islammemo.cc say at least 8618 members of the U.S. military have died

[UAE]

http://www.almokhtsar.com/html/

http://www.islammemo.cc/


i found out many interesting articles posted in these two sites.


1) U.S. troops in Iraq face 10 to 25 attacks a day, partly because they are hunting for Baathists, "jihadists" and fighters crossing the border from Syria, Gen. Tommy Franks, who ran the war against Baghdad
*** the site say " 17 attack a day how come only 1 American soldier die per die? if there were 17 attack why the media show only 2 or 3 attacks against US which mean they want to cover the number of dead.
*** the site say " they saw American military throw some dead American soldiers in the Baghdad river to cover the number of the deaths.
*** the US military Do not allow the TV to tape any attack happened to American Army to take the bodies and tanks from the attack place.
*** American Tank shot the Palestinian Hotel in Baghdad where the World Media stay! and they said we did that to protect ourself also so send a signal to media to not inter-fear.
-----------------------------------------------------

the site it say a lot about daily action in Iraq and it is really interesting i just try to show you what i read in this site!

<<<<<< sorry it was hard to translate the site >>>>>>


Please do not attack me i just wanna show you what i read !


http://www.almokhtsar.com/html/

http://www.islammemo.cc/

[Selatius]

1. Take it with a grain of salt

Multiple sources both for and against the war peg the number at closer to 1,100+ dead, not 8,000. The 8,000 milestone is close though if we consider the number of soldiers who have been wounded or crippled due to the war.

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. yes, those sites are not vetted by US military censors, their reporters

are on the ground in Iraq, and some of them have never even been to the Baghdad Sheraton.

They regularly defy US press cover bans, and routinely enter areas that the US milirary has cordoned off and declared off limits to journalists.

None of them are ever embedded, and they operate in places where it would be too dangerous to have a US military briefing. I would not be surprised if most of them have never even been to one.

[PsychoDad]

11. These rumors have been pretty persistant.

Does anyone have the numbers of servicemen who have died of "natural, medical complications, accidental, suicide," etc. Would be interesting to compare the totals with the 8000 rumor.

[KlatooBNikto]

15. Total Information Dominance with a vengeance. How can a brown

skinned Arab tell the truth better than an American news reporter? Take it with a grain of salt indeed.This was the same theme propagated during the Vietnam War years.That we should not believe anything coming from the Communist side.Even when Nixon was bombing the hell out of Cambodia illegally and denying it, the Cambodians who were bearing the brunt of these aerial attacks were derided by our media.When William Shawcross of the Guardian published Kissinger's deceptions, it finally saw the light of the day, but not before thousands of Cambodians and Vietnamese were slaughtered.

[Selatius]

20. I'm not dismissing them outright

When I said, "take it with a grain of salt," I did not intend it to mean to dismiss them outright and not believe anything coming out there. If I had said, "I can't tell how many are dead but will just keep an open mind to the numbers," would you have posted the same thing you did?

If I came off as a bit skeptical, then I'm not sorry because there is spin going both ways in this war. No, I did not dismiss the numbers outright. Yes, I try to keep an open mind, but I don't know who to believe anymore, so I try not to get into the specifics except to say that everyday some poor soul is dying over there. I take nearly all the numbers coming out of there with a bit of salt because I know for every soldier that dies outright over there, there's some more who are wounded and show up as simply "wounded" but to expect that all "wounded" soldiers survive their wounds would be naivete on my part. Yes, that would naturally lead me to say the numbers are higher than what the Pentagon would have us believe, but the question in my mind is how high that number really goes.

Frankly, I'm a bit upset with you bringing in Vietnam and Cambodia into this, given that I'm Vietnamese, and that damn war is a sore spot with me. I don't believe what I did amounted to that level of derision and ridicule the US news media tossed about with respect to war casualties in that war. It's one thing to be a little bit skeptical, but it's another to outright dismiss the evidence and debase it as propaganda in the opposite direction like the US media did 40 years ago, and I don't think I did such thing, so I think it's unfair.

[KlatooBNikto]

25. Sorry, I did not mean to impute any motives to you.I agree with you

in spirit.But given the fact we are the aggressor in Iraq and command a vast array of media capabilities, it seemed to me at the very outset the contest in disnformation is a lopsided one.

[YankeeFan]

30. I Would Dismiss Them Outright

I believe that site talked about spiders the size of dogs attacking American Soldiers a few months ago. Tens of thousands of deaths were supposed to have died from spider bites.
Spiders From God, I think, was what they were talking about. Several months ago some soldier caught a camel spider, and then using camera tricks, made the spider look larger than it really was. Several times larger.
This is one time where I’m going to use the Pentagon’s numbers of dead and wounded over somebody else’s. There are too many reporters over there to hide massive American casualties.

[UAE]

3. 8000 dead and more than 17000 wounded.

[donheld]

8. Welcome to DU

:hi: i hope this is false, but if it is true i hope that found out

[newyawker99]

24. Hi UAE!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[AndyTiedye]

4. Could They Make KIAs Simply Disappear if they Have No Next-of-Kin?

Would they do something like that? :grr:

[DuctapeFatwa]

5. When Bush told Pat Robertson "no casualties," he didn't realize it

would be so hard to keep them all out of the western press.

When the crusade first started, there were interviews with people on the Spanish language channels who admitted that they had been asked to keep their loved one's death private, to help keep his comrades at arms safe, and for national security.

[Maddy McCall]

7. But what are the odds...

1100 admittedly have died.

If 8,000 were the real number, then according to what you are asking, 8x as many soldiers without kin have died than fatalities with kin.

[AndyTiedye]

17. Of course, the 1100 does not count "Contractors"

Are there any figures for fatalites among civilian contractors at all?
It could be that the 8000 figure includes contractors and coalition
forces.

Are we counting non-citizens in our army who are killed?
Joining our army is one way people gain American citizenship.

I still don't see it getting up to 8000,
but it could be higher than 1100.

[BlueStateGirl]

6. That seems high, but I think it is more then 1100. I believe they

the 1100 only includes those who die "in country". Not wounded soliders who die in Germany or Kuwait, after they have been transported.

[Selatius]

10. If we do cut out their accounting tricks,

wouldn't 2,000 or even 3,000 dead seem more believable than 8,000 dead?

[RivetJoint]

13. No it includes

ALL deaths. Even those who die in Kuwait or Germany ov wounds received in Iraq

[Robbie67]

23. Are you sure of that

I've heard of fudging the after-action or non-battlefield deaths

[donheld]

9. If this is true, and i only say IF

since i have know way of knowing for sure. This would be the biggest cover up in the US history.

[paulk]

12. how could the Pentagon cover up that many deaths?

The military is a pretty tight knit community - they couldn't keep it a secret. They already can't stop the e-mails coming out of Iraq from US soldiers. If 8,000 had been killed, somebody would be talking about it.

[TheLastMohican]

14. 40% of troops fighting in Iraq are non-American citizens

Their death doesn't count as American casualties, their kins are silenced. Even if they are American, how can you count the relatives of the already killed and say the true number?
The casualties are much higher than reported. Look at the two Marine batallions deployed in Falluja, their usual strength is 1500 men each. Right now they have together 1000 men. That is 1/3 of the strength for each batallion. Where are the rest?

[RivetJoint]

16. Can you show me

ANYTHING from the DoD that says they don't count their deaths? Also can you show anything that supports that 40% figure?

[petrock2004]

19. forgive me for no link but

i remember maybe a year ago? reading somewhere online that bushco cut the department that counts the war dead. was i wrong in this? i thought it was like at the same time that they made it illegal to take pictures of dead american soldiers.

this is why i'm surprised at all to see any kind of numbers - i was assuming there was no "official" count since he apparently eliminated the department that handles that...

i'd be really glad if someone could show me either an article about that, or prove me wrong, or something!

i've tried unsuccessfully to google it... :)

thanks

[RivetJoint]

22. "Department that handles the war dead count?"

Man you are really reaching...

That "Department" is the Department of Defense, the one Department that he has NOT cut!

[Robbie67]

18. I heard that only battlefield deaths are in the official count

and that if someone was injured, put into an ambulance, and died on the way to a field hospital, they weren't counted in the official death count. I don't remember where I heard that.

[htuttle]

21. My observation on alternate body counts

I've been following these 'unofficial reports' since the US invaded Afghanistan, and while the KIA numbers never square with US military reports, the incidents themselves usually correlate with an officially reported attack/ambush/bomb.

What I think happens a lot of the time is that the ambushers assume they've killed people when in fact they may only be wounded. I doubt they stick around to check everyone's pulse to verify that they are dead after an IED goes off.

