2,392 174 7.274%
1981 2,380 145 6.092%
1982 2,318 108 4.659%
1983 2,465 18 0.730%
1984 1,999 1 0.050%
1985 2,252 111 4.929%
1986 1,984 2 0.101%
1987 1,983 37 1.866%
1988 1,819 90 4.948%
1989 1,636 23 1.406%
1990 1,508 74 4.907%
1991 1,787 147 8.226%
1992 1,293 109 8.430%
1993 1,213 86 7.090%
1994 1,075 83 7.721%
1995 1,040 67 6.442%
1996 974 1 0.103%
1997 817 42 5.141%
1998 826 25 3.027%
1999 795 37 4.654%
2000 774 31 4.005%
2001 890 42 4.719%
2002 1,007 17 1.688%
2003 1,410 344 24.397%
2004 1,887 737 39.057%


http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22452.pdf