MSNBC - Pentagon: U.S. military death toll in Iraq war reaches 2,500

[sinkingfeeling]

No story as yet.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/

Edit: Story is here now: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13337155/

18,490 maimed so far...

[sabra]

1. *'s "good week" just took a turn....

[milhsur]

24. You won't hear the truth.

[RoseMead]

2. I always love seeing the excitement over a nice round number

Soldier 2499 and soldier 2501 just aren't as interesting, are they? :sarcasm:

What I want to know is, when more US soldiers have died in Iraq than the number of people killed in 9/11, will that be enough? I mean, the Iraqis and Afghanis have paid that price multiple times already. Bush always takes it back to 9/11 when pontificating about the war, so - how much death is going to be enough?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. Getting close. 2752

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.deaths/


And no, it won't be enough.

[RoseMead]

8. Including Shanksville and the Pentagon

the total number is 2986, according to Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks

And you're right, it will never be enough, because this war was never about 9/11 to begin with.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CJCRANE]

41. 3,000 American dead in Iraq will be the turning point.

Yes, I know that's not fair on all the Iraqi casualities or American wounded but that's the way the MSM/public mood works.

On edit: not "turning point" but "enough is enough" moment.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. The filthy scum like Limbaugh will try to make light of this story

They'll throw around numbers to make these terrible deaths look like "It isn't so bad compared to how many people we liberated, how many Hussein killed", etc.

The warhawks are so brave and bold because they have no personal stake this awful war.

[987654321]

16. I never understood that myself.

I don't get how some people justify the death count among Americans and Iraqis from this war by saying how it's far less than how many Hussein killed? I mean, it is a thoroughly irrelevant and even disgusting comparison to make.

So let's see, Hussein is the bad buy, and Bush is the good guy. Hussein is a bad guy who has killed people, and that is wrong because he is a bad guy. Bush is a good guy who has killed people, but that is okay because he is a good guy. It makes no sense to me.

Unfortunately too many people, in my opinion, have learned values and morals from watching Rambo and Terminator movies, where they applaud the good guy for blowing up and destroying things in order to stop the bad guy from blowing up and destroying things.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hand]

28. Man...

You have got to be the dumbest-ass provocateur ever come down the pike. I'd suggest you keep moving...

[Quantess]

29. I can't believe he's still here....

the tombstone is imminent.:popcorn:

[saigon68]

33. adios enjoy your stay

it will be very short

[milhsur]

27. The Stakes

The stakes here are posterity, yours and mine. What would you not do to protect your children and grandchildren?

[CJCRANE]

40. That's a non-sensical argument -

how does attacking a country based on a lie, then dismantling its secular government so that it falls into sectarian violence and religious fundamentalism protect your children and grandchildren?

There's 2,500 American soldiers who won't even have any more children and won't see any grandchildren.

[ckramer]

5. Goooooood Moooorning ...

Vietnam!

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. I wonder how Bush & Pickles

will celebrate tonight?

[MaineDem]

7. Reuters: Pentagon says military deaths in Iraq hit 2,500

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-06-15T123646Z_01_WAT005833_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-TOLL.xml&src=rss

...

In addition, the Pentagon said 18,490 U.S. troops have been wounded in the war, which began in March 2003 with a U.S.-led invasion to topple President Saddam Hussein.

Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed.

[Roland99]

9. A big shout out to Bush and Cheney >>>>>>>>>

F U C K ... Y O U ! ! !

[rodeodance]

10. are we aiming for an 'eye for an eye' target (# of dead on 9/11)????

[RoseMead]

11. We've far exceeded eye-for-an-eye

in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Our policy has been more like, "You poked out my eye! In retribution, I shall now poke your eye and the eyes of all your family and friends and neighbors and a bunch of people you don't even know but who happen to live in your country also. And to show how tough I am about this I will also poke out my other eye, so there!"

Except, sadly, the people of Iraq and Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11. That's a fact that can't be stated enough, apparently.:-(

[zulchzulu]

12. A moment of silence at Noon today from DU!

We should all do this...I will.

