True? Pentagon Systematically Under-counting US War Dead

[Logician]

I heard on Progressive Talk radio that the Pentagon has not been counting men who were wounded in Iraq (either in combat or in other accidents)who were transported to German hospitals, and who died in transit or in those German hospitals.

The number quoted is that will over 6,000 men have died in transit or in German hospitals, and have not been counted with the 1,700+ official tally.

If this is the case, this is just such a breach of ethics, and points to the suppression of information by the right wing: In reality, between 8,000 and 9,000 US soldiers have died in Iraq.

Is this true? And if this is true, why are the Democrats not pursuing an investigation into this under-counting? How can the American people make a fair assessment of the success/progress of this war (yet, even one man dead as a result of this unjustified war by Shrub should be enough!)

[leveymg]

1. This has not been verified. n/t

[back2basics909]

2. We need to be carefull...

We really need to be carefull with this one. I have seen mention, i have seen blogs that say they have evidence of it, but then there is no evidence. There is a web site that tracks war dead and they are tracking who dies in Germany etc, and they say this is not true.

Lets hold off on spreading this around until we have some good evidence.

[FSogol]

5. You are correct

and welcome to DU.

[LynnTheDem]

18. False. (oops sorry, meant to reply to the OP!)

Here are US and coalition troops who died in tranist...and gee, they ARE COUNTED.

Go to; http://www.icasualties.org/oif /

At the top, click on "Fatality Details"

On the details page, at the bottom far right, set filter to "country of death" and choose "USA".

At the bottom far left, click on "set filter".

Died in the USA from Iraq;

1856 06/03/05 Mendoza, Antonio Corporal 21 U.S. Marine 5th Bat., 11th Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire - explosion Brooke Army Med Center, TX Santa Ana California US
1830 05/24/05 Collins, Randy D. Sergeant 1st Class 36 U.S. Army 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment Hostile - hostile fire - mortar attack Bethesda Naval Hosp., MD Long Beach California US
1797 05/11/05 Schmidt III, John T. Lance Corporal 21 U.S. Marine 3rd Bat., 8th Marines, 2nd Marine Div., II Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire - explosion Brooke Army Med Center, TX Brookfield Connecticut US
1790 05/10/05 Bordelon, Michael J. 1st Sergeant 37 U.S. Army 1st Bat., 24th Infantry Reg., 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry Div. Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Brooke Army Med Center, TX Morgan City Louisiana US
1768 05/02/05 Little, Tommy S. Staff Sergeant 47 U.S. Army National Guard 2nd Battalion, 114th Field Artillery Regiment Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Brooke Army Med Center, TX Aliceville Alabama US
1726 04/12/05 Dickens, Tyler J. Corporal 20 U.S. Army 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment Hostile - hostile fire - RPG attack (?) Brooke Army Med Center, TX Columbus Georgia US
1677 03/03/05 Jones, Michael D. Sergeant 1st Class 43 U.S. Army National Guard 133rd Engineer Battalion Non-hostile - illness Syracuse, NY Unity Maine US
1494 01/04/05 Washington, Bennie J. Sergeant 25 U.S. Army 44th Engineer Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division Hostile - hostile fire - RPG attack Brooke Army Med Center, TX Atlanta Georgia US
1483 12/29/04 Nelson, Craig L. Specialist 21 U.S. Army National Guard 1st Battalion, 156th Armor Regiment Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Bossier City Louisiana US
1393 11/27/04 Smith, Michael A. Sergeant 24 U.S. Army National Guard 1st Bat., 153rd Infantry, 39th Brig. Cmbt. Tm., 1st Cav. Div. Hostile - hostile fire - sniper Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Camden Arkansas US
1382 11/24/04 Nolte, Nicholas S. Sergeant 25 U.S. Marine 2nd Low Alt. Air Defense Bat., 2nd Mar. Aircraft Wing, IIMEF Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Bethesda Naval Hosp., MD Falls City Nebraska US
1381 11/23/04 Edinger, Benjamin C. Sergeant 24 U.S. Marine 2nd Force Reconnaissance Co., II Marine Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Bethesda Naval Hosp., MD Green Bay Wisconsin US
1370 11/19/04 Downey, Michael A. Lance Corporal 21 U.S. Marine 1st Bat., 3rd Marines, 3rd Marine Div., III Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire - sniper Bethesda Naval Hosp., MD Phoenix Arizona US
1280 11/07/04 McVey, Otie Joseph Sergeant 1st Class 53 U.S. Army Reserve 706th Transportation Company Non-hostile - illness Beaver, WV Oak Hill West Virginia US
1246 10/22/04 Gadsden, Jonathan E. Lance Corporal 21 U.S. Marine 1st Combat Engr. Bat., 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Vet's Hospital, Tampa, FL Charleston South Carolina US
1205 10/03/04 Pettaway Jr., James L. Staff Sergeant 37 U.S. Army Reserve 223rd Transportation Company Non-hostile - vehicle accident Brooke Army Med Center, TX Baltimore Maryland US
1200 09/30/04 Nolan, Allen Specialist 38 U.S. Army Reserve 660th Transp. Co., 88th Regional Readiness Command Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Brooke Army Med Center, TX Marietta Ohio US
1172 09/19/04 Adams, Brandon E. Sergeant 22 U.S. Army 1st Bat., 32nd Inf. Reg., 10th Mountain Div. Hostile - hostile fire - grenade Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Hollidaysburg Pennsylvania US
1061 08/09/04 Houghton, Andrew R. Captain 25 U.S. Army 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Infantry Div. Hostile - hostile fire - RPG attack Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Houston Texas US
1028 07/21/04 Engel, Mark E. Lance Corporal 21 U.S. Marine 2nd Lt. Armd Recon Bat., 2nd Mar. Div., II Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Brooke Army Med Center, TX Grand Junction Colorado US
1017 07/15/04 Mardis Jr., Paul C. Staff Sergeant 25 U.S. Army 3rd Bat., 5th Special Forces Group Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Palmetto Florida US
987 07/02/04 Martin, Stephen G. Staff Sergeant 39 U.S. Army Reserve 330th Military Police Detachment Hostile - hostile fire - car bomb Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Warsaw/Rhinelander Wisconsin US
811 04/22/04 Dunham, Jason L. Corporal 22 U.S. Marine 3rd Bat., 7th Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Bethesda Naval Hosp., MD Scio (Allegany Co.) New York US
687 03/20/04 Vega, Michael W. 1st Lieutenant 41 U.S. Army National Guard 223rd Military Intelligence Co., 223rd Mil. Intel. Battalion Hostile - vehicle accident Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Lathrop California US
587 01/05/04 Frist, Luke P. Specialist 20 U.S. Army Reserve 209th Quartermaster Company Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Brooke Army Med Center, TX Brookston Indiana US
534 12/02/03 Young, Ryan C. Sergeant 21 U.S. Army A Co., 1st Bat., 16th Infantry Reg., 1st Infantry Div. Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Corona California US
511 11/20/03 Tyrrell, Scott Matthew Private 21 U.S. Army C Co., 299th Engineer Bat., 4th Infantry Div. Non-hostile - munitions accident Brooke Army Med Center, TX Sterling Illinois US
459 11/08/03 Jimenez, Linda C. Sergeant 39 U.S. Army 2nd Sqd. Combat Spt. Aviation, 2nd Armored Cav. Reg. Non-hostile - accidental fall Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Brooklyn New York US
378 10/01/03 Ramos, Tamarra J. Specialist 24 U.S. Army 3rd Armor Med. Co., Medical Spt. Squadron, 3rd Armd Cav. Non-hostile - unspecified injury Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Quakertown Pennsylvania US
356 09/16/03 Pinkston, Foster Sergeant 47 U.S. Army National Guard 878th Engineer Battalion Non-hostile - illness Augusta, GA Warrenton Georgia US
347 09/07/03 Thompson, Jarrett B. Specialist 27 U.S. Army Reserve 946th Transportation Company Non-hostile - vehicle accident Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Dover Delaware US
254 07/04/03 Coons, James Curtis Master Sergeant 35 U.S. Army 385th Signal Company, 54th Signal Battalion Non-hostile - suicide Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Conroe Texas US
231 06/18/03 Latham, William T. Staff Sergeant 29 U.S. Army Troop E, 2nd Squad., 3rd Armored Cav. Hostile - hostile fire Walter Reed Medical Ctr. Kingman Arizona US

Died in Germany from Iraq;

