Tweet
Iraq War hardly costing any casualties
American casualties during bush's first 4 years [2 wars] are basically equal to those under Clinton's first 4 years...[no wars]
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 1/29/2007
War Coverage: U.S. and Iraqi troops eliminated several hundred terrorists on Sunday, but in the twisted view of the establishment media, this significant victory was outweighed by the deaths of two Americans.
'Iraqis Raid Insurgents Near Shiite Holy City," says the Washington Post headline. "U.S. Copter Crash Kills 2 During Fight."
Across the country on the West Coast, the Los Angeles Times was going by the same book. "U.S. and Iraqi forces thwart 500 fighters apparently targeting a Najaf shrine," the Times announced in a sub-headline, but "a helicopter goes down, killing two American troops."
The deaths of the two brave American soldiers who were killed are tragic. But why lump them in with the successful gains that Americans and Iraqis are making against the insurgency?
Yes, Americans' deaths are news and their heroism deserves the respect and gratitude of a nation. But it's cheap journalism to use U.S. military casualties to dilute the progress being made in Iraq.
It is also misleading. While the media are eager to keep a running toll of U.S. soldiers' deaths in Iraq, a look at the data shows that military deaths are not at some all-time high. In fact, they're roughly similar to military deaths in the first three years of the "peaceful" Clinton administration. In 1993, 1,213 American service members died; a year later, 1,075 lost their lives; in 1995, there were 1,040 fatalities.
Compare those numbers with 2003, the year of the Iraq invasion, when 1,410 soldiers died. Or 2004, when 1,887 died.
Or look at it this way. During Clinton's first four years, there were 4,302 active-duty deaths. That number rose to 5,187 during President Bush's first four years — years that were marked by two wars in response to the terrorist threat.
Though the establishment media want to filter the struggle in Iraq through the darkest lens possible, America and its allies are moving forward. In the raid mentioned above, as many as 300 terrorists were killed by U.S. and Iraqi forces. Another 60 were wounded, 120 captured. That's no trivial breakthrough. A world with nearly 500 fewer Islamic militants is a better place.
That alone is enough to celebrate. But the U.S. military has had a number of meaningful successes in recent weeks. On Jan. 9, U.S. and Iraqi troops killed 50 insurgents. On Jan. 22, 16 terrorists were killed; a day later, another 30 or so.
If it's body counts the media want, why not compare the few American troop deaths with the many terrorist deaths? Or would that be too revealing?
Posted 1/29/2007
War Coverage: U.S. and Iraqi troops eliminated several hundred terrorists on Sunday, but in the twisted view of the establishment media, this significant victory was outweighed by the deaths of two Americans.
'Iraqis Raid Insurgents Near Shiite Holy City," says the Washington Post headline. "U.S. Copter Crash Kills 2 During Fight."
Across the country on the West Coast, the Los Angeles Times was going by the same book. "U.S. and Iraqi forces thwart 500 fighters apparently targeting a Najaf shrine," the Times announced in a sub-headline, but "a helicopter goes down, killing two American troops."
The deaths of the two brave American soldiers who were killed are tragic. But why lump them in with the successful gains that Americans and Iraqis are making against the insurgency?
Yes, Americans' deaths are news and their heroism deserves the respect and gratitude of a nation. But it's cheap journalism to use U.S. military casualties to dilute the progress being made in Iraq.
It is also misleading. While the media are eager to keep a running toll of U.S. soldiers' deaths in Iraq, a look at the data shows that military deaths are not at some all-time high. In fact, they're roughly similar to military deaths in the first three years of the "peaceful" Clinton administration. In 1993, 1,213 American service members died; a year later, 1,075 lost their lives; in 1995, there were 1,040 fatalities.
Compare those numbers with 2003, the year of the Iraq invasion, when 1,410 soldiers died. Or 2004, when 1,887 died.
Or look at it this way. During Clinton's first four years, there were 4,302 active-duty deaths. That number rose to 5,187 during President Bush's first four years — years that were marked by two wars in response to the terrorist threat.
Though the establishment media want to filter the struggle in Iraq through the darkest lens possible, America and its allies are moving forward. In the raid mentioned above, as many as 300 terrorists were killed by U.S. and Iraqi forces. Another 60 were wounded, 120 captured. That's no trivial breakthrough. A world with nearly 500 fewer Islamic militants is a better place.
That alone is enough to celebrate. But the U.S. military has had a number of meaningful successes in recent weeks. On Jan. 9, U.S. and Iraqi troops killed 50 insurgents. On Jan. 22, 16 terrorists were killed; a day later, another 30 or so.
If it's body counts the media want, why not compare the few American troop deaths with the many terrorist deaths? Or would that be too revealing?
Or something.
Comment