English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

a friend and I were disscussing and she proclaimed that there were more fatalities during the Carter administration then in the Iraqi War. Does any one know the stats on this?

2007-12-14 06:50:51 · 13 answers · asked by feelin Witchy 4 in Politics & Government Military

13 answers

Military fatalities during those years were due to accident, homicide, illness, and self-inflicted. And the size of the military was significantly larger during those years.

The only table I could find that compiles all the numbers doesn't start until 1980, so it only includes 2 years of Carter's presidency: http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/Death_Rates.pdf

2007-12-14 07:07:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

There were fewer military deaths during the Carter administration, but there was no war then.

If you want a comparision, the most military deaths in the United States were during the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, followed by that of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

2007-12-14 07:11:07 · answer #2 · answered by wichitaor1 7 · 2 0

Actually the US military had much more personnel, and poorer equipment. The combat losses would have been lower, but accidents and training incidents, that always happen with military operations, would have been much higher.

It's reasonably likely that the death toll from non-combat deaths during Carters presidency would be significantly higher than the combat death toll from the current war(s).

2007-12-14 08:04:00 · answer #3 · answered by Andrew W 4 · 1 0

There were 2,392 active duty deaths in the last year (1980) of Carter's Presidency. There were 17,000+ during the eight years of the Reagan administration and 7,500 during the eight years of the Clinton administration.
But, you have to keep one thing in mind. The national "mainstream media" never heard of anyone dying on active duty until the current administration.

2007-12-14 08:20:50 · answer #4 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 1 2

Jimmy Carter contributed particularly no longer something for the duration of his presidency. His squimishness ended in Iran taking photos our human beings and protecting them for years. His economics rules ended in long gasoline line, severe fees and government workers (alongside with the militia) no longer getting paid. Our dollar misplaced floor against distant places currencies. The financial device grew to become into very undesirable in any respect ranges. He left u.s. with a "chicken" recognition and generated distrust between our Allies. those are basically a number of his contributions.

2016-11-26 23:52:01 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

If Carter would have had a war during his time. Casualties would have way exceed the current numbers. Several reasons: Technology, The willingness and b##ls to make the decision necessary: intelligence-Torture tech.. Why do you suppose the hostages stayed long as they did?

2007-12-14 08:21:17 · answer #6 · answered by mik4759 2 · 1 1

Jimmy Carter, AKA, the "Father of Radical Islam." Some of his other notable achievements include:

Destroying the military with budget cuts

Double digit inflation

Double digit unemployment

Boycotting the Olympics

Firing his own cabinet

Nut-less handling of the Iran hostage crisis

2007-12-14 08:59:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Someone gave you a good link to the stats...

Then again, Carter didn't use the US troops except in the failed Iran Hostage rescue mission.

2007-12-14 08:47:10 · answer #8 · answered by mariner31 7 · 1 0

People forget just how destructive Carter was to the economy of this country. Say what you will about Bush or the military; they've done more the help the economy than to hamstring it like Carter did. Carter did far more to literally harm this country in four years than Bush has done in eight.

Blueridgeliving, pull your head out of your rectum, and please provide your references and evidence for a "million" people dead because of Bush. Rosie O'Donnell is not a valid source, I might add.

2007-12-14 07:01:36 · answer #9 · answered by ಠ__ಠ 7 · 4 5

All I can think of is the ones in the failed attempt at rescuing the Iranian hostages. I think there were 18 killed in that disaster.

2007-12-14 06:54:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers