25,000

December 14, 2006

My friend Tom Schaller noted today that we passed a major war-related milestone recently, when we reached the 25,000th American casualty — about 22,000 wounded, and nearly 3,000 dead. (Newsweek’s Glenn Kutler created a powerful slideshow on the subject.)

It prompted Tom to raise an interesting question.

So far this month, there have been 48 American fatalities through 14 days which, should that pace continue, will result in 106 total fatalities by month’s end. There have never been back-to-back triple-digit fatality months during the war, and this month will be no exception, since November brought only 69 fatalities. But if this month continues at its present pace, it will mark the second time there has been two triple-digit fatality months within a three-month span. The other such window? That would be November 2004 when, after six months of waiting for Bush’s re-election to begin the assault on Fallujah, we lost 137 Americans, followed soon thereafter by 107 fatalities in January 2005. In fact, if December 2006 does, tragically, reach 106 fatalities, the Oct-Dec 2006 will become the deadliest calendar quarter of the war, with 281 fatalities. During the fourth quarter of 2004, which included the Fallujah counter-offensive, there were just 272 American fatalities.

I’m compelled to ask: Has anyone else in the media noted the 25,000 threshold? Will they, at month’s end, note this as the deadliest quarter in the war should that reality, sadly, eventuate? Given that almost nobody mentions the fact that more Americans have been killed in Iraq than were killed on September 11, 2001, I seriously doubt it.

When the 2,500th American soldier died in Iraq over the summer, I remember there was ample news coverage. At a White House press briefing, a reporter asked Tony Snow if the president had “any response or reaction” to the milestone, prompting the press secretary to say, “It’s a number, and every time there’s one of these 500 benchmarks people want something.”

But Tom’s right, the 25,000th American casualty seems to have drawn almost no interest at all. I did a little digging, and found some evidence to back this up.

In terms of television news, the milestone was mentioned on just two programs. On CNN’s American Morning yesterday, Miles O’Brien noted the number in passing before an interview with Ken Adelman. Also yesterday, Gen. Barry McCaffrey mentioned the 25,000 number in passing on CNBC’s Kudlow & Company.

In terms of print press, McCaffrey noted the figure in an op-ed. That’s it.

Based on Nexis and Google News, that’s the sum total of the media coverage. Nothing on the major TV networks, nothing in the White House press briefings, nothing in the print press’ news reporting.

Is it me, or is this odd? I don’t expect banner headlines, but almost complete silence?

I think I saw something about it on HuffPo.

  • about 22,000 wounded, and nearly 3,000 dead

    it’s a squishy estimated number. If it was an exact number, such as when #3,000 finally happens, it would get a lot more press. As it is, the media generally just seem to focus on the numbers of actual deaths – wounded don’t really count for some reason.

  • There is never any talk about the casualties, they act like these guys have scratches and bruises. This is the first time I have heard anyone even mention the number. I have seen it on the stats sheet, but never an actual reporting of it.

    That is a lot of fricken people injured, I wonder how many returned to service and how many are/were seriously injured. And what is the cost of treating and taking care of these men/women over their lifetimes ?

    One a side note. I was in the military during desert storm and the they had estimated that there were less deaths and injuries during that campaign then if the soldiers had stayed home. Bush 41 might not be liked, but that is pretty damn impressive.

  • Considering they barley noted the WWII v Iraq days comparison I would hazard a guess that this milestone will not only not be noted but not even be noticed in order to not be noted.

  • The 3000th GI death will occur somewhere around the time the new Congress is sworn in, I think.

    The 22,000 number is in many ways more significant than the deaths. Among those casualities are many many ruined lives. Lost limbs, lifelong pain, disabilities, not to mention the mental effects of all this. This war will go on long after it is declared over.

  • All reports after the last election were that the American people cared about the heavy cost of this war in terms of lives lost and blood spilled. The American media? Not so much. Somehow, being callous to the sacrifes soldiers are making in a foreign land passes for good journalism these days. Somebody tell the news media we won the Cold War — they can stop acting like the Soviet news agencies and quit spinning or ignoring everything to favor the government.

  • My milestone is when more American soldiers and marines have died in combat related deaths than the number of victums of 9/11/01. Soldiers die in accidents and crashes during training and peacetime. Those numbers don’t really count in my mind against the bill Boy George II, Rummy and the Dickster Cyborg are collecting for their trip to Hell.

    On the other hand, the maimed are in my mind a worse thing. Is that fair? Maybe I do believe in an afterlife.

  • “It’s a number, and every time there’s one of these 500 benchmarks people want something.” -Tony Snow

    Yes, you fucking sociopath, they want you and your goddamn administration to stop having their loved ones die because George W. Bush won’t stop writing checks that he’s using other people’s bodies to cash at Moqtada’s House of Anarchy and Horror, which seems to have an eye for compound interest that would make an American loan shark, I mean, credit card company, blush.

    And they don’t just want this “something” every time you get a new installment of *five* *HUNDRED* American soldiers killed (or injured; god forbid you pay any attention to *THOSE* numbers); they want it every time your stupid fucking administration gets *ONE* more American troop killed for *NOTHING*, but the media wouldn’t have time to report anything *ELSE* if they went by that standard, so you’re actually catching a fucking break because they’re colluding with you to *IGNORE* the *FIRST* four-hundred-and-ninety-nine troops in any given batch of *500* dead troops.

    And stop sounding so goddamned cheerful about it.

  • I saw an article sometime in October (?) stating the number of wounded was more meaningful in gauging the level of violence in Iraq. Medicine (even in the field) is immensely better than it was during Vietnam and of course the equipment is better too (if you can get it). Result: More soldiers are surviving wounds that would have killed them even 10 years ago.

    I think ScottW nails the reason the media response is a big “Huh?” They are thinking movie hero wounds. At the most a gun shot wound to the shoulder. And if an embedded news crew tried to show typical woundings the The Bush Cheerleaders would scream about how disgusting it was. But at 22,000 and counting most people should have a chance to witness reality up close and personal at least once. In an ideal world the Dry Drunk Draft Dodger and Dr. Deferment would have to grovel for each and every one…

  • I’m wondering how valid the 22,000 number is — aren’t the military pretty selective about what gets classified as an “injury”? I remember hearing a good while back that upwards of 50,000 medical evacuations had occurred, but only injuries directly related to combat were counted in the official tally.

    If someone can clarify, that would be greatly appreciated.

  • The Bush Crime Family has done a very successful job at hiding Iraq (and Afghanistan) from American voters. I don’t the “average American” could come close to guessing, let alone caring about, the number of troops dead on account of George Bush’s fragile and hopeless ego.

    I also believe, cold as it may sound at first glance, that the number seriously injured is of far more social importance than the number dead. Long after the families of those killed have at long last buried their dead, those injured will be with us, most needing to be cared for, for decades to come. The Bush Crime Family didn’t want to publish “body counts” originally; they really don’t want to publish, or publicize, serious injuries. it might put too human a price on the BCF’s impeachable and imprisonable crimes.

  • Medicine (even in the field) is immensely better than it was during Vietnam — TAIO, @10

    No kidding. Think of Tammy Duckworth and how functional she is. But I remember, as a child, seeing the WWII cripples all over Warsaw. You lost both legs, you spent the rest of your life on a little platform with wheels (a bit like a skateboard), pushing yourself down the street with your hands, because wheelchairs were rare. You lost one leg, you still couldn’t work much, because you needed both hands to hold onto the crutches. You lost an arm and a leg, you couldn’t do much of anything, because you didn’t have that second arm to hold onto the crutches. And so on… I’ve hated war with a passion ever since I was about 5 and was told who all those sad people were…

    The 22K wounded still doesn’t allow for those whose *minds* were messed up forever; your nightmares are less likely to be visible. If I believed in God, I’d pray daily that Hell should open and swallow the whole maladministration as soon as possible (preferably before Christmas)

  • This is an important point about the wounded.

    As well as amputees (including multiple-amputees) there are soldiers who have been blinded, horribly burned or brain-damaged, and those who have lost organ function, including young men who will never be able to beget children. And those who have suffered a *combination* of such severe injuries. They are sentenced to lifetimes of pain and disability.

    And remember too that the real number of deaths has passed 3000 long since. This is because many deaths are not counted, in particular, those wounded who are flown to our European bases for treatment, and die there, are not counted, because they did not die “in the theater of operations,” i.e., they did not die in Iraq/Afghanistan. Nor are those brain-dead, whose living corpses are shipped home so that their families may make the decision to “pull the plug,” counted either, for the same reason.

    • Comments are closed.