Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

140,000 U.S. troops occupying Iraq, almost 2,000 have been killed.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:44 PM
Original message
140,000 U.S. troops occupying Iraq, almost 2,000 have been killed.
Not to mention almost 15,000 wounded, by the OFFICIAL toll. Other estimates are higher.

They've been rotated in and out, but that is still NOT a good percentage.

A number of our troops equal to approximately 1.4% of our occupying force have been KILLED.

A number of our troops equal to approximately 10.7% of our occupying force have been wounded, by the official estimates. Many of them have been severely wounded, maimed for life.

These might be good percentages to point out to anyone that is thinking of joining the military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yeah, statistics don't lie........
I've never thought about it in those terms, and you're right. That's sobering to look at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there is a very real chance
that anyone who is over there will get killed or wounded.

It's not a *good* chance, but it's significant. It wouldn't be a freak occurrence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueJac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's rotate this way......
The National Guards come home and we send the House of Representatives, then we bring home the reserves and we send in the Senate. Think the war would be over in a New York minute!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tex-wyo-dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. Just curious...how does this compare with statistics from Vietnam?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I think it would be difficult to compare, at this point.
For one, our force in Vietnam was continually increased over the years to over half a million troops.

And, our involvement there lasted for something like 12 to 14 years, with the final toll being over 58,000 dead.

We've only been in Iraq for about 2 1/2 years, at this point, and our occupying force is much smaller than the highest force we had in Vietnam.

So, I'm not sure how to compare them, really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boardwalk Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. You have to show the rates as a % of unique soldiers that have been there.
I think that about 375,000 unique soldiers have served in the Iraq theater to date. That would mean your rate must be divided by 2.68. The 1.4 becomes .522 and the 10.7 becomes 3.99 because each unique soldier was exposed to the risk of death or injury over the last number of months we have been there; not just the current 140,000.

Math is not that tricky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Not necessarily.
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 04:06 PM by BullGooseLoony
It depends on if you're looking at the chances of any one particular soldier who goes over there, or if you're looking at the chance of any particular soldier who is actually there at the moment. The troops who have come home, or haven't gone yet, obviously can't be killed or maimed by the Iraqis, so that would seem to distort the chance of being killed or maimed downward. There are only 140,000 troops there at any given time.

The problem with these percentages is the time factor. The most precise way of putting these percentages would be in terms of per day, week, month, or year of service. But, I don't have the relevant stats for that.

I think a good, simple way of looking at it is just in terms of how many troops are there at any given time, compared with how many have been killed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boardwalk Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. My college statistics professor would have just given you an F
for that answer and thrown your thesis away.

Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. What thesis?
Edited on Fri Sep-30-05 04:25 PM by BullGooseLoony
BTW, check out what I wrote below, if you want the CORRECT way of looking at it, as opposed to the way that you suggested, using the total number of troops that have been there. That particular statistic is totally irrelevant. Different soldiers have toured for different periods of time, and the risk percentage for each of them, disregarding their particular jobs, should be the same.

If you could also point out anything that is incorrect in my OP, that would be great.

I know exactly what I'm doing here, my friend. I aced the math on my SAT's twice- once on the SAT, once on the PSAT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. You know, on second thought, maybe we do have the stats to do that.
Let's put this in terms of per year of service. Could we possibly find an average tour of service length somewhere? That would be a good unit to use.

Anyway, we've had about 140,000 troops there, give or take a few thousand (and it's gone up and down), since March of 2003. It's been approximately 30 months, or 2 1/2 years, since the invasion.

So, 140,000 times 2 1/2 years of occupation equals about 350,000 man/years of service.

Divide that into 2,000 dead, and you get about .57% risk per man per year of service, for getting killed.

Being wounded is about 4.2% per man per year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neweurope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
9. The death quota among Iraqis is quite higher. I'm more
interested in that. Sorry.

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Yeah, but that's not going to be as relevant to someone who is
considering joining our military.

I'm just trying to put some perspective on our soldiers' chances of getting hurt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neweurope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Yes, I understand. But I'm just pushing THIS story:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

My heart is bleeding over that...

---------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 14th 2014, 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC