The Grisly Math of U.S. Military Death Statistics In Iraq

Posted by on . 4 comments.

The good news:

American military deaths for July rose to 73 today with the report of a Marine killed in combat, but the toll was still the lowest in eight months as the U.S. said it was gaining control of former militant strongholds.

The bad news:

Nevertheless, the daily average for U.S. troop deaths in July was at least 2.35 — higher than the daily average of 2.25 last year…

The lowest death toll this year is higher than last year’s average? Now whose definition of progress is that going to fit, I wonder?

Also, it’s not exactly heartening that “July was the second-deadliest month for Iraqis so far this year, according to an Associated Press tally”.

And then there’s this:

This was also the deadliest July for U.S. troops since the war began. For the previous three years, the month of July saw a relatively low death toll. In July 2006, 43 U.S. troops were killed in Iraq, and 54 died in each of the previous two Julys.

So I guess July’s seasonally-adjusted death toll cannot honestly be packaged as good news.

That must be why the U.S. military is spinning the July statistics the way they are (the operative word in the previous sentence was apparently “honestly” and not “cannot”):

American officials credited the drop in U.S. casualties with (sic) the new strategies put in place by commander Gen. David Petraeus, who has taken the fight to the enemy rather than keeping forces in defensive bases.

‘‘We’re chasing them to areas where they’re not so well prepared and they don’t have time to prepare, so chances are we will have fewer casualties,’’ a senior U.S. military official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the sensitive operations. ‘‘The tactical momentum has shifted to us.’’

The No. 2 commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, expressed cautious optimism last week about the decline in deaths.

All hail David Petraeus, who has caused the seasonally-adjusted death toll to drop to new heights.

All hail Ray Odierno, who is optimistic about the heights that future death tolls may drop to.

Comments

  1. jeremy says:
    April 9, 2008 at 6:45 am

    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

    Hey,
    Take a second to open this link & look @ page 11 of 29, that shows total military deaths by year.

    See anything interesting? The number of fatalities was higher every year in the early 80’s than they were in 06’ & was the same in 06’ as the late 80’s.
    Yes, most of the deaths in the 80’s were from accidents, sickness/disease, & suicide.
    Yes, we have done a tremendous job curbing the number of deaths from accidents & sickness/disease.
    Yes, there has been a huge reduction in the size of the force = a higher percentage of Soldiers dying now.

    So, let’s take a look at a percentage.
    In 2006 there were 1,378,014 military personnel & 1,858 died.
    Without pulling out your calculator any guesses on what the percentage of the force that died is? .134%
    Also, don’t forget that some of those Soldiers were killed accidentally, sickness, yada yada.

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf
    Here’s another link that’s updated daily. It shows OIF death rates & breaks it down to before APR 03 & after.
    Since 1 May 2003 there have been 3,161 KIA’s & 709 accidental deaths = 3,870
    - 3,870 deaths in just shy of 5 years = 774 deaths a year, on average.
    - The table in the 1st link shows us an average of 1891 deaths/year from 04 – 06.
    - 1891 minus 774 = more deaths due to non-combat related situations than combat situations. Even after you add in the 488 total deaths in Afghanistan, since we went in, it still hardly impacts the numbers.

    I don’t like to hear about Soldiers dying in Iraq & Afghanistan anymore than the next person. Just trying to point out that when you look at the statistics it puts things in perspective.

  2. sarabeth says:
    April 9, 2008 at 10:23 am

    And what’s that perspective again?

    That we should care about the avoidable deaths in the Iraq war a little less because the number of military deaths due to “accidents, sickness/disease, & suicide” is larger than the number of combat deaths?

  3. manuel ybarra says:
    April 26, 2008 at 12:46 am

    You idiots!!! In the last 4 years or since 9/11 if you will, we have lost 4000 plus military heroes protecting the US from terrorist around the globe. We are not at war with Iraq as the majority of the well protected citizens think. We are at war against terrorism against innocent men women and children in Iraq and around the world. They are putting their life on the line freely and with the full knowledge of what they do. Let see now, with the freedom and safety they provide for YOU the US citizen, the US has the highest mortality rate in the world when it come to its own citizens. The death rate among people in the US is alarming. More people die by crime, drugs, accidents, and stupidity than lives are lost in Iraq. Those young men and women are losing their lives in order for you to have the freedom to kill each other back home. STOP the KILLING of yourselves first before you complain about the heroes giving themselves selflessly to defend freedom around the world.

  4. jamiebeth says:
    April 26, 2008 at 7:51 am

    jeremy just yada yadad suicide?! no effing way, really?! you’re gonna yada yada suicide on THIS blog? you clearly haven’t been paying attention!