[thereismore]

13. "The extreme left wing of the Democrat party celebrates 2500 deaths"

I can hear them now, the RW bubbleheads on teevee. :puke:

[saigon68]

34. Fuck them they are Irrelevant like this clown

[barb162]

14. very, very sad news

[ClintonTyree]

15. "It's just a number".

That's the official White House response from Tony "Snowjob", bush's mouthpiece. :eyes: I can think of another number. O, the number of times bush has been elected by the people of this country. Here's another number......20 to life, which is the sentence I hope bush gets when his reign of terror is over and a court of law finds him guilty of his myriad offenses. :mad:

[lastliberalintexas]

19. That 20 to life better be for 2500 *consecutive* sentences

I just hope all these families can find peace. :(

[LibDemAlways]

39. The corporate whores will never replay

that soundbite. That's one that, if exposed, would piss off a lot of people - including a lot of the 29%ers.

[987654321]

17. All I can think of...

Is that somewhere someone's daddy or mommy, husband or wife, son or daughter, will not be going home again. When the numbers of the dead grow, regardless of whether they are American or Iraqi, I always want to go hug one of my kids. I hold them and pray for those who will never get to hold their loved ones ever again, especially for the children.

[1620rock]

18. Yes, and the 18,490 wounded, and the God knows how many...

...with psychotic problems...discusting.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[987654321]

32. Excuse me?

What in the hell are you talking about?
I was speaking of the plight of the families of those killed in war.
Sure, go set off your bombs because they set off their bombs because someone before them set off their bombs.
You speak of history, and I ask you this; If war is the way to secure peace, then how come there is such little peace in the world with all of the wars that have been going on throughout the history of man?

[FighttheFuture]

20. These numbers are low, anyway. All hocus-pocus....

accounting to try to keep them down. If people only new the real numbers... not that it would any reporting anyway!

[Roland99]

21. Oh, come on. Don't drag that crap up again.

[FighttheFuture]

22. Oh? You believe these numbers? If so, I have a bridge to...

sell you!!

[Roland99]

23. Give it a rest. Tinfoil hatters like yourself have been a dime a dozen

and everytime it's the same thing (pure conjecture).

Go check out icasualties.org

[FighttheFuture]

31. ...and gullible fools like you are apparently endless! Here's why...

The site you refer to is a good site for OFFICIAL figures released by the Pentagon and British military. Note the "official" here and also note "pentagon". That is all very much controlled by Bu$hitCo whom have been suppressing and changing the methodology of counting casualties to lessen them for quite some time. Let state the obvious: Bu$hitCo LIES. I know, you must find this hard to believe, because when have Bu$hitCo ever lied???

Perhaps you should ask: when have they ever told a truth that would cast them in a bad light?!

I have researched this site and they do a lot of work to make sure this is fairly accurate. I suspect, however, that it is higher, perhaps double, from what I have read over the years. The wounded counts are also very suspect, and these have been fudged by playing with the counting methodology.

Now you can be an dupe and call me a "tinfoil hatter" while dancing around the 2500 grave marker all you want. I have no doubts the reality is the counts are much higher on causalities and wounded and it will be years before we really know the truth of it, if ever.

For example, from a 2003 article: United States military casualties in Iraq are running at more than twice the number most Americans have been led to believe they are. The public is largely unaware of a high number of accidents, suicides and other non-combat deaths.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/04/1059849347169.html

Or this July 2005: article: Official US. government reports on soldiers under US command killed in Iraq are so fragmented that they account for less than half of the total number, ...
...which reveal that more than 4,076 troops under US command have been killed in 799 days of battle.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9437.htm

[Roland99]

35. *yawn*...just confusing casualties with deaths

And, as I said, go to http://icasualties.org

They covered this "story" and debunked all of the BS claims.


Go through the list of all of the names and find the hundreds or thousands of others you claim were killed and ask why their families and friends aren't raising 10 kinds of hell.



:eyes:

[FighttheFuture]

36. You're missing the point--no surprise--the deaths are mischaracterized...

so as to be not included in the Iraqi war deaths, but rather in "military accidents", non-combat related, etc. Non-death counts are even much more askew.

In the end, it is the results of the Iraq war, and many of these re-categorizations did not occur in past conflicts. Bu$hitCo is shaving it every way they can, and are greatly helped by suckers such as yourself.