1816 05/22/05 Seesan, Aaron N. 1st Lieutenant 25 U.S. Army 73rd Engineer Company, 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry Div. Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Massillon Ohio US
1725 04/09/05 LaWare, Casey M. Private 1st Class 19 U.S. Army 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment Non-hostile - building fire Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Redding California US
1678 03/04/05 Garceau, Seth K. Sergeant 27 U.S. Army National Guard 224th Engineer Battalion Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Oelwein Iowa US
1434 12/09/04 Renehan, Kyle J. Corporal 21 U.S. Marine Marine Air Ctrl. Sq-2, Mar. Air Ctrl. Gp-28, 2nd Mar. Air Wing Hostile - hostile fire - mortar attack Kaiserslautern Oxford Pennsylvania US
1410 12/01/04 Pena, Javier Obleas-Prado Gunnery Sergeant 36 U.S. Marine 2nd Recon Battalion, 2nd Marine Div., II Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Falls Church Virginia US
1378 11/20/04 Heredia, Joseph J. Corporal 22 U.S. Marine 3rd Bat., 5th Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Santa Maria California US
1376 11/20/04 Welke, Joseph T. Lance Corporal 20 U.S. Marine 3rd Bat., 1st Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Rapid City South Dakota US
1231 10/13/04 Baker, Ronald W. Specialist 34 U.S. Army National Guard 39th Support Battalion Hostile - hostile fire - car bomb Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Cabot Arkansas US
1194 09/28/04 Prewitt, Tyler D. Sergeant 22 U.S. Army 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Div. Hostile - hostile fire - RPG attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Phoenix Arizona US
1053 08/05/04 McCune, Donald R. Specialist 20 U.S. Army National Guard 1st Bat., 161st Infantry Reg., 81st Brigade Combat Team Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Ypsilanti Michigan US
933 06/03/04 Bolding, Todd J. Lance Corporal 23 U.S. Marine 2nd Bat., 4th Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Hostile - hostile fire Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Manvel Texas US
901 05/18/04 Chaney, William D. Staff Sergeant 59 U.S. Army National Guard B Company, 1st Battalion, 106th Aviation Regiment Non-hostile - illness Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Schaumburg Illinois US
876 05/08/04 Holmes, James J. Specialist 28 U.S. Army National Guard C Company, 141st Engineer Combat Battalion Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. East Grand Forks Minnesota US
809 04/20/04 Fox, Bradley C. 1st Sergeant 34 U.S. Army 1st Bat., 36th Inf. Reg., 1st Armored Div. Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Adrian Michigan US
682 03/19/04 Matthews, Clint Richard "Bones" Specialist 31 U.S. Army 1st Bat., 18th Infantry Reg., 1st Infantry Division Non-hostile - vehicle accident Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Bedford Pennsylvania US
679 03/18/04 Sutphin, Ernest Harold Private 1st Class 21 U.S. Army 2nd Bat., 11th Field Artillery, 25th Infantry Division Non-hostile - vehicle accident Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Parkersburg West Virginia US
447 11/06/03 Fisher, Paul F. Sergeant 39 U.S. Army National Guard Det. 1, Co. F,106th Aviation Battalion Hostile - helicopter crash (missile attack) Homburg Hospital Cedar Rapids Iowa US
320 08/17/03 Ivory, Craig S. Specialist 26 U.S. Army 501st Forward Spt. Co., 173rd Airborne Non-hostile - illness - heat related Homberg Univ. Hospital Port Matilda Pennsylvania US
319 08/14/03 Kirchhoff, David M. Private 1st Class 31 U.S. Army National Guard 2133rd Transportation Company Non-hostile - illness - heatstroke Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Anamosa Iowa US
303 08/06/03 Colunga, Zeferino E. Specialist 20 U.S. Army 4th Squadron, 2nd Armored Cavalry Reg. Non-hostile - illness - acute leukemia Homburg Hospital Bellville Texas US
266 07/12/03 Neusche, Joshua M. Specialist 20 U.S. Army Reserve 203rd Engineer Battalion Non-hostile - illness - pneumonia? Homburg Hospital Montreal Missouri US
260 07/08/03 McKinley, Robert L. Private 23 U.S. Army H & H Company, 1-101st Air Assault Non-hostile - illness - heatstroke Homburg Hospital Kokomo Indiana US
214 06/01/03 Lambert, Jonathan W. Sergeant 28 U.S. Marine Headquarters Battalion, 1st Marine Div. Non-hostile - vehicle accident Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Newsite Missouri US
168 04/24/03 Jenkins, Troy David Sergeant 25 U.S. Army B Co., 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Reg. Hostile - hostile fire - bomb Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. Ridgecrest California US

Died in Kuwait:

1803 05/14/05 Gillican III, Charles C. Sergeant 35 U.S. Army National Guard 1st Battalion, 118th Field Artillery Reg., 48th Infantry Brig. Non-hostile - vehicle accident Camp Arifjan Brunswick Georgia US
1739 04/18/05 Thornton, Steven W. Major 46 U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command Non-hostile - illness - sudden collapse Camp Arifjan Eugene Oregon US
1693 03/15/05 Marracino, Salvatore Domenico Sergeant 28 Italian Army 185th Parachute Regiment Non-hostile - weapon discharge (accid.) Kuwait City (hospital) Apulia Italy IT
1536 01/23/05 Rangel, Jose C. Staff Sergeant 43 U.S. Army National Guard 1106th Aviation Classification Repair Activity Depot Non-hostile - illness - sudden collapse Camp Arifjan Fresno California US
1534 01/21/05 Lusk II, Joe Fenton Captain 25 U.S. Army 3rd Battalion, 3rd Aviation Regiment Non-hostile - unspecified injury Camp Buehring Reedley California US
1456 12/19/04 Farmer, Donald B. Staff Sergeant 33 U.S. Army 180th Transportation Battalion, 13th COSCOM Non-hostile - vehicle accident Ash Shuaybah Zion Illinois US
1455 12/19/04 Meza, Barry K. Sergeant 23 U.S. Army 180th Transportation Battalion, 13th COSCOM Non-hostile - vehicle accident Ash Shuaybah League City Texas US
1249 10/24/04 Boles, Dennis J. Sergeant 46 U.S. Army National Guard 171st Aviation Battalion Non-hostile - illness - sudden collapse Camp Arifjan Homosassa Florida US
697 03/27/04 Toney, Timothy Master Sergeant 37 U.S. Marine Headquarters Bat., 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Non-hostile - illness - sudden collapse Camp Wolverine Manhattan New York US
674 03/16/04 Thigpen Sr., Thomas R. Master Sergeant 52 U.S. Army National Guard 151st Signal Battalion Non-hostile - unspecified cause Camp Virginia Augusta Georgia US
672 03/14/04 Normandy, William J. Sergeant 42 U.S. Army National Guard 1st Battalion, 86th Field Artillery Regiment Non-hostile - illness - heart attack Camp Virginia East Barre Vermont US
658 03/08/04 Milczark, Matthew G. Private 1st Class 18 U.S. Marine 2nd Bat., 4th Marines, 1st Marine Div., I Mar. Exped. Force Non-hostile - weapon discharge Camp Victory Kettle River Minnesota US
656 03/05/04 Gray, Michael J. Petty Officer 2nd Class 32 U.S. Navy Navy Detachment Non-hostile - vehicle accident Kuwait Naval Base (near) Richmond Virginia US
535 12/02/03 Boone, Clarence E. Chief Warrant Officer 50 U.S. Army Hqtrs. & Hqtrs. Co., 4th Infantry Division Non-hostile - accident (?) Kuwait City Fort Worth Texas US
486 11/15/03 Petrucci, Pietro Caporale 22 Italian Army Regular Army Hostile - hostile fire - car bomb Al Sabah Hospital Casavatore, Napoli Italy IT
465 11/12/03 Bailey, Nathan J. Staff Sergeant 46 U.S. Army National Guard 1175th Transportation Company Non-hostile - weapon discharge Camp Arifjan Nashville Tennessee US
369 09/25/03 Rooney, Robert E. Sergeant 1st Class 43 U.S. Army National Guard 379th Engineer Company Non-hostile - vehicle accident Shuabai Port Nashua New Hampshire US
342 09/01/03 Sarno, Cameron B. Staff Sergeant 43 U.S. Army Reserve 257th Transportation Company Non-hostile - vehicle accident Kuwait City Waipahu Hawaii US
339 08/27/03 Sherman, Anthony L. Lieutenant Colonel 43 U.S. Army Reserve 304th Civil Affairs Brigade Non-hostile - illness Camp Arifjan Pottstown Pennsylvania US
300 08/05/03 Loyd, David L. Staff Sergeant 44 U.S. Army National Guard 1175th Transportation Co., Tenn. ANG Non-hostile - illness - heart attack? Not reported Jackson Tennessee US
262 07/09/03 Tetrault, Jason Lance Corporal 20 U.S. Marine 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Div. Non-hostile - vehicle accident Not reported Moreno Valley California US
259 07/08/03 Boling, Craig A. Sergeant 1st Class 38 U.S. Army National Guard Co. C, 1-152nd Infantry, IN Nat. Guard Non-hostile - illness - heart attack? Camp Wolf Elkhart Indiana US
246 06/26/03 Hubbell, Corey A. Specialist 20 U.S. Army Company B, 46th Engineer Battalion Non-hostile - illness - breathing difficulties Camden Yards Urbana Illinois US
229 06/17/03 Tosto, Michael L. Sergeant 24 U.S. Army 1st Bat., 35th Armrd Reg., 1st Arm. Div. Non-hostile - illness - pneumonia? Camp Wolf Apex North Carolina US
192 05/19/03 Shepherd, David Corporal 34 Royal Air Force Royal Air Force Police Non-hostile - natural causes Not reported Not reported Not reported UK
183 05/10/03 Smith, Matthew R. Lance Corporal 20 U.S. Marine Comm. Co., 4th Force Svc. Spt. Group Non-hostile - vehicle accident Not reported Anderson Indiana US
179 05/09/03 Bruns, Cedric E. Lance Corporal 22 U.S. Marine 6th Engr. Spt. Bat., 4th Force Spt. Gp. Non-hostile - vehicle accident Tac Assy Area Coyote Vancouver Washington US
175 05/04/03 Deibler, Jason L. Private 20 U.S. Army 1st Battalion, 6th Infantry Regiment Non-hostile - weapon discharge Camp New Jersey Coeburn Virginia US
95 04/01/03 Maglione III, Joseph Basil Lance Corporal 22 U.S. Marine 6th Eng'g Spt., 4th Force Serv. Spt. Gp. Non-hostile - weapon discharge Camp Coyote Lansdale Pennsylvania US
85 03/30/03 Brierley, Shaun Andrew Lance Corporal 28 British Army 212 Signal Squad., 1 (UK) Armoured Div. Non-hostile - vehicle accident Not reported W. Yorkshire England UK
66 03/25/03 Stone, Gregory Lewis Major 40 U.S. Air National Guard 124th Air Spt. Oper. Squadron - Idaho Non-hostile - homicide Camp Pennsylvania Boise Idaho US
27 03/23/03 Seifert, Christopher Scott Captain 27 U.S. Army 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Div. Non-hostile - homicide Camp Pennsylvania Easton Pennsylvania US
13 03/21/03 Ward, Jason Major 34 Royal Navy 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Plymouth England UK
12 03/21/03 Stratford, Mark Warrant Off. 2nd Class 39 Royal Navy 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Plymouth England UK
11 03/21/03 Seymour, Ian Oper. Mech. 2nd Class 28 British Army 148 Commando Battery, Royal Artillery Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Poole England UK
10 03/21/03 Hehir, Les Sergeant 34 British Army 29 Commando Regiment, Royal Artillery Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Poole England UK
9 03/21/03 Hedenskog, Sholto Royal Navy Marine 26 Royal Navy 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Pretoria South Africa UK
8 03/21/03 Guy, Philip Stuart Captain 29 Royal Navy 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) N. Yorkshire England UK
7 03/21/03 Evans, Llywelyn Karl Lance Bombardier 24 British Army 29 Commando Regiment, Royal Artillery Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Llandudno Wales UK
6 03/21/03 Cecil, John Colour Sergeant 36 Royal Navy 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Plymouth England UK
5 03/21/03 Waters-Bey, Kendall Damon Staff Sergeant 29 U.S. Marine MAW&TS-1, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Baltimore Maryland US
4 03/21/03 Kennedy, Brian Matthew Corporal 25 U.S. Marine MAW&TS-1, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Houston Texas US
3 03/21/03 Beaupre, Ryan Anthony Captain 30 U.S. Marine MAW&TS-1, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Bloomington Illinois US
2 03/21/03 Aubin, Jay Thomas Major 36 U.S. Marine MAW&TS-1, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing Hostile - helicopter crash Umm Qasr (near) Waterville Maine US

Died in Qatar:

1839 05/28/05 Smart, Albert E. Lieutenant Colonel 41 U.S. Army Reserve 321st Civil Affairs Brigade Non-hostile - illness Doha San Antonio Texas US
1134 09/06/04 Boria, John J. Captain 29 U.S. Air Force 911th Air Refueling Squadron Non-hostile - vehicle accident Doha Broken Arrow Oklahoma US
640 02/10/04 Mariano, Jude C. Master Sergeant 39 U.S. Air Force 615th Air Mobility Operations Squadron Non-hostile - vehicle accident Doha Vallejo California US
346 09/04/03 Brown, Bruce E. Technical Sergeant 32 U.S. Air Force 78th Logistics Readiness Squadron Non-hostile - vehicle accident Al Udeid (near) Coatopa Alabama US
280 07/20/03 Scott, David A. Master Sergeant 51 U.S. Air Force 445th Communications Flight Non-hostile - unspecified cause Doha Union Ohio US
129 04/05/03 Smith, Edward 1st Sergeant 38 U.S. Marine 2nd Bat., 5th Marine Reg., 1st Mar. Div. Hostile - hostile fire Doha Chicago Illinois US

[trotsky]

3. Categorically false.

http://icasualties.org/oif/Dow.aspx

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. That's a good site with good information

but it is still based on information given it by the pentagon.

We need to be able to look beyond the pentagon as a source.

[LynnTheDem]

20. No, that site VERIFIES deaths by info from Pentagon; we base our info

on worldwide media, blogs, websites etc, and we back up each death with DOD/Centcom releases or chase after DOD/Centcom for any verified deaths that the DOD or Centcom have not released notices for.

We do not add deaths to the ICCC until we have verification thru credible news sources who name names of the dead, or until Centcom/DOD release official notices.

This is to avoid duplicate countings, and to prevent morans from tricking us into adding non-existant deaths.

We do NOT simply rely on info from the Pentagon.

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. My error. Thanks.

[frictionlessO]

22. Hi NCevilduer,

ICCC actually only turns to the epntagon for final status confirmation after an individual death has been reported in the media teh world over. Pentagon will also sometimes provide specifics about the casualties. ICCC is not based around the pentagon numbers or any other "official" totals. The numbers are a conglomerate of world media articles vetted and verified for bogus sources and the like a space is then made for them in the count these slots get filled after DOD releases specifics...

Pentagon is only a verifier in the end not a source.

Hope that helps and thank you for your interest in the casulties, wish more people would be so inclined.

[RaleighNCDUer]

43. My error. Thanks.

[frictionlessO]

47. Whoops apologies, I didnt see that Lynn hadn't gotten there first!

Sorry about that!

[LynnTheDem]

50. GAWD NO! Don't you dare leave me all alone! LOL!

I'm very glad to have your corroboration, frictionless!

[frictionlessO]

64. LOL! You most certainly will have it then!

Seriously though by the time I find one of these threads your posts are all over it!

I sometimes think you have multiple computers set up at the LynnTheDem command and control center!

[LynnTheDem]

69. ROTFL!

Actually I only have 2 puters set up; one is 24/7 for my main newsfeeds, the other seems to be 24/7 DU. LOL!

My being "all over it" actually means I'm being spread thinner than Twiggy, so no lip, just HELP MEEEE! :rofl:

:hug:

[Just Me]

4. Randi referred to a report issued by the McLaughlin Group,...

,...which indicated that the Pentagon was fudging numbers big time.

I do believe an investigation would be appropriate IF at least one other source reveals evidence of manipulating the numbers. To date, I know of no such source.

[LynnTheDem]

24. What the US officials do is ONLY name the 1740+ US troops killed when

they speak of Iraq. They do NOT name the number of wounded and sick troops, nor do they name the number of NON-US troops, ie UK, Italy, Poland etc, nor do they name the Iraqi cops/military killed/wounded.

THAT is where this entire BS started from; US officials only refer to US troops killed, and don't mention coalition troops or Iraqi troops killed, or any of the wounded troops.

-"CASUALTY" does NOT mean "DEAD"; it means dead, wounded, sick.

An article came out in Arabic saying the US officials were "hiding" the number of CASUALTIES in Iraq BECAUSE they only refer to US troops killed and don't mention the US troops wounded, the UK & coalition & Iraqi troops killed & wounded.

From that article the neoNazi TBR website accused the Pentagon of hiding the number of US dead.

[Just Me]

30. As another poster pointed out, U.S. "private warriors" and contractors,...

,...deaths are not included. They should be included as American casualties in order to reflect the real human cost of this war. With 100,000+ "contractors" in Iraq, the number of deaths must be pretty close to that of the troops.

Maybe, the reason this issue keeps popping up is because those deaths/casualties are being concealed even though they are American.

I heard a former contractor on Randi's show yesterday. He was abandoned in hostile territory. His story made me realize that there are a LOT of Americans hired by these profiteering "security" companies whose deaths/injuries are treated like collateral damage rather than an American death/casualty.

[LynnTheDem]

48. No, because they are PRIVATE individuals.

US troops are NOT private individuals, but are "property" of the US military.

The US military reports ONLY the deaths of US soldiers.

They cannot report deaths of mercs, because mercs are private individuals whose employers and/or families may not want the deaths known or made public.

Most security companies refuse to publish any info on mercs' deaths because it's a security issue.

ICCC does separately count merc deaths, but as they are private individuals there are no official confirmations to use for verification.

[Just Me]

51. Yeah. However, they are still part of the "U.S. War Dead".

Not that I am at all keen on the BushCo/neoCON private militia. Believe me on that 'cause I find it disgusting that they are paid so much more than our troops to do dirty work, and they do not reflect the honor, integrity or skill of our troops.

However, they are American private militia and their injuries and deaths should be included as part of the "U.S. War Dead" to more accurately reflect the human cost of this war IMHO.

[LynnTheDem]

54. And if the private citizens disagree with that? If the private firms

disagree with that?

I'd like NO WARS at all, NO mercs, NO bushCartel etc.

But then there's reality. And the reality is, they are private citizens working for private companies, and under our democracy, what's left of it, these private individuals and private firms cannot be forced to reveal such info, and espeically not if doing so would put more people at risk.

Now many merc and contractor deaths ARE made public info, but there is no way to determine how many are not, because that is PRIVATE info that is protected under law.

[Just Me]

57. You don't believe the Pentagon or DoD or CIA utilize these people,...

,...and directly define their roles in the BushCo/neoCON wars? Since their "services" are being directly utilized by our government, why shouldn't their deaths/injuries be counted as part of the American human cost of war?

:shrug:

[LynnTheDem]

60. Of course the Pentagon is trying to outsource, Rummy makes no secret

of it.

There are many reasons why this is a bad idea, not least of which is ya can't force private citizens/firms into a warzone. So how the hell do our troops get food & water if the providing of food & water is outsourced to a private firm whose private employees say hell no, not going into the middle of a warzone?

And then the accountability, or rather lack of, is a huge problem.

But it isn't just the US using private contractors (for food, for laundry, for security etc) so even if private workers were totally banned by the US, it wouldn't be the end of the problem.

I'm not saying their deaths "shouldn't" be counted, I'm saying the US gov doesn't have the right to make public the info of private employees. It is up to the private firms to release death/wounded info and if they refuse to do so, that's up to them.

Sometimes democracy sucks.

Hmmm maybe I can 'splain myself better (or not, lol!)

I do not want the US govt to have control over private firms and private individuals' personal info. If they had such control over any US firm/citizen doing anything in Iraq or any other war, that opens the door so wide it would give them the right of control over you & me and every other citizen.

If my husband, a soldier, were to die, I CANNOT make the US military NOT release a death notice. I have no say over it, my hubby has no say over it (in a will, for example).

I don't want the US gov to have that kind of power over private firms & private individuals.

[Just Me]

80. Practically speaking, the US govt already has power over these folks.

I mean, what are you going to find if you pierce the corporate veil? Voila' Pentagon and the DoD. They pull the strings ESPECIALLY with respect to the mercs and private militias.

Now, I am not advocating that personal information be released. Nor am I arguing that the govt be allowed to be unreasonably intrusive. However, I do believe that these private merc/intelligence/militia companies should be legally obliged to publish an accurate number of the deaths and the injuries resulting from their "services" in a war theatre because their "services" are already being controlled by the govt.

I also believe these companies should NOT be excepted from criminal and civil liability, which has apparently been granted to them. Our troops can be criminally charged for torture but the govt-controlled mercs and private militia get off? That's bullshit!!!

[FormerOstrich]

62. I've been wondering..

about the reporting of civilians that are working for the US Military (not the contractors). For instance, the Army Corps of Engineers has civilians in Iraq. Their checks are drawn just like the enlisted, but they are civilians.

[LynnTheDem]

67. There are some civs working directly for the US military that have died

and yes they were counted.

Soldier hubby says: "most the DoD civilians are located in Qatar and Kuwait, not in Iraq itself. There are a handful of DoD civs in Iraq, but they're confined to the Green Zone."

[FormerOstrich]

77. Thank you LynnTheDem...

now I won't have to wonder anymore. The person I know (he just came back to the states) was in the Green Zone.

[DemonFighterLives]

101. Would ICC dig deeper?

Lynn, I appreciate your work and I can appreciate the privacy of extra fighters. I was just wondering if any effort was being given to attempt to document "all the deaths" ?
I don't need their name or SSN if they have one, just an approximate number to keep us informed of what is really going on.

[LynnTheDem]

105. We try to document all the non-military deaths we can, on separate

lists from the military deaths;

Contractors Killed in Iraq
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/Civ.aspx

Iraqi Police and Guardsmen Deaths
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx

Journalists Killed in Iraq
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/journalist.aspx

:hug:

[enlightenment]

110. LynneTheDem, do you know if there is any listing of numbers of

the catastrophically injured, ie., head-injuries, lost limbs, and the like?
I have had several students asking about these numbers, but have not been able to find a count.
Many thanks, and a tremendous hurray for the fabulous work you're doing at icasualties -- it is heart-breaking, but oh, so needed.

:thumbsup:

[LynnTheDem]

111. There are a few articles around that give some estimates & types of wounds

But no definitive lists, unfortunately.

The Lasting Wounds of War
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44839-2004Apr26.html

US wounded in the shadows
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/US_wounded_100203.htm

Casualties Increase
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4701323/

U.S. soldier injuries mount in Iraq
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2003/09/19_zdechlikm_injuries/

The Missing Wounded
http://www.counterpunch.org/goff08012003.html

10% At Hospital Had Mental Problems
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_mental_021904,00.html

National Public Radio: "Daniel Zwerdling reports on the number of U.S. troops wounded in Iraq. It's a number that is much higher than many think and also extremely difficult to come by. And of the close to 9,000 wounded, few details are available concerning their injuries."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1587762

The Permanent Scars of Iraq
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0D12FC3C5E0C768DDDAB0894DC404482

Maimed in Iraq, then mistreated, neglected, and hidden in America
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=654

"The Damage Done. It's easy to send soldiers off to war. It's a lot harder to face them when they come home." Photo Essay
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/03/03_100.html

HTH.

[enlightenment]

117. Absolutely.

Thanks very much. My students (mostly 18-25) are starting to pay attention -- finally -- and realize that there is a good chance that they may become cannon fodder whether they want to or not. Asking many more questions, as a result.
I wish I had answers.

Thanks again.

[DemonFighterLives]

115. Thanks Lynn for all the info.

and the hug! :hug:
I have never believed that there were thousands of extra dead, but can't seem to get it out of my head that there are a number of uncounted. I guess it is my :tinfoilhat:
In all of this discussion, I don't remember anyone mentioning actual CIA. We can talk about mercs and independent contractors. It seems that much of the dirty work that goes on in Iraq and the rest of the world is covert actions. I'm sure this information is not getting out to anyone.
I can't for the life of me figure out how so many independent warriors can be over there doing "our" will supposedly. The disgusting regime in power* is killing any respect that the US had. Dubby or Cheney have got to have control of all of these independent warriors, so the blood is all on their hands.


On Edit:
I was going to say how the deaths of the reporters especially disgusts me. It tells its own tale. Our sick administration found it important to kill off those that are trying to document the whole fiasco. :argh:

[LynnTheDem]

119. You're welcome.

It's all damned disgusting, isn't it.

And so many Ameicans still just refuse to face the horrific facts; WE attacked a weak little nation that hadn't been doing anything to anyone. And the world knows it, and detests us for it.

And every day, more blood drips into the sands.

:(

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. This has been popping up a lot lately.

Mostly, it's been debunked. I saw one reference that claimed to have verified about 100 un-counted deaths, but nothing like the thousands that have been suggested.

For one thing, the casualty lists are publicly posted, and if someone did not show up on the list, the family would presumably raise hell.

Of course, we all know that there are thousands who are 'green-card soldiers'; non-citizens whose families are in Guatemala or Mexico or Nigeria or some such, and those families don't likely watch American web sites. (For that matter, once a family has received notification from the government, why would they look at the lists - they've gotten all the bad news they need.) So it is entirely possible that there is under-reporting. Also, if the decease d's Service Record Book (is it still called an SRB these days?) lists no next of kin, and there is no one listed for survivor benefits, that would be a name that could be safely left off the lists -- but that might get into more bother than it's worth.

Generally, I think it's highly unlikely, but that said, it wouldn't surprise me either.

[Just Me]

7. If the Pentagon is doing ANY kind of "scrubbing", though,....

,...I believe the American people would get really, really upset. Even if the Pentagon is scrubbing hundreds, that behavior is beyond pale.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Well, you gotta remember,

this is an organization that has managed to misplace billions of dollars. If they misplace only a couple hundred dead soldiers, they probably think they're doing pretty well.

On Edit - It just occurred to me that one of the 'secrets' of the pentagon is that there have been 5000+ desertions. It occurs to me that would be a good place to disappear a casualty - "Gee, he just walked off the base and no one's seen him since". That way they can also avoid paying survivor benefits to the family, as well.

Ooh, boy, my tinfoil hat is starting to get warm.

[Just Me]

13. Ummm, yeah. That's actually a very good point.

I never even thought about that.

[merh]

14. hmmmmm

:tinfoilhat: Would our government lie to us? :sarcasm:

You might want to place these under your hate!

I don't believe anything this admin reports. I wear my hat :tinfoilhat: and when it gets hot, I just put some ice on my head.

:hi:

[grumpy old fart]

25. Money doesn't have family. Poor analogy.

Sgt. Johnny Jones of Hoboken N.J., father of Jim and Billy, son of Wilma and Joe, brother of Becky and Steve, husband of Jane, etc. goes missing, is a lot different than a generic Ben Franklin.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. But if they claim that Sgt Jones went over the hill, and nobody

hears from him again, who's to know? If just one in ten was written off as a deserter, that's only 170 out of 5000. You could hide another 1700 in the deserters' numbers, much less 170. Gone is gone.

How closely are the FBI monitoring the families of the deserters? Any attempt by the deserters would be known - that's right up DHS's alley. Therefore, most families would not expect their missing soldier to try to contact them.

So I suggest again, what better place to hide excess casualties?

[LynnTheDem]

70. And the families will all just shrug and say "oh well, always knew our boy

was no good, damn deserter"?

If the families were told their kid/spouse/parent had deserted and no one knew where he'd gone, the families aren't all going to just sit quiet. There'd be at least a few articles about Family Smith worried over their son/daughter/parent/spouse being disappeared.

You'd also have to have a lot of people in on such a cover-up; fellow soldiers, medics, doctors, morgue attendants, whoever's burying/cremating these "deserters". Someone would have squealed long ago.

[RaleighNCDUer]

87. Good points, all.

Wearing the tinfoil a little to tight today.

I appreciate your reasoned and reasonable responses.

[LynnTheDem]

92. Not tinfoil; I think it's VERY good to ask questions, even ones that may

seem far-out. That's how people get ideas of where else to search and what else to search for or maybe an area we hadn't thought of before, etc. Not just in counting deaths accurately, but in any endeavor; the more questions asked, the more likely things won't slip through cracks. :)

[Just Me]

94. What do you think about the record number of suicides over there?

Are those record numbers included in the US War Dead or does a family have to fight to have the soldier counted?

:shrug:

I remember reading an article about a family that raised hell because their suicided soldier was not included in the list of US War Dead/Casualties.

[LynnTheDem]

96. Suicides counting depends; if the soldier kills himself in Iraq, or in a

hospital that he was flown to from Iraq, then yes those deaths are counted, absolutely.

ALL deaths, from heart attacks to murder (fragging) to IEDs are counted IF the soldier dies in Iraq itself, or in or on the way to hospital, regardless where or when.

BUT...unwounded healthy troops who finish their tours in Iraq and are flown home to the USA after their tours and who then kill themselves, are NOT included.

The family that fought to have their soldier included was a soldier who was flown from Iraq to HOSPITAL, and killed himself while in the hospital.

The argument, and the Military agreed, was that because this soldier went directly from Iraq to hospital and killed himself while IN that hospital, his suicide was death from wounds/illness sustained in Iraq, and needs to be counted just like any other sick or wounded soldier is counted when they die in the hospital.

Had he just finished his tour and been sent back to the US as unwounded/not ill, and NOT to a hospital, and then killed himself, he would not be counted. If he came back home, was then found to be suffering under PTSD and a likely suicide candidate, he'd be hospitalized; if he then killed himself in the hospital, he'd be counted.

Same if a soldier was say shot, never told anyone, came home after his tour was up, and then later died from the wound, he'd be counted. Very unlikely scenario, of course.

The problem with suicides back in the US is the difficulty in knowing if it's because of Iraq, or because the soldier comes home & finds his spouse in bed with someone else or has run off with their entire savings, or because the person was simply unstable & always had been, etc. So the military ruling is; suicides committed while the soldier is in a hospital for illness or wounds sustained in Iraq are counted. Then drunk driving deaths back in the US; was the soldier just unlucky as so many Americans are every year? Was he drunk due to mental stress from Iraq? Do you count him or not? The military had to draw a line somewhere, and wherever you draw it some will be excluded or even improperly included.

ICCC is trying to count suicides that are not included and we have a separate list; frictionlessO is in charge of that, among other things.

What do I think about the suicides; well, they're always a part of war, and they're just another reason why wars should NEVER EVER be started unless they are LAST RESORT for DEFENSE of the physical lives of a nation's PEOPLE; NOT for defense of maintaining oil supplies or geopolitics or preventing other nations from outstripping us in economics, etc.

Iraq was most obviously not a war of last resort, nor a war for defense of the people of the United States.

[LynnTheDem]

32. The names of those 5000+ deserters are known.

If a deserter runs to say Canada, and gets run over by a truck in Canda, he ain't gonna be counted, nor should he be.

Maybe a soldier deserted while in Iraq and has now disappeared, and is actually lying dead under the sand in Iraq. That's entirely possible, a wandering criminal may have murdered the deserter & buried him. That means his family don't know he's dead, they only know he's deserted.

It also means the Pentagon only knows he's a deserter, as well...which means they are not hiding US deaths.

[The Magistrate]

37. Presumeably, Ma'am

The dates of the disappearances, the person's unit assignment and its station, are also known? How many occur in Iraq, or even in the Gulf bases?

[LynnTheDem]

40. Yes, that's all known.

Virtually all occurred when troops were at their home bases during leave, or from their home bases before they were to deploy.

As a US military "dependant", I'd prefer to not give any further details as I'm not aware of exactly what info is now in the public domain.

[The Magistrate]

44. That Was My Suspicion, Ma'am

Good to have it confirmed from an un-impeachable source. You efforts in this regard are most valuable, and much appreciated, Ma'am.

[LynnTheDem]

46. Thanks, Magistrate.

Very much appreciated, coz mostly I just get yelled at by the left for not counting enough deaths, and the right, for counting any deaths at all! :D

:hug:

[grumpy old fart]

39. Anyone have a solid source/link on the 5,000 deserter number?

[LynnTheDem]

45. UK Telegraph

There's many such; here's the one I have at hand;

An estimated 5,500 men and women have deserted since the invasion of Iraq, reflecting Washington's growing problems with troop morale.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/09/wus09.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/01/09/ixportal.html

[G_j]

68. actually the Pentagon has misplaced $2.3 trillion

from Peter DeFazio's website:

http://www.house.gov/defazio/UpPentagon.shtml

<snip>
The Pentagon’s own auditors admit the military can’t account for $2.3 trillion in transactions. That means the Pentagon has misplaced $8,000 for every American citizen. The Pentagon can’t account for 25 percent of what it spends on an annual basis.
<snip>

[LynnTheDem]

28. The site that said they'd verified 100 uncounted deaths, do they give any

names? Even one name? If so, we can check to see if that name appears on any of the various ICCC lists, and if not, we can LexNex and verify that the death was a soldier and that s/he died from illness/wounds sustained in Iraq.

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. Unfortunately, I neglected to bookmark it.

It was one of those 'link to a link to a link' to some thread on DU a couple days ago, and as I said, they 'claimed to have verified' - but from here it's just a third-hand rumor. An equally valid explanation could be that they were Blackwater or some such, and their names came up on outdated military lists from before they moved to exploit their skills in the private sector. Who knows.

If I stumble across it again, I'll post it.

[LynnTheDem]

33. Thanks, I'd greatly appreciate that!

:)

[Atman]

10. There are nearly 100,000 "civilian soldiers"

who do NOT get counted. They are not in our military. They are private-contract security forces, Halliburton personnel, mercenaries. A huge force of handsomely-paid freelancers, and LOTS of them have been KIA. They don't count in ANY tallies published.

[Just Me]

12. True. I wonder how many of those private warriors have been killed.

Perhaps, the McLaughlin Group was including that fact in their report. I haven't read it.

[LynnTheDem]

38. ICCC does count mercs, in a separate list. However, as mercs and

contractors are private individuals it's not easy to get a full count.

[RaleighNCDUer]

88. Are the mercs being flown back at government expense, on

government flights into Dover?

That could be one source of these rumors - someone counting the coffins and coming up with more than the military's totals.

(Pure speculation disclaimer)

[LynnTheDem]

91. As far as I'm aware, no, they're brought back at the company's expense

but whether they're on US military flights, that I don't know. That's a good possibility, as they'd be pretty much the only flights out.

Lemme ask hubby, brb...

Ok we got the scoop on what he says is "normal procedure"; if they're killed up north, they're probably flown on military flights (the only flights coming & going in the area) to wherever the flight is headed (Kuwait, Qatar, Doha, even Germany) and the company arranges civilian flights from there back to the US.

If killed down south, they're usually trucked to Doha and then the company arranges civilian flights from there back to the States.

The company pays expenses. He says "normally" there wouldn't be civilian dead coming into Dover AFB.

As for that "more coffins" rumor, I believe that's an urban legend; it's always "a friend of a friend who's a soldier at Dover says..." I've not yet seen an actual first-hand account or a name of any soldier saying there are more coffins. Also, troops at Dover don't work 24/7, so it's hard to see how any one unit, let alone a single soldier, could know how many are coming in.

Went back to hubby on this; he says 3 people at Dover know the count; the logistics officer, his NCO, and his clerk. Plus the upper echelon (the Big Cheezies). The regular soldiers standing on the tarmac wouldn't have a clue how many have come in.

HTH :)

[Stockholm]

11. Divide and conquer??

[soothsayer]

15. Hey, if someone dies in the post office, you drag 'em off the

property so you can avoid doing all that paperwork. Same thing here.

[The Magistrate]

16. The Source Of This Number, Sir

Is speculation by a hack of The Barnes Review, a notorious right wing hate site, dedicated to exposing Jewish control of the United States, and world events in general, that has grown out of the remnants of the old Minuteman movement, a group that in its day rather suspected the John Birch Society was not quite right enough....

[katinmn]

17. Lynnthedem , our resident expert on this topic, has debunked this

[The Magistrate]

19. And Done So Thoroughly And Expertly, Ma'am

"Rover was killed by a Pontiac, and it was done with such grace and artistry, witnesses awarded the driver both ears, and the tail."

[katinmn]

23. Well said.

:)

[grumpy old fart]

21. Why does this come up every day? It's Urban Myth, pure and simple.....

http://icasualties.org/oif/ is as accurate as it gets. This B.S. has been refuted, ad nauseum, on DU and elsewhere by simple logic. (i.e. the hundreds of silenced relatives/friends required to carry it off)

[Just Me]

27. Well, apparently, all American casualties are not being reported.

The troop figures reflected by the site may very well be fairly accurate. However, if there are thousands of "private warrior" and contractor deaths being concealed, then the actual American casualties are being manipulated.

IOW the human cost of this war is being misrepresented.

[The Magistrate]

29. Apples And Oranges, Ma'am

The claim is that U.S. military casualties actually total many thousands greater than the Pentagon reports. That does not seem to be true.

It does not stand to reason, either, that any great number of contract employees who are U.S. citizens are being killed. Certainly they are not being killed in such great numbers as to make stand the claim that "actual" U.S. casualties total six or seven thousands.

[grumpy old fart]

34. Contractor figures are indeed a whole 'nother ball game.

But there is no Government obligation to count these numbers. These folks aren't under orders to be there. They choose to be there for the money. You roll the dice, you take your chances.

[Just Me]

41. Yeah. But, they are, in fact, part of US War Dead.

Their lives are also spent.

[grumpy old fart]

49. Well, yes, but you may as well start counting the "sacrifice" of Earnhardt

or others who risk their lives doing dangerous things for money. Volunteering to enter the military to defend your country and then being ordered into war is a far cry from voluntarily chasing a buck on a whim, with the concomitant ability to leave if and when you change your mind.

[Just Me]

53. Ummm. No. Earnhardt wasn't operating in a war theatre.

I certainly make that distinction.

But, I'm just expressing my personal opinion that "U.S. War Casualties" should include private American citizens doing contract work in the Iraq war so that a more accurate reflection of the human cost can be achieved.

Don't mistake my opinion as being a reflection of my feelings towards mercs and private militia. I believe there should be laws strictly prohibiting that shit.

[LynnTheDem]

52. PRIVATE CITIZENS' deaths are not always reported by their EMPLOYERS

but that doesn't have anything to do with the US military or the Pentagon, as they don't have legal control over private individuals.

The companies who hire mercs usually refuse to publish any info on merc deaths for security reasons, and the US military has no control over forcing these private companies, or mercs' families, to release such info.

Should these private companies be forced to relsease such info? Dunno; would it put other citizens at increased risk? Do the private citizens want such info to be released in the event of their deaths? Would private firms then refuse to send private citizens, resulting in the need for a US draft, meaning your kids?

I dunno the answers or what's best, but I do tend to think democracy means private firms having the right to keep employee info private and not under Pentagon/US military control.

[Just Me]

55. The serious accountability problem associated with these companies,...

,...is one of the reasons I don't like them and believe private mercs/militias should be prohibited.

With respect to whether the Pentagon has control over these people,...hmmm,...legal control, no, but I have no doubt that logistical planning certainly occurs. I would even go so far as to assert that, these mercs are the ones responsible for the vast majority of torture, and the Pentagon has placed them in that role, on purpose.

That's the other thing that bothers me: the Pentagon can escape accountability as well by utilizing these private forces.

Since the Pentagon is utilizing these people, why shouldn't they be counted as part of the "U.S. War Dead/Injured"? :shrug: I just think they should for purposes of more accurately reflecting the actual American human cost of the BushCo/neoCON wars.

[LynnTheDem]

58. I don't like them either. Mercs are always the downfall of empires.

And yes, I believe the Pentagon is outsourcing BECAUSE of the lack of accountability. But it isn't just America using private firms; cooks, laundery services, doctors, oil pipeline specialists, builders, etc, as well as private security guards.

The problem though is where the line gets drawn. As long as they are private firms and private citizens, the govt simply does not have the right to publish their private info against their wishes and I know I sure as hell do NOT want the US gov having any such right over me and/or my business firm.

As much as I dislike mercs, I don't want more killed, either, and I'm against info being published that could put more citizens at risk.

To demand NO MERCS allowed would be one way to sort this out to some extent, but then a whole lot of those mercs are not US-hired. We don't have the right to tell Poland they can't use mercs or contractors in Iraq.

Unfortunately we are stuck in a world that is very far from what we'd like it to be. :(

[DemonFighterLives]

102. Good post!

If they are "our" mercs, I want to know where I invited them and what power structure is paying them. I don't remember voting for privatization of everything.

[DistressedAmerican]

26. OMG! NOT TRUE! TOTALLY DEBUNKED.

I'm sure it was an honesrt info request but, this rumopr seems to persist. Please EVERYONE HELP. DO not pass this rumor any more. Debunk it when you see it. There is no truth to it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

59. "Totally debunked"? Really? What independent agency....

...is double-checking the DoD's reporting on this subject? What independent agency is double-checking the reporting of the mainstream media on this subject?

Why are the planes flying into Dover at night, and why won't the government of the NeoCon Junta allow reporters to photograph the incoming coffins? And please don't tell me that Clinton ordered this, because it was actually ordered by Bush I, and suspended during the eight years of Clinton's Presidency. And please don't tell me that they fly in at night because of their alleged schedule of departure from Iraq and Germany.

How many other other cities are being used for the purpose of receiving the dead from Afghanistan and Iraq?

What are they hiding?

"Totally debunked"? Perhaps it is to you, but I'm not the only one that's asking questions about this issue.

[Atman]

61. Thank you.

You usually hear the "totally debunked" line with the same back-up proof as you hear the original charge. None. Just "This has been debunked." Well guess what? I've not seen it "debunked" in any suitably believable forum. As has been stated, these figures come to us from the Pentagon. You know them, right? The guys about whose lying we spend hours on this board posting? Those guys. Why are we suddenly willing to believe the Pentagon on this matter? Did they suddenly sprout angel wings?

[DistressedAmerican]

65. Go Search Out LynntheDem's Post Referenced In Posts 17 and 19.

It was thorough and convincing.

I do not intend to sit here and redo all of that work. Do some post searches and you will find it. I have better things to do since I have already ready it.

Tinfoil hats and mystery flights aside, please look for the post.

The info was primarily from www.icasualties.org.

They are doing more than anyone to count the dead accurately. Please see their site. They are not the Pentagon. They are a credible activist organization working against the war. Why would they want to lie?

[LynnTheDem]

73. And 2 of them are DUers

;)

[DistressedAmerican]

75. Thank You So Much For That Important Post!!!

With all of these rumors floating, fact checking is where it is at. Great work!!!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

108. So, tell us what the sources are again?....

...DoD and CentCom, right?

And they've never lied to the American people, have they?

[LynnTheDem]

112. LOL!

You know damn well what ICCC uses as sources, and you know damn well we use DoD & Centcom releases as VERIFICATION, not as sources, and I know you know, because I've told you so many times myself...yet still you insist on making the same false statement.

Why is that?

:)

[katinmn]

84. You're right. I cut some corners by saying it has been debunked

It's just that this assertion comes up about once a week and then someone has to spend a lot of time pulling up Exhibit A, B and C.

I think I will bookmark this thread since it is bound to come up again.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

109. And those bookmarks start and end with the DoD, don't they?...

...You still trust those guys?

[LynnTheDem]

113. And yet another of the same false statement.

Starting to sound like quite the agenda.

[katinmn]

114. No and no.

It is a collection of and by independent sources. It is being done precisely because the DoD is NOT trusted.

Oh, never mind. The info is here if you want to take time to read it.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

63. All of your questions...

...have been answered countless times. You just don't like the answers.

[frictionlessO]

72. Please MLD if you have proof then present it.

ICCC wants to count all casualties... badly. SO badly in fact that at least I wake up thinking about casualties, I dream about them. All day long I think about them and read about them and research them.

You are so convinced and I understand your pessimism so very well. Who the hell can you trust and/or even believe about one thing anymore? Well I can tell you this.. you can trust Lynn and I on this because we'd be leading the charge to the gates of the WH and beyond if this hiding massive amounts of deaths (not only injured)is true.

So what I need and ICCC needs is articles naming names of any families who have come out and confirmed that their family members death was hidden purposefully and succesfully.
Do that and you'll get some very very VERY vocal and material support.

Also from my point of view I just dont think they are indeed intelligent and crafty enough to pull such a thing off, truth always seeks the light of day. Look at Pvt. Lynch look at Pat Tilman... Everytime they try and bend a bad situation into a propaganda exercise they fail, miserably. That is however truly anecdotal.

Anyways I do appreciate your activism, and again I do appreciate where you are coming from.

[DistressedAmerican]

76. Glad To See You Are On this As Well. How About Some More Info On ICCC

I am not familiar. Sounds like a good organization though.

Clue me in!

[frictionlessO]

79. ?? ICCC??

its icasualties.org ICCC = Iraq Coalition Casualty Count.

hehe... I am on it alrighty! lol Visions of Beastie Boys whenever I hear the phrase. ;-)

[DistressedAmerican]

81. Got It! I Prefer Brass Monkey Myself!!!

Brass Monkey, That Funky Monkey!!!

[frictionlessO]

82. ahh yes... I popped and locked to that one with my old crew.

Back in the day, linoleum and a fresh ass boombox.. kickin out windmills and kneespins.

ahh the days when life was really a sorta weird musical. Now its just a really c-rate horror flick.

[DistressedAmerican]

85. That's It! I Am Putting On Paul's Boutique RIGHT NOW!!!

Gotta Bump Some Beasties!!!

Never popped or locled though. Still have your parachute pants?

[frictionlessO]

86. Hehe nope! Ripped the crotch out about 15 years ago on my last pair.

(yes I still had a pair in '90:P )

Every crew had a fat guy or hot looking girl in it as the "ace" up the sleeve so to speak. Just like in the movies! BWahaha.. it was a lot of fun, a joke that we took way to seriously... but hey we coulda been fighting instead!

Hey Check out Lynns post to you re about ICCC below.

[LynnTheDem]

93. You WHAT to your crotch???!

:wow:

Bet there's a story behind that. :D

[frictionlessO]

98. Shhhhhhhhhh.....

:blush: :blush:

yes... that was the uhmmm day I stopped uhmmm breakdancing. (it was supposed to be just for fun but I got challenged!!, the ensuing crotch ripping was witnessed by friends and not friends alike... it was still entertaining I'm sure!)....

[LynnTheDem]

99. LOL!!!

Hey I am ALWAYS up for crotch-witnessing, sorry I missed it. :D

(Did I just say that out loud?) :blush:

[DistressedAmerican]

100. Crotch Witness! Sounds Like A BAnd Name To Me!!!

[frictionlessO]

104. Like GWAR only with a kind of Enya bent???

:)

[LynnTheDem]

106. rotfl!

:rofl:

[frictionlessO]

103. hehehe yes you did!

:blush: backatcha!

[LynnTheDem]

107. Heh...don't ya hate when that happens...

LOL!

:hug:

[frictionlessO]

116. In this case nah...

Blushing was fun :blush:
and nothing beats a Lynn hug :hug:


awwww shucks...

[LynnTheDem]

118. gwarsh!

:hug:

[LynnTheDem]

83. Info on ICCC;

It was started by Pat (woman in California, well-known for her twice-weekly, now once-weekly vigils) and Michael.

Are they anti-bush, anti Iraq war, you might ask. Well, here's their blog, Lunaville;

http://www.lunaville.com/blogging/

Oh yes, they certainly are anti-bush, anti Iraq war. And then some.

That's how I came to know Pat & Michael and became a "body hunter" myself.

Frictionless was interested in helping, and is now a full-fledged "body hunter" for the ICCC.

Pat & Michael started the ICCC because Centcom & the DoD issued death notices but did not keep a tally, so it was very difficult to know the total deaths.

This changed, in August 2003, from tallying the official notices to actively seeking deaths and then using DoD/Centcom releases as verification.

Here's what I do;

I monitor worldwide newsfeeds that are set to search through an average of 20,500 articles, blogs, websites etc every 5 minutes for any mention of what I've set my key words for.

Any mention of deaths that I find, I forward to the ICCC gang. Deaths of soldiers, US or coalition, Pat sets up "slots" for. When we have credible info, via news articles or via Centom/DoD official notices, Pat then posts the death to the public ICCC site and adds to the total.

Any deaths that are posted and added to the total but do not also have a DoD/Centcom official release Pat then chases the DoD and Centcom to release death notices.

Why do we wait until we have either credible news accounts, and/or DoD/Centcom releases?

1. To avoid duplicate counting.

If a news article says "3 US troops killed" and then a Texas paper says "1 US soldier from Texas killed", is that 4 all total, or 3, one of whom is from Texas? Pat spends literally hours every week sorting out all the deaths to ensure none are duplicated, and all deaths mentioned are accounted for.

2. To avoid non-existant deaths.

So we're not "Dan Rathered" by freeps or other crazy people.

Why do we prefer having, and chase down when we don't have, DoD/Centcom official notices?

Because those are hard fact official notices with hard facts about the person listed. Freepers can't deny those deaths; they happened, they're real, and the US Military says so with names, dates, units, hometowns, etc.

A newspaper -a dozen papers- may say Sgt John Smythe, 21, was killed in Iraq and people could say it's a "liberal conspiracy" or that it's just one reporter saying so, such as AP, and all the other articles are just repeating the one reporter in an echo chamber.

If the papers are credible, we'll post that death and add it to the count...but when Centcom and/or DoD release an official notice that Sgt John Smythe, 21, was killed in Iraq, then that simply puts an end to anyone (moran) trying to deny the death happened.

HTH :)

[katinmn]

89. Thank you, Lynnthedem and FrictionlessO, and of course,

Pat and Michael for the noble effort undertaken.

Looks foolproof to me. Very dilligent.

:hug:

[LynnTheDem]

95. Foolproof? Ehhhhh....let's say we try to make it as foolproof as possible

Mistakes can make for fallen soldiers slipping through the cracks, but we're talking a handful, I'd bet on less than 20. But not deliberately being hidden.

And we are actively searching to make sure that's the case & that it remains the case. *sniff sniff sniff*

[DistressedAmerican]

90. That Is AWESOME WORK!!! I Am SO Glad You Folks Are On It.

Clearly this info is needed. To many bogus rumors floating around. I'll get a link added to my site for them soon!!!

Keep it up. You are an inspiration. Conctere action like you describe is going to end this war. Bush sure as hell isn't!!!

I bow down...

[LynnTheDem]

35. How this story got started; translating Arabic to English

The original article was in Arabic, where the author said US officials are NOT SHOWING THE TRUE EXTENT of CASUALTIES in Iraq, because US officials ONLY mention US soldiers KILLED.

US officials don't mention the number of US soldiers wounded, or UK troops killed, or UK troops wounded, or coalition troops killed & wounded or Iraqi troops killed or wounded.

The article never said the US was hiding the true number of US SOLDIERS' DEATHS; it said by ONLY speaking of US troop deaths and not of the coalition & Iraqi troop deaths & wounded, the US was COVERING UP THE EXTENT OF CASUALTIES in Iraq.

***Note: "casualty" means dead AND sick AND wounded, not just "dead".

That article was then "translated" by the racist neoNazi site, TBR, as meaning the US is covering up US SOLDIERS' DEATHS.

[dogday]

56. It's all in their definition of words.

I believe we are getting most of the picture. I wonder do non-citizens count?

[LynnTheDem]

74. US military who are non-US citizens are counted, yes.

The US military, however, does not count UK troops or Polish troops etc who are killed; only US military are counted by the US military.

[alcibiades_mystery]

66. Absolute, unmitigated bullshit

Too often in response to the ridiculous assertion that the Pentagon is hiding 1,000, 2,000, even 7,000 American troop deaths, I've seen the response "I wouldn't be surprised" or worse, "I don't doubt it." These responses are inadequate and essentially unthinking. They are not positive arguments and shouldn't be treated as such.

We can use our reasoning powers and common sense to determine - to a high level of probability - that the current death count of 1742 is entirely accurate. Can it be determined to a certainty? No, few things outside of theoretical mathematics ever can be. But the "opinion" that the count is accurate is much more probable than the opinion that the government is hiding numerous troop deaths. Why?

In order to believe that the count is accurate you'd only have to believe that there are enough eyes on the question to prevent any cover-up of any number of deaths - even five additional deaths. That's not hard to believe. You don't have to believe the government to believe that the casualty figures are accurate. You only have to believe that it would be extremely difficult for the government to fudge these numbers successfully, and it would be.

Now let's review what you'd have to believe in order to believe the opposite:

1) Sounds of Silence NOT ONE person connected to these additional deaths has come forward to seek recognition for their loved one. ZERO. NONE. NOT ONE. When you think of how many people would be thus connected to even ONE additional death, you see that this 100% success rate in "hushing up" people who would otherwise have a driving interest in having a relative, friend, student, comrade, etc. recognized in the official toll is completely implausible. I've seen some claims that there are 6000 total dead. The claim is thus that there are 4,300 additional dead? More than 6000 minus the approx 1700 we know about, right? Let's do the math, shall we?

4,300 KIA X 20 family/friend/teacher/comrade/coworker each = 86,000 people connected to these KIAs.

Of those 86,000,

NOT ONE is aware of icasualties.org, or the dozens of news sites purporting to list all the KIAs, OR, if aware
NOT ONE has looked up the name of their loved one and found it missing, OR, if they've looked it up
NOT ONE has contacted those sites (and especially icasulaties.org) to report this defect in the list.

Let's also remember that Nightline has TWICE presented what it purported to be a complete list of the dead for a determined period, as has Doonesbury, so we can transfer those same numbers to NIGHTLINE and Doonesbury as well, thus:

NOT ONE was aware that Nightline or Doonesbury was running a list of names, OR, if aware
NOT ONE watched Nightline or saw Doonesbury to see their dead relative/friend/comrade/coworkers/student, etc. named OR, if they watched
NOT ONE contacted Nightline or Doonesbury about the defect in their list, OR, if you choose to believe that Nightline or Doonesbury would then cover that up (a laughable assertion in the case of Trudeau!),
NOT ONE otherwise publicized the defect in the various ways we have of publicizing something.

