More Than 1,000 U.S. Soldiers Wounded in Afghanistan in Last 3 Months

[bigtree]

Sunday, November 01, 2009

About 4,000 U.S. soldiers have been wounded in Afghanistan since the invasion of 2001—but a quarter of those have come just in the last three months of fighting. Expanded military operations coupled with a Taliban offensive and more powerful improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have caused casualties to skyrocket recently, even surpassing the rate American troops experienced during the “surge” in Iraq two years ago. In mid-2007, 600 soldiers were wounded in Iraq each month out of about 150,000 personnel, whereas monthly casualty figures in Afghanistan have been averaging 350 out of a total force of only 68,000.

IEDs have become a serious problem for American soldiers, even after all that the military learned trying to defend against them in Iraq. More than 1,000 of the roadside bombs either exploded or were found in Afghanistan in August, more than double the total for any other month of the war. IEDs now account for from 70% to 80% of U.S. and coalition casualties, and they are so powerful that even the latest mine-resistant vehicles are unable to protect soldiers from the blasts.

http://www.allgov.com/ViewNews/More_Than_1000_US_Soldiers_Wounded_in_Afghanistan_in_Last_3_Months_91101


Statistics from Britain-

The statistics, from Britain's Ministry of Defence, show its troops fought 3630 battles against the Taliban between June 2006 and February this year. During that period, 181 soldiers were killed while 646 were wounded, the ministry said. The total number of British troops wounded in action, as of October 15, was 954.

The figures reveal that from August 2008 to February this year, the last period for which data is available, troops were ''in contact'' with the enemy on average 200 times a month - almost double the number of attacks compared with the previous seven months.

The figures also show that the number of contacts, or attacks, have increased in line with the number of troops in Helmand. In December 2006 there were 3500 British troops in Afghanistan. Now there are 9500.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/british-fight-taliban-six-times-a-day-20091101-hrm5.html

[mmonk]

1. And we can expect things to worsen as we escalate the war.

Especially as we typically have no plans to greatly improve the lives of the civilian population.

[bigtree]

5. you'd think

. . . there would be some concrete accomplishment during that period to justify the losses, but all I see is a crooked election there and a ramped-up conflict between the resistance fighters and the U.S.-led forces in which the Taliban couldn't be more pleased to have American targets and American assaults on the population to rally their countryfolk behind them as they oppose the propped-up regime.

[mmonk]

10. Yes, that is effectively the consequence of current strategy.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

2. That's the very wicked story

that is not being discussed.

As in Iraq the number of US soldiers that come back seriously injured is pretty staggering. People tend to only hear about the killed. The number of displaced locals is another gruesome tale that is largely removed from sight by the propaganda model of media silence.

K&R

[bigtree]

3. and for what?

. . . to facilitate a corrupted election?

[rgbecker]

4. How many from Sweden are there fighting?

I think we should use Sweden as the barometer. If they don't think the Taliban are a problem, then we don't need to be there.
Or for that matter, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, Russia, Denmark, Finland, Canada, Mexico, Japan,
China, Korea, India. You pick.

[bigtree]

6. of the 40 or so nations participating

. . . only a handful have indicated they intend to see the U.S.-contrived mission through to the end.

[unhappycamper]

7. And the Taliban are not hurting for bodies, either.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=259&topic_id=26778&mesg_id=26778

[bigtree]

8. returnees?

. . . routed in the initial invasion?

[unhappycamper]

9. Don't think so.

This sounds a lot like 80s - people coming from far and wide to get in the action.

[bigtree]

11. to me

. . . it sounds a lot like a military intelligence officer (holdover) making a case for complicity from Pakistan and Iran to justify some aggressive or punitive posture they want to assume towards those nations. Just like these reports which used to come from Iraq about foreign nationals, I still believe most of the violence, however instigated and fueled by a Taliban leadership inside or outside the country, is coming from resisting Afghans. I can't believe that the over a million refugees are just sitting on their hands across the border.