You can trust icasualties.org all you want. Nothing against them, but I trust nothing having to do with this war and Bu$hitCo. Perhaps you should try out a "tinfoil hat". In these times, it would serve you better than your lemming like acquiescence to facts in dispute!

[Roland99]

37. Allow me to REPEAT >>>>>>

Go through the list of all of the names and find the hundreds or thousands of others you claim were killed and ask why their families and friends aren't raising 10 kinds of hell.

Here's a list of all the names:
http://icasualties.org/oif/US_NAMES.aspx

Go ahead and post ONE NAME not on that list.



Digest this, too

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/19/13126/2340

[FighttheFuture]

38. A little quote from the letter from icasualties.org to kos...

<i>So there's no truth to the rumor that if you die outside of Iraq, the DOD automatically ignores you. Yes, occasionally it does ... especially if the death happens months after the soldier gets back from Iraq (Lynn's husband knows of 5 men that this applies to). And I am told that occasionally Special Forces deaths may be hush-hush.</i>

Wounded are much, much higher and they apply every method to not count them from the Iraqi war theater. As discussed here: http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

Total Wounded: Official: 18490 Estimated: 20000 - 48100

Also, from March, 2006: U.S. lacks mechanism to accurately track troops wounded in Iraq
....
When Michael White, a database/Web designer for a Georgia cell phone company, heard conflicting news reports about casualties in Iraq, it bothered him enough to create www.icasualties.org, a Web site that has become a national reference point for war statistics. White, who calls the continuous effort to keep up the site a "labor of conscience," does so on his own, for no compensation.

A few other people at other locations in the country and the world have joined him in combing through all available data to get the very best information. White has been working for the past two months on a way to pinpoint the number of wounded because he will not post any casualty without verification.

"The DoD says its does not release the names of the wounded out of respect for the individuals," said White, who searches a variety of places to find names of the wounded and is struggling to nail down a reliable method of gathering such information. "I've been trying to codify exactly what we know about names of wounded and how they were wounded and where they were wounded. Boy, it's just eating me up."

The DoD Wounded in Action numbers confound him for other reasons, too....

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/courier00.html

Or from 2004: The Forgotten Casualties of War: Over 17,000 U.S. Troops Wounded

Mark Benjamin, UPI Investigations editor. He has been closely following the hidden US casualties from the Iraq war. ...
AMY GOODMAN: How do you get these figures, and why aren’t they being more reported?

MARK BENJAMIN: You have to ask the right questions. If you go to the Pentagon, and you take their own definitions of casualties and ask you them the right questions, they will give you some answers....


http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/10/1537224

[newspeak]

42. some days I just get so fekken fed up

A couple of years ago after the war began, I was standing in line and we were talking about how wrong the war was, and an elderly woman just shrugged her shoulders and said nonchalantly "that's what happens in war." There are some callous, apathetic sociopaths in this country. Yet, "BlackHawk Down" comes on at the theaters and it's "see, Clinton left those men behind." Definitely delusional. The media has some of the willing worried and concerned by one white young woman, but don't care about those over in Iraq or Afghanistan. Some days I feel the majority in this country are nothing but hypnotized zombies, only caring and feeling about those issues or people, that the whorish media tell them to. OKAY, BOYS AND GIRLS, REPEAT AFTER ME-SADDAM HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11--OBL HATED SADDAM--SADDAM HATED AL QUAEDA--THERE ARE MORE TERRORISTS TODAY THAN BEFORE 9/11, DUE TO IRAQ. And, tell me clueless ones when you finally catch on to what is really going on. If you really want to know about the history of Al Quaeda, then read some of the articles from the Nation back during the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan. Why was our government funding Al Quaeda, instead of the Afghanistan factions who were fighting the Soviets? Why was our government funding a band of extreme fundamentalists who came from different countries, most were not from Afghanistan. Bhutto warned the US that this would come back and bite us. But, do those who still reap even more profits and power from today's scenario, really care how this whole sordid affair has culminated? The majority of the people in the world are just pawns in a fek fest power grab. And, I weep for the victims of this maniacal chess game.