Skip to comments.VERY Surprising Military Death Statistics, 1980 - 2007
Posted on 11/03/2007 9:08:48 AM PDT by InfantryMarine
click here to read article
Very interesting. Were these men and women killed in combat or do these numbers also include routine every day accidents?
what is amazing is that under clinton, there were 8,033 military deaths, under bush, counting the casualties of war, there were 7,803...can anyone (libs) explain that? I can because I served under carter...gutting the military results in lost lives, period..
Listening to CNNABCNBCCBSMSN, one would assume hundreds of thousands of poor uneducated blacks were being killed on the front lines for the sole purposed of amusing Bush.
Finally, we have the statistics.
Even the ABS media is noticing.
Their readers are demanding bad news from Iraq,
and well, there isn’t much.
The casualty rate is now at or below the peacetime
Interesting trend in the peacetime rate.
Any correlation between it and the
hummer replacing the jeep?
Or just a result of troop level reductions?
ABS - Agenda Bias Spin
(even the left has to admit it:
Why are there no deaths in 2005 and 2006 not related to Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom?
Pardon me if my question is ignorant. I went to the link and it says active duty deaths. Does that include guard units?
Your numbers while quite interesting are meaningless statistics without knowing the Denominator for each of the posted numbers.
In other words do we know the total number of people in the military in 1986 and the total number of people in the military in 2006?
With knowing both the Numerator and Denominator we would know exactly what percentage of military personal died each year.
A lot of deaths in the military are due to training accidents. When you have a less educated, lower quality force (as we did prior to the 1980s), these deaths are going to be higher due to...acts of stupidity. For example, a friend of mine (who was a clerk typist in the Army in the early 80s) used to tell me that the most common death letter involved people who went out into the field on manuevers, fell asleep in the high grass, and got run over by tanks. Not very smart. I am sure that the more lethal (and hopefully less essential) training practices have been phased out over the years as well.
Semper fidelis BUMP!
Deaths are denoted as integers. They are not in percentages. So numerator and denominator do not apply.
The percentages, as used here to denote ethnicity, do not require knowledge of total combatants.
These data are anything but meaningless.
“Your numbers while quite interesting are meaningless statistics without knowing the Denominator for each of the posted numbers.”
It is only meaningful if you are selling insurance.
The fact is: Service men in harms way are doing a better job and are not having to pay the ultimate price as often. This is all good news.
“...involved people who went out into the field on maneuvers, fell asleep in the high grass, and got run over by tanks. Not very smart.”
Tell your friend his is either an idiot or full of crap!
It makes sense. People die every day. And in Iraq the MSM counts everyone no matter how they died as a casualty of war. With the majority of the Army in Iraq, then all those dieing people get attributed to Iraq and dumped on President Bush’s head by the MSM. Darn we should have figured this out sooner.
The size of the military and the relative frequency of the various types of casualties vary over time, the meaningful numbers are casualties in each category per person or man-year. The only chart I could find quickly does not cover post 2005 casualties, but it's easy to extraplate out to the present as we know the casualty numbers.
One thing that really jumps out when you look at the numbers that way is the success of the US Military in holding down accidental deaths in the last 5 years, something that requires a very serious ongoing commitment to improving operational methods and then training and leading troops to take advantage of them under wartime conditions.
They are not meaningless at all. The media reports raw numbers, not % killed relative to overall numbers. This reporting merely keeps it apples to apples. To use a different format would only confuse the issue
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.