28 February 2008

Why blog on the war?

Returning again to the why I have finally started writing about the war.
What follows is one of those emails you get from your fringe friends espousing some radical politcal viewpoint/near conspiracy theory. In the past I tended not to waste much time on reading them, much less replying to them. Of late, however, I have begun to realize that writings like this tend to be the whole reason some people will vote for or against a candidate or a whole politcal party, to the detriment of the country. So as ineffectual or useless as it may be, I have begun to write back. I unfortunately have had to watch the United States make some terrible decisions out of fear and ignorance over the last seven years; I have to try to do something to limit the damage of these actions, and try to reverse it. This is a duty, as much as any I have actually sworn to.

The following is reformatted to make it more readable, with the email I got first, then my response to it. Oh, and I am leaving the .pdf document attached, I don't know what Blogger will do with it.

~~~
Subject: Fw: MILITARY DEATHS FOR THE PAST 26 YEARS....UNBELIEVEABLE!!
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:32:35 -0800

Some very interesting figures here. Where has the press been on acknowleging, disputing, or advertising the facts concerning these figures????

Bet you didn't know the following! I surely did not..
These are some rather eye-opening facts: Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afganistan, the sacrifice has been enormous. In the time period from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 through now, we have lost over 3000 military personnel to enemy action and accidents. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed forces is, consider the following statistics:

The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006:

>>>1980 ......... 2,392
>>>1981 ......... 2,380
>>>1984 ......... 1,999
>>>1988 ......... 1,819
>>>1989 ......... 1,636
>>>1990 ......... 1,508
>>>1991 ......... 1,787
>>>1992 ......... 1,293---------------------------------------
>>>1993 ......... 1,213
>>>1994 ......... 1,075
>>>1995 ......... 2,465
>>>1996 ......... 2,318 8 Clinton years @13,417 deaths
>>>1997 ......... 817
>>>1998 ......... 2,252
>>>1999 ......... 1,984 ---------------------------------------
>>>2000 ......... 1,983
>>>2001 ......... 890
>>>2002 ......... 1,007 7 BUSH years @ 9,016 deaths
>>>2003 ......... 1,410
>>>2004 ......... 1,887
>>>2005 ......... 919
>>>2006.......... 920 ------------------------------------------

If you are confused when you look at these figures...so was I. Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton 's presidency, when America wasn't even involved in a war? And, I was even more confused; when I read that in 1980, during the reign of President (Nobel Peace Prize) Jimmy Carter, there were 2,392 US military fatalities!

These figures indicate that many of our Media & Politicians will pick and choose. They present only those 'facts' which support their agenda-driven reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth. Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their agenda?


Our Mainstream Print and TV media, and many Politicians like to slant, that these brave men and women, who are losing their lives in Iraq, are mostly minorities! Wrong AGAIN---just one more media lie! The latest census, of Americans, shows the following distribution of American citizens, by Race:

>>>European descent (White) .... 69.12%
>>>Hispanic ................................ 12.5%
>>>Black..................................... 12.3%
>>>Asian ...................................... 3.7%
>>>Native American .................. . 1.0%
>>>Other ...................................... 2.6%

Now... here are the fatalities by Race over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:


>>>European descent (white) .... 74.31%
>>>Hispanic ........................... 10.74%
>>>Black ................................... 9.67%
>>>Asian .............................. . 1.81%
>>>Native American ................. 1.09%
>>>Other .................................... . 33%

These statistics are published by Congressional Research Service, and they may be confirmed by anyone at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf (Please look at this report site if you have the chance.)


Now ask yourself these two questions:

1. 'Why does the mainstream Print and TV Media never provide statistics like these?'
2. 'Why do the mainstream media hate the web as much as they do?'
You do the Math! These figures don't lie... but, Media-liars figure...and they sway public opinion!

----- Original Message -----
From: <davewitt@technologist.com>
To: X
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: MILITARY DEATHS FOR THE PAST 26 YEARS....UNBELIEVEABLE!!
Anyone who thinks that they can boil down something as complex as Iraq or Afghanistan to a half paragraph set of figures might be a bigger fool that the person who listens to him.

First of all, the last Americans to die because of our actions in our two(current) land wars in Asia haven't been killed yet, so any discussion of what this war has cost "us" is nonsensically incomplete. Further, "we" haven't paid dollar one of the financial costs yet either, we have simply pushed these costs on the next generation. If I live long enough to have kids, I do not look forward to the day when I have to explain to them that it took us 200 years to get our first trillion in debt, and only the length of my life (so far) increase that debt by nine times (so far), a debt they will have to pay off.

