This is just a short quandary of mine. We know that over 58,000 American troops were killed or listed as "Missing in Action" in Vietnam. In Iraq we have nearly 3,000 killed and approximately 46,000 casualties. I have to add a side note here, for Iraq, the casualty list includes non-combat casualties and illnesses.
My question is...how are these numbers comparable? How are the Iraq numbers comparable to Vietnam, Korea, or WWII? We can create a false sense of security and interpolate the numbers of mortalities and casualties for the current "war" as not very high. I think this is what the current administration would choose to believe, and have the American populace believe.
However, we can also take into consideration certain geographic conditions ( a dry, flat terrain in the Mideast) and medical advances in the intervening years between wars to explain why many of our injured troops survive. Yes, this war has a high casualty rate, but a low mortality rate. These numbers are a credit to our medical profession, both military and civilian, and their heroism, and has nothing to do with the "deciders" in this war.
Lest we kid ourselves...we're still paying a high price.
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Ruth
http://www.infrared-sauna-spot.info
Posted by: Ruth | 31 December 2008 at 12:44 AM