73,000 AMERICAN DEAD - Page 3

The Old Medic · #21 01-29-2009, 01:45 PM

You are a liar.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has said no such thing, and they wouldn't. There is no 73,000 dead in the Iraq war. Your "source" made this up, and he must be smoking something really powerfull to have hallucinations that strong.

BlueAngel · #22 01-29-2009, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Old Medic

You are a liar.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has said no such thing, and they wouldn't. There is no 73,000 dead in the Iraq war. Your "source" made this up, and he must be smoking something really powerfull to have hallucinations that strong.

A link was provided; however, it appears to be inactive at present.

George_Bush copied and pasted a portion of it.

Did Roscoe's source make it up?

I don't know, but I find the following figure very odd:

Total U.S. Military Gulf War Deaths: 73,846
– Deaths amongst Deployed: 17,847
– Deaths amongst Non-Deployed: 55,999
--------------------------------------------------------------

Deaths amongst non-deployed: 55,999.

To whom are they referring?

Iraqi citizens?

How do they even know?

jmt · #23 03-10-2009, 05:10 PM

since this thread is about numbers I have a newsstory that i saw well about three weeks ago. I was in a mcdonalds where they play cnn on TV, well theirs was a story on how thier was 83,000 missing guns and i was with two of my friends and one believed the story so i called him out on it! so i tell him

" that story is a lie 83,000 guns missing???? you have to be stupid to believe that story now just image this mcdonalds had 40ppl in it all with guns! now thats alot of people with AK47s....now image 100 people in the micky D's with guns that even alot more guns! now image 1,000 guns one to each person! then multiply that by 80,000!" Now how the hell does the fing United States of America lose 83,000 AK47 that are three feet long!?
the lies they try to sell you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/opinion/07tue3.html

BlueAngel · #24 03-10-2009, 08:03 PM

There was an estimate of Iraqi deaths in our local newspaper and the number was from (?) to 600,000.

jmt · #25 03-11-2009, 06:18 AM

^ i dint think we have lost that many blueangel.

Revelation1217 · #26 03-25-2009, 02:23 PM

I know things look bad, but sometimes it pays to hope for the best.

BlueAngel · #27 03-25-2009, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt

^ i dint think we have lost that many blueangel.

I was referencing Iraqi deaths.

EireEngineer · #28 10-27-2009, 12:42 PM

A quick search of "Iraq US Casualties" comes up with numbers that are quite a ways away from 73,000. Both ICasualties and AntiWar.com come up with 4351 dead and 31,536 wounded whil Global Security has 4,269 and 30,182. Everyone should beware of single source reporting. I find it is helpful to look at a few sites on the left and a few on the right, and if there numbers agree within %10 or so, its a pretty safe bet the true number is somewhere in between them.

BlueAngel · #29 10-27-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EireEngineer

A quick search of "Iraq US Casualties" comes up with numbers that are quite a ways away from 73,000. Both ICasualties and AntiWar.com come up with 4351 dead and 31,536 wounded whil Global Security has 4,269 and 30,182. Everyone should beware of single source reporting. I find it is helpful to look at a few sites on the left and a few on the right, and if there numbers agree within %10 or so, its a pretty safe bet the true number is somewhere in between them.

I know a military person.

He says they lie as far as casualties are concerned.

Thanks for your opinion, however.

We'll take it into consideration.

EireEngineer · #30 10-28-2009, 07:57 AM

Ahh...anecdotal evidence....the purest kind. True that they do delay releasing casualty information, or lie about the extent of the casualties, when there is a controversial situation, like a "Friendly Fire" incident. When I hit a landmine in Bosnia things were certainly covered up while the investigation went on, since my unit had proofed this road the day before. Part of the reason that coverups like this happen, though, is that people outside the military have little, if any, understanding about the nature of warfighting. In the fog of war all manner of calamities can befall the soldier, from friendly fire to poor intel. Combat is an inherently dangerous business, and no matter what level of training you have nor and high tech gear they may issue, people get killed for the stupidest reasons. Then, because of the media reaction, yes, sometimes they have to lie to the press while they figure out just why Pvt Johnson had a gun stuck down his pants.