If you want to really to use figures to try and grasp this war, look for the answers to some of these questions: How long has the average servicemember been deployed in the last seven years? How many civilians (both American and other) have died in the course of the war? What is the current divorce rate in the DOD? Compared to ten years ago? What is our current retention rate among the new forces we recruit? Of our injured veterans, what percent are considered totally disabled by the VA? (For that matter, what percent consider themselves diasbled, as opposed to the VA number?) And BE ON YOUR GUARD when you use or read statistics. What exactly are they referring to? Something as simple as checking addition might reveal errors. I have attached the mentioned casualty list because I have uncovered disagreements between the numbers in the email and the numbers in the report and I can't figure out where the numbers in the email came from. For both 1995 and 2005 there are significant disagreements between the two.


I have a friend who's a surgeon and of late a debate on the ethics of the heroic measures on the part of the medical community has begun, because they are now saving people that wouldn't have survived their injuries even five years ago. They are often able to save lives while being totally unable to actually heal the injuries. This is not a topic you can simply quote statistics on, this a deep issue you must examine in detail and ask what horrific injuries to fellow Americans you are truly willing to accept in the cause of a given foreign policy.


Please do not construe any of my remarks as directed against any particular group. The debacle we are involved in is our collective responsibility; we are all complicit to some degree. Congress is most responsible for the runaway spending that has been going on the my entire life, because they weren't held accountable by THEIR boss, the American people.

As for myself, despite my first hand knowledge of this war, I have shied away from telling much of it. For me, this is mostly because to tell even small parts of this story accurately takes so long. Even to my parents, who have been watching my military career since 1996, it can take hours to explain the most basic aspects of military news. This is a downside to the all volunteer military: America at large has no idea how the military operates. For example, the surge, which in the mind of the public boiled down to the choice of "should we or shouldn't we," is really a much deeper balance of other factors. Consider: What did it cost the troops who were there when we so cavalierly extended them from 12 months to 15? I can assure you from personal experience that being extended while on rote is among the cruelest things you can go through, and my longest rote has only been 4 months. It might sound simple to just move up the deployment dates of the next set of troops, and make it longer, and extend those already there, but it isn't. Most people in the military have already been, and already have a date to go back. When the ratio of home time to desert time gets below 1, understand that this means the majority of US forces are spending the majority of their time in another country. I can tell you now there is generation of children who will remember this war as the reason their parents got divorced. In a larger sense, we have left ourselves no strategic reserve. Imagine any kind of serious conflict requiring military force beyond our current fights, and that is a conflict we don't have the troops to address. I am not saying the surge was worth it or not worth it, but these are some of the costs that went with it, and they were totally unmentioned by TV news, and beyond the thinking done by the average citizen.

So in regards to not talking about the war, I have tried to change policies. I am working on telling this story, or the parts of it I know. Anyone who votes needs better information than that on TV. There are few things I can emphasize more than this: Whatever you think you know about the war, you have only begun to scratch the surface. To understand this war, you need to STUDY. Hours of it, not just breezing through an email like this. I list a below a few of the most basic books on recent military history that I have found enlightening lately, as well as some web sources, like an independent war reporter who describes the details you will not find on the evening news.

The Generals' War, by Gordon and Trainor
Learning to Eat Soup With a Knife, by John Nagl
Art of War, translated by Samuel Griffith
Scipio Africanus, by B.H. Liddell-Hart
Strategy, by B.H. Liddell-Hart
Masters of War, by Michael Handel
On Strategy, by Harry Summers

"Have a plan to kill everyone you meet"
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2008/01/a-plan-to-kill.php

Garry Trudeau has earned a lot of respect from me with the amount of time he has spent with injured veterans at Bethesda, and tried to tell their stories in his strip and letting them tell it themselves on his website.

http://gocomics.typepad.com/the_sandbox/

Finally, in keeping with my new policy, I will try to blog a bit about the war myself at the address below. I depart for Iraq shortly.

http://iloaktree.blogspot.com/

respectfully submitted,
David Witt

<<2008-war casualties-RL32492.pdf>>

No comments: