2007-01-08 02:23:00 · 11 answers · asked by tarzan1978 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
i dont know, that seems like a good estimate, usually the papers report a couple deaths per day, that would be an average of two for the last four years. The conspiracy people say that 3000 is only the ones who actually died IN iraq, the seriously injured ones they flew to germany or out of the country and died they dont count. who knows. There have been many many more injured and crippled, that 20 years ago would hve died but with modern medical technology will live.
2007-01-08 02:28:24 · answer #1 · answered by rand a 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Deaths are public record.
If there were a substantial amount more then there would have to be an explanation as to where service people have "disappeared" to. If there were more than the 3000, but it were only a few more what would be the point of lying about it.
2007-01-08 02:32:50 · answer #2 · answered by WhiteLilac1 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
that being stated, all yet one or 2 voted for the warfare. if indead it really is criminal, all could be prosecuted. and likely it now might want to be quite oftentimes rep backing it yet were a dem in place of work this can be a police action being carried out by way of our protection rigidity. bill clinton let this warfare take position by way of no longer handling it contained in the 8 years he had to no longer let this simmer. warfare sucks yet what we are doing isn't incorrect. and no choose for the dems to float now, they jumped deliver a lengthy time period in the past. basically in the previous the 06' elections. humorous-straightforward isn't it?
2016-12-28 09:38:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is impossible to hide military casualties. In fact of you go to the DOD website you can review the press releases for every single casualty.
And contrary to what the conspiracy idiots think - if you look through the press releases you will find many names that 'Died of Wounds' (received in Iraq) in Germany or the US.
2007-01-08 03:02:00 · answer #4 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is correct, as someone stated eariler the goverment HAS to list all killed and wounded troops to the press.
I find it strange people are b!tching about 3,000 troops killed in 3 years when in WWII we lost 8,000 on just ONE island in the Pacific.
2007-01-08 03:01:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Death toll is probably accurate, wounded and post traumatic syndrome isn't anywhere I can find but its very high due to the fact we can keep more people alive with horrific wounds that would have killed them in earlier conflicts.
2007-01-08 02:26:36 · answer #6 · answered by justa 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no military reports troop losses accurately. since it is a national security issue there can be no way to determine what the true figures are. we must also remember that a great number of troops are not us military. there are forces from other nations, and "contract security" forces operating under the us flag. don't forget them.
2007-01-08 02:41:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why doesn't it seem to be correct?
Perhaps 3,000 is the correct toll.
2007-01-08 02:27:22 · answer #8 · answered by C = JD 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just think, in the three years of war in Korea, 58,000+ were KIA, and in the modern era, only 3,000. It truly is a testament to our training, technology, and the nature of modern warfare.
2007-01-08 02:57:06 · answer #9 · answered by Shawn M 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
3265 coalition troops.
3014 us troops and contractors.
2007-01-08 02:37:48 · answer #10 · answered by sand runner 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