Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America's Hidden Battlefield Toll
Guardian/Observer ^ | 9-14-03 | Jason Burke and Paul Harris

Posted on 09/13/2003 9:16:27 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy

The true scale of American casualties in Iraq is revealed today by new figures obtained by The Observer, which show that more than 6,000 American servicemen have been evacuated for medical reasons since the beginning of the war, including more than 1,500 American soldiers who have been wounded, many seriously.

The figures will shock many Americans, who believe that casualties in the war in Iraq have been relatively light. Recent polls show that support for President George Bush and his administration's policy in Iraq has been slipping.

The number of casualties will also increase pressure on Bush to share the burden of occupying Iraq with more nations. Attempts to broker an international alliance to pour more men and money into Iraq foundered yesterday when Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, brusquely rejected a French proposal as 'totally unrealistic'.

Three US soldiers were killed last week, bringing the number of combat dead since hostilities in Iraq were declared officially over on 1 May to 68. A similar number have died in accidents. It is military police policy to announce that a soldier has been wounded only if they were involved in an incident that involved a death.

Critics of the policy say it hides the true extent of the casualties. The new figures reveal that 1,178 American soldiers have been wounded in combat operations since the war began on 20 March.

It is believed many of the American casualties evacuated from Iraq are seriously injured. Modern body armour, worn by almost all American troops, means wounds that would normally kill a man are avoided. However vulnerable arms and legs are affected badly. This has boosted the proportion of maimed among the injured.

There are also concerns that many men serving in Iraq will suffer psychological trauma. Experts at the National Army Museum in London said studies of soldiers in the First and Second World Wars showed that it was prolonged exposure to combat environments that was most damaging. Some American units, such as the Fourth Infantry Division, have been involved in frontline operations for more than six months.

Andrew Robertshaw, an expert at the museum, said wars also claimed casualties after they were over.

'Soldiers were dying from injuries sustained during World War I well into the 1920s,' he said.

British soldiers are rotated more frequently than their American counterparts. The Ministry of Defence has recently consulted the National Army Museum about psychological disorders suffered by combatants in previous wars in a bid to avoid problems.

The wounded return to the USA with little publicity.

Giant C-17 transport jets on medical evacuation missions land at Andrews Air Force Base, near Washington, every night.

Battlefield casualties are first treated at Army field hospitals in Iraq then sent to Landstuhl Regional Medical Centre in Germany, where they are stabilised.

Andrews is the first stop back home. As the planes taxi to a halt, gangplanks are lowered and the wounded are carried or walk out. A fleet of ambulances and buses meet the C-17s most nights to take off the most seriously wounded. Those requiring urgent operations and amputations are ferried to America's two best military hospitals, the Walter Reed Army Medical Centre, near Washington, and the National Naval Medical Centre, Bethesda.

The hospitals are busy. Sometimes all 40 of Walter Reed's intensive care beds are full.

Dealing with the aftermath of amputations and blast injuries is common. Mines, home-made bombs and rocket-propelled grenades are the weapons of choice of the Iraqi resistance fighters. They cause the sort of wounds that will cost a soldier a limb.

The less badly wounded stay overnight at the air base, where an indoor tennis club and a community centre have been turned into a medical staging facility. Many have little but the ragged uniforms on their backs. A local volunteer group, called America's Heroes of Freedom, has set up on the base to provide them with fresh clothes, food packages and toiletries. 'This is our way of saying, "We have not forgotten you,"' said group founder Susan Brewer.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: casualties; iraq; oef; oif; wia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last
To: RicocheT
The left is having orgasms every time our boys get injured
21 posted on 09/13/2003 9:24:36 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Leeann
I agree. I don't know why we don't discuss the wounded with the same reverence. Just because the bullet didn't kill them, it doesn't matter?
22 posted on 09/13/2003 9:24:57 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: section9
Thanks for posting on this thread.

I really admire you intellect
24 posted on 09/13/2003 9:25:40 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticCowboy; section9
you=your

25 posted on 09/13/2003 9:26:20 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticCowboy
The true scale of American casualties in Iraq is revealed today by new figures obtained by The Observer, which show that more than 6,000 American servicemen have been evacuated for medical reasons since the beginning of the war, including more than 1,500 American soldiers who have been wounded, many seriously.

Note that they lie in the very first paragraph. "6000 evacuated for medical reasons," yet only "1500" actually hurt. The other 4500 could be anything from Section 8s to guys that got sunburns or dehydration, were given a day off and then sent right back.

But this is what the Left will now be claiming every hour of every day: "SIX THOUSAND HURT! SIX THOUSAND HURT!"

And, of course, you can rest assured that whenever they give specific numbers for the meaningless generalized statements, but then only refer to the "seriously injured" as "many," the truth is that the actual number is so low that it would give the lie to the entire article if the Guardian had the guts to print it.

26 posted on 09/13/2003 9:26:26 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: stylin19a
The sad thing is that the Taliban have been coming back strong in Afghanistan.

Bush should have focused on them before Iraq
28 posted on 09/13/2003 9:27:19 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
You're right.

However, it bothers me that the ones that ARE injured, we pay no attention to.
29 posted on 09/13/2003 9:27:24 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
The Guardian is the UK's Pravda
30 posted on 09/13/2003 9:28:13 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
I hope that our military wins soon in Iraq, because the liberals will gain from a protracted conflict
31 posted on 09/13/2003 9:29:22 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: Cathryn Crawford
We can't be allowed to pay attention to them -- because a lot of people would start asking some serious questions about what the hell the U.S. is doing over there.

The ultimate irony of modern warfare is that a fatal casuaty is lot more "clean" to report on the homefront than someone who is seriously wounded in action.

33 posted on 09/13/2003 9:29:49 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("To freedom, Alberta, horses . . . and women!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticCowboy
Yes, of course they werespit on and called "baby killers"; this is why our brave fighting forces need to know we are ONE HUNDRED percent in support of their mission.

Remember, while they are fighting terrorism on foreign soil, they are protecting US!!!

34 posted on 09/13/2003 9:30:01 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
Here's a thread relevant to our recent discussion...
35 posted on 09/13/2003 9:30:22 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
However, it bothers me that the ones that ARE injured, we pay no attention to.

Yes, I'll agree with you on that. Though I think many of them are getting more attention than we're being told; they just don't get that much coverage outside of their local paper and TV stations when they come home. For better or worse, dead soldiers are big news, while wounded soldiers returning home safely are little more than human-interest stories. That's just "journalism."

36 posted on 09/13/2003 9:30:56 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: seamole
You are right, but is shocking that they even thought that they could move in large numbers.
37 posted on 09/13/2003 9:31:00 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticCowboy
The liberals at the Guardian never rest, do they?

That's what I was thinking after reading the first 2 paragraphs. "They just don't want to surrender political power, do they?"
Anything from the British press is waaaaay far to the left. Most isn't the least bit true. They make things up as they go along. They've been caught over and over, but still keep doing it anyway. Maybe because the left wing here is so gullable.
I'm sure if this were true, the liberal press would have been hitting Bush over the head with it a loooong time ago.

38 posted on 09/13/2003 9:31:06 PM PDT by concerned about politics (Lucifers lefties are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The ultimate irony of modern warfare is that a fatal casuaty is lot more "clean" to report on the homefront than someone who is seriously wounded in action.

Hasn't the actual number of injuries been classified?

39 posted on 09/13/2003 9:31:16 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
I think anyone who would spit on a GI needs beaten up badly
40 posted on 09/13/2003 9:31:47 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson