January 17, 2004
A Measure of Sacrifice
It always seemed absurd to me that the media and public would get so out of shape about casualties in our military engagements. Casualties in post Gulf-War engagements pale in comparison to those suffered in previous combat arenas like Vietnam, Korea, and wars before that. Even the casualties of the two Gulf Wars and Afghanistan hardly compare to their historical counterparts. 9/11 has once again put such small losses in perspective, though, and we are much less likely to raise hell over two or three soldiers killed a day or a week as we were in pre-9/11 days.
That said, the sacrifice of individual soldiers should not be an unrecognized thing. Unfortunately, our Department of Defense is failing to do so in one substantial way. I might be wrong, but so far as I have checked, there is no official casualty list for the war in Iraq.
Some might suggest that such a list would be unnecessary, considering that many news-sites have such lists. But those lists only list those outright killed, and they don't speak of injuries except in vague numbers.
Those numbers and pictures may also neglect those wounded who died in America of their injuries.
Whatever the numbers are, whatever the manner of their death, Americans need to be told of the dead and wounded who have born the brunt of the War on Terror.
The department of defense needs to regularly publish a list of all the casualties incurred in the the conflicts with the appropriate facts and figures, and do so in a way that provides easy access for the public and the press. The Bush Administration must be held accountable for the lives they sacrifice in following their foreign policy, however right or wrong they are. They should not be able to hide our losses behind anonymous or misleading numbers.
Posted by Stephen Daugherty at January 17, 2004 02:55 PMGood subject. Having been old enough to have witnessed the buildup and war in Viet Nam, the question that comes to my mind about Iraq, is how many is too many? We are over 50 dead now, where do Americans want to draw the line? 75, 250, 1000, 25,000. Americans did not ask that question in the beginning of the Viet Nam civil war and we lost 52,000 before the people’s demand for an end was responded to by the Government.
And you are absolutely right, we the American people have a right to know what the injury count is, type of injuries and causes. The authority to wage war in a democracy comes from the people via their representatives. If their representatives fail to inform the public of this information, the people are no longer authorizing continuation of the war based on relevant information.
Posted by: David R. Remer at January 17, 2004 03:42 PMYou mean like this list?
This is about as official as you’re going to find, generally when people make demands of the DoD, they tell people where they can stick those demands…
Posted by: JT at January 17, 2004 05:38 PMThat’s a .com address. It’s a commercial Magazine, with a list whose content differs little from what CNN or FOXnews has up.
And yes, I want it more official than that. As far as the DoD telling the public where they can stick their demands, it’s their job, and I don’t want to hear any whining from them about it. If they didn’t want to deal with things like this, they should have never become public servants.
It’s people from our communities who are fighting this war, and if the DoD thinks they can incur such debts of sacrifice from our friends and loved ones, and just play around with the numbers and publicity, they have another thing coming.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at January 17, 2004 08:10 PMLocal newspapers probably have more info about soldiers from their respective areas who are killed than any other news source. The DoD, when they’re inclined to do so, will probably provide this info. Generally, those looking for info on the fatalities can, with some effort, find it. It is much harder, I think, to find info on those who are injured.
Do we even know the number of soldiers who’ve been injured so far? It sounds perverse but this cost is considerably messier from a PR perspective because it cannot be represented as “neatly” as a eulogy, which shields the public from seeing the real, painful consequences to those whose lives the deaths affect. The cost incurred by an injured soldier would be there for all of us to see in all its starkness.
If the government or the media are shielding us from this ugliness then we are also letting them shield us. There is no public outcry over this lack of information. If we don’t see the need to demand to be kept informed about our own soldiers who are getting maimed and killed then what could possibly get us to be moved by the thousands of foreign civilians who are made to suffer the same fate on our behalf?
Posted by: aslam at January 19, 2004 11:58 PMSome things people would be mad about if they simply knew better. I wasn’t ticked about this until I ran across some item on the web that told me soldiers were dying of wounds here, and not being added to the number of those killed in the conflict. I only wrote the post above when I realized I couldn’t find any casualty lists online. We only get lists compiled by private news organizations. That just struck me as lazy. Here people are, giving their lives and being wounded serving their country, and their own superiors refuse to official acknowledge the debt they owe to the Americans who volunteered that sacrifice. Americans deserve to know the extent of the blood spilled. I mean, what are they afraid of? If Americans believe in the war, they’ll accept the sacrifice required. If Americans don’t they’ll rightly consider the price too high. Either way, it’s the publics decision, and the DoD has no right to inform that decision at its own convenience.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at January 20, 2004 11:05 AM
