Could someone please answer this question? If someone is wounded in Iraq and then is evacuated to Germany or some other country and THEN dies of his wounds, is this counted as a casualty of the Iraq war?

A while ago I heard that the lots of soldiers were evacuated only to die of their wounds in another country, and that the fact that they didn't die in Iraq removed them from the official death toll.

Is this true? If so. how many soldiers fit this scenario? What about people who die of complications of their wounds when they arrive home? How are they counted? How big is that list? And if you die in a bus accident but not through enemy fire, which list are you counted on? How many are on THAT list?

Any links would be appreciated.

Thanks.

The Iraq Coalition Casualty Count [http://icasualties.org/oif/] has a list of people [http://icasualties.org/oif/Dow.aspx] who died in hospitals in Germany and the US after being wounded in Iraq. These deaths are included in their count of US military fatalities.

Wait, so not only does Rumsfeld claim that casualty numbers are misleading because they include accidental deaths, but also the casualty reports don't include a lot of accidental deaths? Too rich.

From the beginning the Pentagon said that the official death count only included soldiers who are dead on the ground in Iraq. I cant find anyone who has researched how many other soldiers died an hour later, on the plane to Ramstad or back at Walter Reed medical center. That would give us something closer to the true death count. This seems like a perfect thing for Salon to pursue.

So, the administration doesn't do Webster's? Who do they do then? I'm thinking of Humpty Dumpty here:

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

Of course, when Humpty made the words work like that, he always paid them extra.

How much is the Pentagon paying casualty, torture and "Mission Accomplished"?

Incalculable Pain by Mark Benjamin (Dec. 10, 2005) brings to mind another pertinent question. How many of our soldiers have fallen victim to the Pentagon's policy of using artillery, tank shells and other ordnance made from depleted uranium? Being a soldier is dangerous even in peacetime, but being poisoned by your own government's policies raises the dangers of serving in Iraq to a surreal level of absurdity!

James L. Desper Jr.

Really? War?? Bad?? For soldiers??? We thought it was just a way to ramp up the old cash-flow engine and throw off tens of billions of tax-payer dollars that would have been wasted on housing clothing and helping the needy and unfortunate.

-signed- BIG OIL

Just to follow up on a prior writer, it seems the Pentagon may have adopted a very narrow definition of a combat death. This is from www.globalsecurity.com . . .

DOD Instruction 7730.22, ("Reports of U.S. Casualties in Combat Areas," January 20, 1967, and March 20, 1973) provided that the Vietnam casualties to be reported were all those occurring within the designated combat areas and those deaths occurring anywhere as the result or aftermath of an initial casualty occurring in a combat area. The current related document, Military Personnel Casualty Matters, Policies, and Procedures" DoD Instruction 1300.18, December 18, 2000, is simply silent on this critical matter.

Is it possible that the DOD is defining combat deaths as only those occuring in the 'combat area' as a direct result of enemy action?

If so, not only are accidental deaths not being reported but deaths occurring in Germany or in the States - which during Vietnam would have been considered combat deaths - are being counted as what, wounded?

How would the benefits to the families be impacted by this narrow classification (if it is indeed being used)?

Please look into this Salon.

A. Todd

Chalk me up as another person who remembers hearing (somewhere) that critically wounded soldiers in Iraq were being bustled into planes as quickly as possible, so that if the plane was off the ground before they died the death "didn't count".

Which leads me to the macabre thought in my subject.

In any case, I'd very much like to see more reporting on this subject.

The Pentagon is also cheating on the number of American troops killed in the Iraq war. CNN has a complete list of dead American soildiers. Only about one percent of the dead are shown to have died in American or German hospitals. But many thousands of our troops are sent state-side or to American operated hospitals in Germany. Can only one percent of these often terribly wounded troops have died from their wounds. It seems a virtual imposiblity.

The distinctions among casualty types are obviously considered, and beside an obvious PR angle, it seems they would also serve as legitimate distinctions in various war-fighting analyses. Military operations are dangerous in peacetime, too, as the Navy's operations suspension a few years ago reminds.

What's interesting is how these larger casualty numbers seem to reinforce the contention of many officers that the military's effectiveness is being degraded, characterizing the human elements of the price of extended military campaigns. They haven't said it directly, but it seems that the true, larger human costs of campaigns (beyond combat deaths and wounds, which are well-known to military professionals) create a ripple effect in readiness, etc., more profound than wear and tear on equipment, re-enlistment rates, and so on. It is this toll to which officers make veiled reference in warning about the Iraq deployment diminishing the effectiveness of the armed services.

Whenever you write to a Representative or Senator add the following text below to your letter or petition. This will tell the senators and representatives that you will use the power of your purchases to leverage the legislation or action you want done. Also contact the

CEOs of these companies listed below and demand that they get the RNC accede to these demands or they lose a large part of their customer base.

We demand that you get the Republican Party to hold a press conference and accede to these demands. Until such a press conference happens and the legislation gets passed we will boycott products from Republican contributors Walmart, Wendy’s, Outback Steak House, Dominos Pizza, Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Eckerd, CVS and Walgreens, Curves for women health clubs, GE and Exxon/Mobil.

[ Please pass this on to others. Thank you. ]

-----------------

Join the revolution for progressive legislation

http://www.boycott-republicans.com