As you point out, the article is discussing battlefield losses. You are bringing up atrocious POLITICAL losses. This is one of the down sides of having civilians in charge of declaring war, and having a civilian suddenly become the Commander of the most powerful military in human history. (And to be sure, there are plenty of historically-proven down sides to having only military folks in charge of the military. Everything in life is a 2-edged sword.)
That's a pedantic difference - especially to the enemy.
The politicians would not let us win in Vietnam or Iraq.