What is the REAL Number of Casualties in Iraq?

[jackstraw45]

As someone else pointed out last week, there is NO way that 100% of wounded recover.

So the 600+ number is those who are killed in the field. How many have died in the hospital from their wounds?

Why isn't that number reported or even REQUESTED by the media?

Puzzling.

[nostamj]

1. oh, i think it's *requested*

bushies just won't say.

in baghdad today, 7 dead (so far) 24 (at least) wounded.

what does 'wounded' mean?... so conveniently vague. dismembered? brain damage? a boo-boo?

did the US lose 7 or 31 troops today?

it's sickening

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

2. The media don't care

They rather talk about some 'shock n awe' campaign.

This website might help some: http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx

[IndianaGreen]

8. 613 dead and 3,466 wounded according to Lunaville

The count does not include the number of those that were taken stateside with psychological problems.

[xultar]

3. I heard 605 Combat related this morning around 9am. n/t

[jackstraw45]

4. yet that's not a real number

There's no such thing as a 100% recover rate.

How many men and women have been lost in the hospital from their wounds a day, week or month after injury?

[Toucano]

5. Why do you conclude that those who die after treatment

aren't included in the 605 number?

I don't think the 605 number is "number killed instantly", but I could be wrong.

Just asking, cause I don't know.

[jackstraw45]

6. I don't for sure

but I keep a close eye on the number and it always seems to go up by the total number of killed THAT day. If it DOES include those who pass later in hospital, I'd like to know too.

It just doesn't appear to, to me at least.

[Toucano]

7. That's interesting.

I recall hearing reports from earlier in the fiasco where there would say, "Three US Soldiers were killed today and four were injured..." type of thing.

I don't think I ever heard them specifically say that someone who was injured earlier had later died, but if you've been tracking the numbers closely, you should be able to determine it.

I've no doubt the number are being monkeyed with, but I wasn't sure that it was happening in the way you think it may be happening.

It seems their big push now is to distinguish between "hostile deaths" and "non-hostile deaths". I hear that bandied about a lot lately.

Of course that doesn't matter one bit to me. I don't care if a soldier is blown up or trips and falls, dead is dead. And he or she wouldn't be in that position if it weren't for a massive lie.