NOT ONE. ZERO. OUT OF 86,000 (and that is a VERY conservative estimate of the number of people who would otherwise have known 4,300 different people!) Never before in the history of human events has a cover-up managed to include so many people who have no interest in perpetuating it, and - in fact - have a strong emotional interest in EXPOSING IT! It's a miracle cover-up, a magic cover-up...just like the magical thinking that would allow anyone to believe it.It is, in short, a silly belief to hold, but you'd have to hold it in order to believe that deaths are being covered up.

2) South of the Border - So, do some hold that belief? Yes, some do. And the new way they've justified it (i.e., tried to make it appear less silly) is by claiming that the extra casualties are all non-citizen personnel - so-called "green card military." The next sly step is to imply that these green-card military mainly come from Mexico and Central American countries. How, they ask, can Mexican and Central American parents be expected to contact the US media or otherwise be aware of the the current lists? Aside from the obnoxious racist presumption of such an argument (which asks you to believe that Mexican and Central Americans are somehow less in tune with their kids, siblings, friends, etc., and less capable of publicizing their issues, Zapatistas notwithstanding!), it also calls on you to believe that ALL the extra deaths fall into this category.

If the number of extra deaths is small (say, less than 200), you'd still have to be surprised by the 100% success rate in the cover-up, and you'd also have to wonder why the government would bother (and risk so much with so many contingencies out of its control!) to hide these deaths. If the number is assumed to be big, you'd still have the problems of the 100% success rate in cover-up (compounded), plus a number of other problems. Some have suggested 4,000 extra casualties, which would mean that the insurgents hit these non-citizen personnel at a 2 to 1 rate! Do they have Magic Mexican-Seeking I.E.D.'s? Do their suicide attacks on Humvees magically strike a minority group at twice the rate of the other groups? That's a miraculously LUCKY rate....LUCKY for the US government, that is, which is intent on covering up green-card casualties. Imagine if it had gone otherwise, and they hit citizens at twice the rate! We'd only have a third as many hidden casualties...guess the pentagon cover-up dodged that bullet! Miraculous! Or, as people with a shred of common sense say, utterly implausible.

Never mind that there are only 45,000 non-citizen personnel from all countries in the entire US military (all branches). If you're gullible or intent enough on believing 1) and 2), I suppose you'd also think that the government is lying about that figure. Never mind that the government would have to rely on the total and perpetual silence of even the comrades-in-arms of these non-citizen personnel - combat veterans being somehow now notorious for covering up the deaths of their comrades-in-arms and letting them be buried in secret without the honor of a mention! We are to believe that combat troops don't put much stock in "honor and recognition" anymore! If you're gullible or intent enough on believing 1) and 2), I suppose you'd also believe that we have non-citizen-only units that rove around Iraq taking massive casualties without any other military unit noticing! Never mind that the one activist group that supports non-citizen military personnel, particularly those of Mexican citizenship, says http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/05/22/MNGQ2CSURU1.DTL">no such thing, and in fact says the opposite, claiming that half the Latinos acknowledged on the list are Mexican non-US-citizens (which would beg the question of why the Pentagon would count only some, but not all of those with such status!). We are now to believe that one of the primary anti-war activists - a father whose non-citizen son was killed in Iraq and is on the list - is in on the cover-up!

3) Dover AFB Delirium I should add a third argument that is often thrown out, despite its being a ridiculous non sequitor. It goes like this: Why else would they prohibit pictures being taken at Dover? It is never cashed out with any further description, possibly because it is laughably incoherent, and further description would expose it as a sham argument. It is thus left bare, a simmering implication, but examined with any courage, even the implication is preposterous. Let's examine. Why would "they" prohibit the pictures at Dover? Why indeed. We're meant to believe that the only possible reason to do so would be to hide these extra dead bodies rolling through. But is that the only possible reason? Of course not. It is much more likely that even the daily sight of the acknowledged casualties would produce a negative PR effect in the American public. One need not suppose anything more sinister than that: even the 1742 is far too much for the American public to bear in the graphic sight of flag-draped coffins, and "they" damn well know it. So there is another possible reason for keeping Dover closed to cameras, and it doesn't involve "extra" coffins; the ones we know about are sufficient.

But let's look further into the other possibility, if only for its comic value. The implication is that there are hundreds - even thousands - of coffins coming through Dover that aren't acknowledged. So, the Pentagon goes out of its way to hide these casualties, but continues to drape them in flags and send them back on military planes, and bring them out at the standard body arrival site, and expose them to the troops there, who are assumed to remain silent in perpetuity? Could one imagine a more ridiculous scenario? This is some amazing cover-up that refuses to dispense with tradition, despite the threat that tradition poses to the success of the cover-up! If the Pentagon is going to hide these casualties at all, why bother bringing them back through Dover? Why not just bury them in the desert (as one of the sites has suggested happens to the green-card personnel (see 2) above)? Are we to believe that the same schemers who have hushed up tens of thousands of family members and friends and dishonored thousands of dead continue to honor them with the standard transport through the standard channels? What fool would believe such a thing? Oh, but people will say, if they don't bring them back through Dover, then they couldn't send them out to their families officially! See 1) above for the intractable tangles this would get a believer into. The Dover argument is clownish on its face.

These beliefs are thus not equal. They are not of the same status simply because neither can be "known" to a mathematical certainty. The first belief - that the reported numbers are accurate - is supported by specific evidence, painstakingly collected by people like LynntheDem and the good people at www.icasualties.org , who are not connected with the government and actually work as watchdogs on the government. It requires us only to believe that the government couldn't possibly accomplish a cover-up on this level because the scrutiny is too severe and the conditions for success too tenuous. The risks of detection are too great and the ability to control those who may become aware of the cover-up next to zero. It requires us only to believe, in other words, that a 100% success rate is implausible for covering up such information.

The second belief is supported by no evidence whatsoever, and requires us to accept a number of "facts" that are contrary to all experience and common sense (see 1), 2) and 3) above).

These beliefs are not equal in their uncertainty, but remarkably disparate in their probability. The first is probable and reasonable.The second is incredibly improbable and therefore utterly irrational. "I wouldn't be surprised" is not an argument. "I don't doubt it" - when lacking any evidence and any plausibility - is not a reasonable position, but the position of a dogmatist. Reasonable people doubt any claim that is not supported. Unreasonable people accept any claim they desire to accept, and when they can't support it, and when they can't make plausible arguments for it, simply say that they don't doubt it.

[LynnTheDem]

78. Additional info re Dover AFB;

The prohibition on pics has been in place since 1991; yes Clinton allowed 3 exceptions, but he never removed the prohibition itself.

The majority of the military troops & families WANT that prohibition.

People should think about how they'd feel:

How would YOU feel having reporters and cameras all over the coffin of YOUR loved one on their first arrival home to US soil? Having reporters and cameras thrust into YOUR face, ights flashing at you, reporters demanding to know how you feel about the death of YOUR loved one, the death you only found out about a few days previously?

I gotta admit, I'd start punching people.

[onenote]

97. excellent post

One additional thought. Another variant on the "hidden" deaths is the number of private security personnel and/or contractors (sometimes its just the security folks, sometimes its anyone working in Iraq) that have been killed. I've seen suggestions that there are probably 1000s of such unreported deaths.

First, the number of private security forces in Iraq is generally not known, but the typical estimate that I've seen is around 20,000. The total number of contractors is also uncertain, but for some reason the usubstantiated number 100,000 seems to have taken root.

Second, even if those numbers are correct (or at least in the ballpark), the assumption that 1000s have died is dubious to say the least. A very large number of the contractors work in the areas of Iraq that are the most secure, including the Green Zone. While there are no absolutely safe places in Iraq, some areas are definitely more dangerous than others the number of contractors in the most dangerous areas is probably fairly low. Even more importantly, if 1000s of contractors were dying in Iraq, it would be hard to keep it secret. Maybe the companies don't publicize it, but if people die, their families and friends learn about it, funerals are held, etc. These folks have no reason to keep the fact that their loved ones died in Iraq a secret. They would want them to get recognition. So its not surprising that when a civilian contractor or private security personnel die in Iraq, there typically is a story about it the local paper. http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/05/03/67051785.shtml?Element_ID=67051785

Without question, there have been a number of deaths among the civilian contractor population (not all of whom are Americans). But searching the web suggests that the number of contractors getting killed in Iraq is not in the thousands.

The fact that anyone is dying over there -- military,civilian, Iraqi, American, or anyone else -- is horrible given the false pretenses and utter lack of necessity for the war. But it does us no good to make charges about thousands of additional dead soldiers that we can't back up and then -- echoing the administration's own changing rationales -- switch from saying that the thousands of hidden dead are soldiers to saying their contractors, when there is no evidence to support that either.

onenote

[Logician]

71. Thanks to everyone

It seemed implausible to me, so I needed to get the dope on the real situation!