In addition, modern medicine can often save people who don't look like they will make it. What shape they will be in after the fact is another story, but they would be alive instead of dead.

I don't doubt that at least SOME KIAs are not reported by the DoD. They have a long history of this, especially if somebody gets killed where they aren't supposed to be (cf. Central America during the 1980's). I also don't doubt that the KIA counts issued by various jihadi groups are also overly 'optimistic' (or pessimistic, depending on which side of the conflict you are on).

[paulk]

26. here is an interesting website

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Invasion_and_occupation_of_Iraq_casualties

Coalition (as of September 29, 2004):
Military:
1,054 U.S.
799 killed in action
68 U.K.
70 from all other coalition countries
Civilians:
at least 157 contractors/security personnel
54 U.S.
103 other (includes some from non-coalition countries)
more than 150 UN personnel and contractors
more than 30 journalists
Iraqis:
Military/combatants (very rough estimates):
during the 6 weeks of "major combat" in March–April 2003:
30,000 (estimate by General Tommy Franks)
6,119 to 15,925 (from a compilation of incident reports)
4,895 to 6,370 (one study's estimate)
13,500 to 45,000 (one journalist's estimate)
around 124,000 U.S. troops believe they killed one or more Iraqi combatants in 2003
Civilians:
>36,533 during March-October 2003 (tally by survey in Iraq)
12,952 to 15,007 reported by two or more news organizations (as of September 29, 2004)
around 41,000 U.S. troops believe they killed one or more Iraqi civilians in 2003


Wounded in action
7,532 U.S. military (as of September 28, 2004)
4,083 wounded severely enough that they could not return to duty within 72 hours
Iraqi combatants: number unknown
Civilians (of any country): number unknown


Injured/fallen ill
U.S. military: About 15,000 (as of September 15, 2004).
U.K. military: 2,228 (as of March 31, 2004; includes troops wounded in action)
Iraqi combatants: number unknown
Civilians (of any country): number unknown



I think they only count deaths in theatre- For instance, suicides are only counted in Iraq, soldiers who return to US and commit suicide don't get counted. Wounded soldiers who die out of theatre don't get counted. (I think)

[NickB79]

32. I think this line from your post says it all right here

"around 124,000 U.S. troops believe they killed one or more Iraqi combatants in 2003"

124,000 US troops think they each killed AT LEAST one Iraqi in the past year and a half, while almost no international organization has claimed to have recorded more than 50,000 Iraqi casualties? It's pretty obvious that, while we've killed a hell of a lot of innocent Iraqis, we haven't come close to 124,000+ dead Iraqis (yet).

This kind of problem, where soldiers in combat think they've hit and killed an enemy, while in reality they missed or just wounded them, is very common in combat. I feel the claim that over 8000 US troops have been killed in Iraq is because of the same reason: Iraqi fighters claiming to have killed American soldiers (and truly believing what they think they saw) when they missed or just wounded them instead.

[Mike L]

27. This site is total bullshit.

There is no way the military could have hidden an additional 7500 troop deaths. Caveat Emptor.

[renegade000]

28. it appears insurgents have their own

overinflated body counts?

:shrug:

[Entrayl]

29. :/

I doubt the american government is lieing about their dead. Something like that would be too big to hide.

[stavka]

31. Tin Foil Hat/Playing into the "enemy" Alert

These extra 6,800 dead have no relatives?

Ridiculous figure.

The dead in Iraq is a figure that doesn't need hyping...and it's an insult to those that have died to suggest that they died along with people made up to fill a statistical point in a propaganda driven sentence.

[UAE]

33. hmmmm here you go some examples

http://www.albasrah.net/images/3loj/mass-grave-us-soldiers.htm

[oblivious]

34. Some figues on the wounded, from Alternet

...The numbers are even higher when you look at the numbers once the soldiers return to the country from Iraq or Afghanistan. According to some of the veteran groups, 33,000 have sought VA care, 26,000 have filed VA disability claims, and 10,000 have sought VA counseling. When you look at these huge, huge numbers, what do they indicate?

It's just starting and it's only going to get worse. Those numbers are going to do nothing but increase. You have the physical injuries which speak for themselves. I've seen the breakdown of that 33,000 number (who've sought VA care) and they include a significant percent of spine injuries. As a neurosurgeon, I saw all the complaints in that area and I can only say that there's an overwhelming number of them....

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/20254/