Putting This war into Perspective

Bleeding hearts Pay attention

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
from JoeUser Forums

While I admit MOST life is precious, I keep hearing about the 4,000 plus deaths so far in the war against terror.

Here is a little perspective about wars America has engaged in:

The Revolutionary war: 4,435 Deaths

The Mexican war: 13,283 Deaths

The Civil war: 364,511 Deaths

World war one: 116,516 Deaths

World war two: 405,399 Deaths

The Korean war: 36,574 deaths

The Vietnam war" 58,209 deaths

Kind of put things into perspective huh folks.

A little debunking about Vietnam, many blacks love to shout from the rooftops how America put the blacks in the most dangerous positions, how America used them as fodder in the war because they were to poor to escape the draft, this has been taken as truth for many years because if your repeat a lie long enough soon it becomes some kind of "TRUTH. Well the real truth is in Vietnam there were 49,802 white deaths and  7,241 black deaths, this does not add up to putting blacks in more harms way does it? Just a matter of if you tell a lie long enough and loud enough it takes a life of its own.

12,369 views 34 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top

Battlefield medical care has increased dramatically since the former wars.  That's why we have 30,000 plus wounded soldiers.  Injured is better than dead though. 

I was surprised how few died in the Revolutionary War and am shocked to see how many died in the Civil War. 

It just makes me sad that we haven't moved past killing each other to solve our differences. 

Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top

I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but for the revolutionary war:

"An estimated 25,000 American Revolutionaries died during active military service. About 8,000 of these deaths were in battle; the other 17,000 deaths were from disease, including about 8,000 who died while prisoners of war. The number of Revolutionaries seriously wounded or disabled by the war has been estimated from 8,500 to 25,000. The total American military casualty figure was therefore as high as 50,000.[20]"

WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think your Civil war figure is a bit low. That was the Union side. Total was 618,000 (up to some estimates of 700,000).

I was surprised how few died in the Revolutionary War and am shocked to see how many died in the Civil War.


Put that in perspective. There were only a few million in the colonies during the revolutionary war (some estimates put it at 2.5 million). So 25000 was a large chunk. There were more during the civil war, but only about 31 million Americans. 6 or 7 hundred thousand is 2+% of that population. And that was almost entirely of the father age. It basically wiped out a generation of males.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Actually, only 140 U.S. military personel died in the Iraq war. The rest were killed during our occupation.
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting mittens, reply 2
I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but for the revolutionary war:"An estimated 25,000 American Revolutionaries died during active military service. About 8,000 of these deaths were in battle; the other 17,000 deaths were from disease, including about 8,000 who died while prisoners of war. The number of Revolutionaries seriously wounded or disabled by the war has been estimated from 8,500 to 25,000. The total American military casualty figure was therefore as high as 50,000.[20]"

There is a link at the top of the page to show where I got my stats from.

Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting Benmeister, reply 4
Actually, only 140 U.S. military personel died in the Iraq war. The rest were killed during our occupation.

True, but death is death.

Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting Locamama, reply 1
Battlefield medical care has increased dramatically since the former wars.  That's why we have 30,000 plus wounded soldiers.  Injured is better than dead though. I was surprised how few died in the Revolutionary War and am shocked to see how many died in the Civil War. It just makes me sad that we haven't moved past killing each other to solve our differences. 

Man has been killing his fellow man since Cain and Able.. nothing has changed except we have gotten better at it.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
This biggest problem with our actions in Iraq have been strategies, or lack thereof. Far fewer deaths would have resulted if there was better planning and execution.

Long before Rumsfeld got canned, we had some success with "clear, hold, and build" -- our current strategy with the surge. Rice wanted to widen that strategy but Rumsfeld was too hard headed and only wanted to stay the course, which at the time consisted only of an exit strategy.

And of course, much of the blame can be placed on the shoulders of L. Paul Bremmer and the dissolusion of the Iraqi army. Sending 100s of thousands of armed, unemployed men into the streets is obviously a recipe for disaster.
Reply #9 from Stardock Forums Top

And then, of course, one must also consider the 4,417 deaths under Clinton during peacetime.

Reply #10 from Stardock Forums Top

Thank you Dr. Guy for the insight on the US Civil War. As a Civil War buff the numbers just didn’t match. As of this date more US soldiers (both north and south) died during that war then all the wars combined (that the US has been in). The final toll of US soldiers and citizens was in the neighborhood of 1.1 million people. The number of northern soldiers death toll was 360,000 give or take, and the south was approximately 250,00 death.

There were battles during the Civil war where up to 6,000 to 10,000 men had died in just a couple of days worth of fighting.

Lee

Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top

Oh and Mod, I disagree, ALL life is precious. Personally I don't differentiate.

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
As a Civil War buff the


You should visit Virginia. Half the state is reserved for Civil war Battlefields! ;)
Reply #14 from Stardock Forums Top

SilentPoet,

Bogus numbers do NOT help put things "into perspective".

The Iraq Body Count Web site is fine and they have an essay about why the other high numbers are bogus.

But even with Iraq Body Count's (probably true) numbers, there is not much perspective. Iraqis have been killing each other before and after the invasion. Withdrawing American troops would only return Iraq to the old days (when more people were killed).

All life is precious, indeed. That's why saving American lives by refusing to stand by allies might not be the right thing to do. But oddly enough it is the proposal most often made by those who don't value American lives as higher than others'.

 

Reply #15 from Stardock Forums Top

Far fewer deaths would have resulted if there was better planning and execution.

We have been looking for the "perfect" war for some time. Fact is that this war cost very few lives compared to all other wars. It could have been done better, but it would be a quantitative difference, not a qualitative difference.

Fact is that George W. Bush's war was already executed in the most live-preserving way and the numbers show it.

 

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Dr, reply 3
I think your Civil war figure is a bit low. That was the Union side. Total was 618,000 (up to some estimates of 700,000).I was surprised how few died in the Revolutionary War and am shocked to see how many died in the Civil War.Put that in perspective. There were only a few million in the colonies during the revolutionary war (some estimates put it at 2.5 million). So 25000 was a large chunk. There were more during the civil war, but only about 31 million Americans. 6 or 7 hundred thousand is 2+% of that population. And that was almost entirely of the father age. It basically wiped out a generation of males.

I stand totally chagrined, the figure I quoted was for UNION FORCES ONLY. the nerve of the compiler to not add Confederate forces, as if they were not American also, damn them for not doing that! father killing son, brother, killing brother!

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting SilentPoet, reply 12
Oh and Mod, I disagree, ALL life is precious. Personally I don't differentiate.

So invite a rapist, child molester, drug addict, murderer, necrophiliac, cannibal intro your home for dinner, after all, all life is precious! hypocrite!

Reply #18 from Stardock Forums Top

"So invite a rapist, child molester, drug addict, murderer, necrophiliac, cannibal intro your home for dinner, after all, all life is precious! hypocrite!"

I said all life is precious, therefore I wouldn't take it, because all life is important, and has worth. This has nothing to do about friday evening social gatherings, so I'd appreciate it if you would stay on topic.

 

Reply #19 from Stardock Forums Top

To add more:

You can hold all life as precious, cherish life, and dislike the act comitted, as I do. Doesn't mean I support their acts, in fact I detest the act of molestation/abusing of children,  (especially them), rapist, murder, etc...

But, I recognize that they're still a life, they're still human, and while yes they broke the law, legal and otherwise - they are still human.

If we continue seeing people as nothing more than their deeds, even the most horrible ones, you forget that they're human. You lose compassion, and a sense of humanity. In the end, they're just turned into evil, horrible people. Where's the person that says, "Yes it was horrible what they did, but they're human still, and there's obviously something that caused the act. What is it?"

Also, like i said above, this isn't about a social gathering.

Reply #20 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting SilentPoet, reply 18
"So invite a rapist, child molester, drug addict, murderer, necrophiliac, cannibal intro your home for dinner, after all, all life is precious! hypocrite!"I said all life is precious, therefore I wouldn't take it, because all life is important, and has worth. This has nothing to do about friday evening social gatherings, so I'd appreciate it if you would stay on topic. 

Staying on topic coming from someone that almost never stays on topic, you have so much nerve it is a joke, the topic was deaths in war and comparing this war to other wars. so you stay on topic, I happen to believe that not all life is precious, people that blow up chil;dren, while they stay safe themself are scumbags and to me not worth spit.

Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Benmeister, reply 8
This biggest problem with our actions in Iraq have been strategies, or lack thereof. Far fewer deaths would have resulted if there was better planning and execution.Long before Rumsfeld got canned, we had some success with "clear, hold, and build" -- our current strategy with the surge. Rice wanted to widen that strategy but Rumsfeld was too hard headed and only wanted to stay the course, which at the time consisted only of an exit strategy.And of course, much of the blame can be placed on the shoulders of L. Paul Bremmer and the dissolusion of the Iraqi army. Sending 100s of thousands of armed, unemployed men into the streets is obviously a recipe for disaster.

What you quoted was one of the biggest tarfu ever, Bush made one of the biggest mistakes ever and our troops paid for it in blood and are still are paying for it in blood.

Reply #22 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting SilentPoet, reply 18
"So invite a rapist, child molester, drug addict, murderer, necrophiliac, cannibal intro your home for dinner, after all, all life is precious! hypocrite!"I said all life is precious, therefore I wouldn't take it, because all life is important, and has worth. This has nothing to do about friday evening social gatherings, so I'd appreciate it if you would stay on topic. 

BTW NEVER make the mistake of telling me what to do in my own blog, here I do what I please, if you do not like it do not comment! next time you try to tell me how to conduct myself in my own blog you are gone. Got it? As it is I am one of a very few people that TOLERATE your presence Lucas.

Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
[quote]Staying on topic coming from someone that almost never stays on topic, you have so much nerve it is a joke, the topic was deaths in war
BTW NEVER make the mistake of telling me what to do in my own blog, here I do what I please, if you do not like it do not comment! next time you try to tell me how to conduct myself in my own blog you are gone. Got it? As it is I am one of a very few people that TOLERATE your presence Lucas.


and comparing this war to other wars. so you stay on topic, I happen to believe that not all life is precious, people that blow up chil;dren, while they stay safe themself are scumbags and to me not worth spit.


The Deaths of civilians because of the war, and in the war is certainly on topic. Not just that, but I said:

so I'd appreciate it if you would stay on topic.


Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Also, I apologize if i (obviously) made you mad, it wasn't my intention.
Reply #25 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting SilentPoet,
Oh and Mod, I disagree, ALL life is precious. Personally I don't differentiate.

Sorry, I can't agree with that.  Life is precious, I will agree with.  However, saying all life is precious is going to far.  Child rapists, terrorists, torturers, and similar ilk debase the value of their own life with their actions untill its nil.  I'm not going to run around murdering them myself -- that would be just as wrong as their own acts --  but neither am I going to cry crocodiile tears because they got "what was coming" to them in a legitimate manner.

Please note the legitimate; I'm not advocating whole sale executions of them, either.  I'm simply saying that their own acts have removed them from the "precious" category.  In essance, I'm ranting because that phrase is yet another of a million over simplifications that drive me insane.

In addition, please consider the following bit of philosophy.  All life ends.  Death is one of the very few true constants in life.  Life, in fact, is based in death.  When we die, bacteria will consume us, scavengers may very well ravage us.  The food we eat is borne of that death; plants are fed by the rotted remains of other living things.  No form of life escapes the simple constant that for us to live, others must die.  Death, therefore, can not be considered evil.  It simply is.  What remains is how we die, and what we do before we die.