Soldiers Lost in Iraq Top Those Lost in First Four Years in Vietnam

[ckramer]

"The nearly 2,000 Americans killed in combat (1,998 on October 24, 2005) in Iraq since 2003 are more than were lost in Vietnam combat in the first four years of U.S. combat (1961-1965, when just over 1800 died). This total is more than were lost in the last two years of combat (1971-1972, when just over 1600 died)," recounts Maurice Isserman, co-author of "America Divided: The Civil War of the 1960s."

link

[leftchick]

1. Lost? How about DEAD!

:(

[DemoTex]

2. Very, very important statistic, ckramer. Thanks for the link.

As a Viet Nam veteran, I thought this was the general pattern back in the early days. This more-or-less (mostly more) confirms it. A few of us were scoffed on DU (seldom, and not by those who knew our background) in the early days of this Bu$h war, when we dared to compare Iraq to Viet Nam. Same-same, I say still. Numba ten war, GI!


My Hogster in the Namster.

[illflem]

4. Tex, are you the one who dumped that orange crap on me?

Just kidding!;-)
101st, Dak To '64-'66

What I find very similar between 'Nam and Iraq that is rarely mentioned is how we spent the early years training and supplying the South Vietnamese Army to take over the job.
We all know how that panned out.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. S-squared, D-squared....

...same stuff, different day.

[DemoTex]

9. Oh no! Ilflem, I was on the Ho Chi Mihn trail doing ECW shit!

Alone, Unarmed, Scared Shitless our badge said. I spent most of my time in Laos, over the Ho Chi Mihn Trail. But I did get exposed! I ran a convoy from Nha Trang to Cam Rahn, NAF (when we moved), and we got sprayed in the Nha Trang Pass (by Ranch-Hand C-123s spraying A/O)!
Mac

[DemoTex]

10. BTW, Friend ...

Welcome home! I know all about 101 and Dak To .. from the history. Bitch-of-a-battle!

Mac

[enid602]

3. Bush

Yeah, but Bush spent hundreds of billions of dollars MORE than JFK/LBJ to get us to the point where we lost the 2000 soldiers. Let's give credit where credit is due.

[ckramer]

5. Not to mention these

[cyberpj]

6. Oh so very many of those. But we don't count them. Or the suicides. nt.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

7. With another 254+ killed in Iraq, we will have surpassed the number....

...of Americans killed in Vietnam during the first NINE years of that conflict, from 1956 when we lost our first casualty in that faraway Asian country through the end of 1965. That total is 2,254.

If you add the 200+ Americans killed to date in Afghanistan, we're almost there.

If the NeoCons have their way, we'll lose a lot more than that before they're done.

Vietnam War: Casualties by Year or Declaration of Death
<http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html#year>

[meganmonkey]

11. And keep in mind the many, many soldiers who would likely have died

in Vietnam with the same injuries they can survive today, thanks to better medical care in the field. There was a really good Salon piece about that last year - the death toll would be much higher otherwise.

[MarsThe Cat]

12. one question though-

what were the troop levels in Vietnam during each of the first 4 years?
we went into Iraq at pretty much full strength from day 1.

[onenote]

14. valid point

Troop levels between 1961 and 1964 ranged only from around 3000 to 23,000. It wasn't until 1965 that the big troop build up began -- reaching over 180,000 by then end of that year. Most of the casualties occurred after the build up.

onenote

[liberal N proud]

13. Kick

With 2000 dead this needs to move to the front