U.S. deaths in war now exceed 9/11 losses.

[SA210]

U.S. fatalities in war exceed those from Sept. 11

Military deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan reach 2,974


AP file
Flag-draped coffins of U.S. war casualties are seen aboard a cargo plane in Dover, Del., in a recent but undated photo made available by the U.S. Defense Department.
View related photos



Updated: 9:44 p.m. CT Sept 22, 2006

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14959937/




WASHINGTON - Now the death toll is 9/11 times two.

U.S. military deaths from Iraq and Afghanistan now surpass those of the most devastating terrorist attack in America’s history, the trigger for what came next.

The latest milestone for a country at war came Friday without commemoration. It came without the precision of knowing who was the 2,974th to die in conflict. The terrorist attacks killed 2,973 victims in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

An Associated Press count of the U.S. death toll in Iraq rose to 2,696. Combined with 278 U.S. deaths in and around Afghanistan, the 9/11 toll was reached, then topped, the same day. The Pentagon reported Friday the latest death from Iraq, an as-yet unidentified soldier killed a day earlier after his vehicle was hit by a roadside bombing in eastern Baghdad.

Not for the first time, war that was started to answer death has resulted in at least as much death for the country that was first attacked, quite apart from the higher numbers of enemy and civilians killed, too.

Historians note that this grim accounting is not how the success or failure of warfare is measured, and that the reasons for conflict are broader than what served as the spark.

The body count from World War II was far higher for Allied troops than for the crushed Axis. Americans lost more men in each of a succession of Pacific battles than the 2,390 people who died at Pearl Harbor in the attack that made the U.S. declare war on Japan. The U.S. lost 405,399 in the theaters of World War II.

Milestone overlooked
Despite a death toll that pales next to that of the great wars, one casualty milestone after another has been observed and reflected upon this time, especially in Iraq.

There was the benchmark of seeing more U.S. troops die in the occupation than in the swift and successful invasion. And the benchmarks of 1,000 dead, 2,000, 2,500.
Now this.

“There’s never a good war but if the war’s going well and the overall mission remains powerful, these numbers are not what people are focusing on,” said Julian Zelizer, a political historian at Boston University. “If this becomes the subject, then something’s gone wrong.”

Beyond the tribulations of the moment and the now-rampant doubts about the justification and course of the Iraq war, Zelizer said Americans have lost firsthand knowledge of the costs of war that existed keenly up to the 1960s, when people remembered two world wars and Korea, and faced Vietnam.

“A kind of numbness comes from that,” he said. “We’re not that country anymore — more bothered, more nervous. This isn’t a country that’s used to ground wars anymore.”

Violence worse in Iraq
Almost 10 times more Americans have died in Iraq than in Afghanistan, where U.S. casualties have been remarkably light by any historical standard, although climbing in recent months in the face of a resurgent Taliban.

The Pentagon reports 56 military deaths and one civilian Defense Department death in other parts of the world from Operation Enduring Freedom, the anti-terrorism war distinct from Iraq.

Altogether, 3,031 have died abroad since Sept. 11, 2001.

The death toll among Iraqi civilians hit a record high in the summer, with 6,599 violent deaths reported in July and August alone, the United Nations said this week.
The latest U.S. deaths identified by the armed forces:

• Army 2nd Lt. Emily J.T. Perez, 23, Fort Washington, Md., who died Sept. 12 in Kifl, Iraq, from an explosive device detonated near her vehicle. A former high school sprinter who sang in her West Point gospel choir, she was assigned to the 204th Support Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Hood, Texas.
• Marine Sgt. Christopher M. Zimmerman, 28, Stephenville, Texas, killed Wednesday in Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 2nd Reconnaissance Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Lejeune, N.C.

A new study on the war dead and where they come from suggests that the notion of “rich man’s war, poor man’s fight” has become a little truer over time.

Among the Americans killed in the Iraq war, 34 percent have come from communities reporting the lowest levels of family income. Half have come from middle income communities and only 17 percent from the highest income level.

Bigger losses among the poor
That’s a change from World War II, when all income groups were represented about equally. In Korea, Vietnam and Iraq, the poor have made up a progressively larger share of casualties, by this analysis.

Eye-for-an-eye vengeance was not the sole motivator for what happened after the 2001 attacks any more than Pearl Harbor alone was responsible for all that followed. But Pearl Harbor caught the U.S. in the middle of mobilization, debate, rising tensions with looming enemies and a European war already in progress. Historians doubt anyone paid much attention to sad milestones once America threw itself into the fight.

In contrast, the United States had no imminent war intentions against anyone on Sept. 10, 2001. One bloody day later, it did.

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

================================================== ====

When are AHF, gtown, and all you other pro-phony-war guys gonna sign up for this effort?

[boutons_]

I think it's only a little unfair to include the US Aghan deaths in the above total, since the US invading Afghanistan to go after Taleban and al-Quaida was fully justified.

However, the Repugs not finishing the Afgan job in favor of starting the phony Iraq fiasco has very probably caused unnecessary US deaths in Afghanistan as the Taleban and al Quaida are returning to be serious threats.

The point is that dubya has killed, or very soon will have killed, and wasted more US military lives in Iraq than OBL killed in the WTC.

OBL spent a couple $200K on WTC. dubya is spending $1T on Iraq.

OBL spent 19 of his fighters on WTC and accomplished a huge victory, dubya is wasting 1000s of US military in Iraq, and accomplishing nothing (except to get barely re-elected in 2003 as a war president).

Obviously, OBL and al Quaida are much more effective and efficient than the Repugs' mis-commanded "warriors".

dubya/ head/rummy/condi/wolfowitz have managed to make the US look like, totally unecessarily, a stressed, enfeebled, ineffective giant before a few 1000 ragtag insurgents.

America is not safe (dubya said so last week).

America is not safer.

You're doing a heckuva job, dubya!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

When are AHF, gtown, and all you other pro-phony-war guys gonna sign up for this effort?

Probably the day a WMD attack hits American soil.

Meanwhile, the forum vaginas, namely you, Dan, and croutons, will be here stroking yourselves off while blaming it all on Bush.

[boutons_]

"blaming it all on Bush."

who the else has been (badly) running the NatSec show since 9/11? (Repugs did all NatSec work before 9/11)

"WMD attack hits American soil."

Because of the Repugs' disaster in Iraq, the US is in a weak, exposed position to threaten the real threats of Iran and NK.

No anti-war, anti-Repug dissenters had anything to do with the Repugs' Iraq.

The Repugs and their -suckers here blame all the Repugs' self-created disasters on Clinton and the dissenters.

[smeagol]

If you want to compare apples to apples (American deaths), the war in Iraq reached the 9/11 number of American deaths long ago.

[johnsmith]

"blaming it all on Bush."

who the else has been (badly) running the NatSec show since 9/11? (Repugs did all NatSec work before 9/11)

"WMD attack hits American soil."

Because of the Repugs' disaster in Iraq, the US is weak position to threaten the real threats of Iran and NK.

No anti-war, anti-Repug dissenters had anything to with the Repugs' Iraq.

The Repugs and their -suckers here blame all the Repugs' self-created disasters on Clinton and the dissenters.

I would just like to point out that when Boutons actually posts his own thoughts, they are more worthless then anyone elses posts throughout this entire board.
Every other person that is opposed to Bush, the war, etc and posts on this site comes up with some good thoughts and concepts. Boutons however, only throws out worthless insults that serve no purpose whatsoever.

[johnsmith]

I know, Repugs are suckers blah blah blah blah.

If I ever get the chance to meet Boutons in person, I'm going to beat the out of him.

Really, this could all be solved by me putting him on ignore, perhaps I should do that.

Ahhhh yes, sweet ignore.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

who the else has been (badly) running the NatSec show since 9/11? (Repugs did all NatSec work before 9/11)

"WMD attack hits American soil."

Because of the Repugs' disaster in Iraq, the US is weak position to threaten the real threats of Iran and NK.

North Korea? North Korea doesn't take a dump without China's permission. As China finally got its together and likes being part of the world economy, that day will pretty much be never.

Iran? Do you think we would go into Iran? We will never invade Iran, and you're dumber than I thought (which, would be really ing dumb). Any action taken WRT Iran will be done by Israeli air strikes.

I guess it would also be too easy to point out that there are Democrats in the state department and high up in the military, but I guess they're all just *pawns* of the evil, yet incredibly stupid (according to you) president.

I'm still amazed at how someone who is supposedly as stupid as you think Bush is somehow can run all these conspiracies for oil/world domination/rich people.

Whatever makes you sleep at night with your Michael Moore doll, boutons.