As of this moment, there are 911 reported US fatalities in Afghanistan, since 9/11/2001. My Brothers are not mere numbers and left or right, it is wrong to use them as mere numbers for political purposes or to undermine their mission. To date, 2009 fatalities exceed the combined 2008 and 2007 totals and the combined 5 years prior.
But 911 fatalities is not quite honest. It includes deaths in Pakistan, Cuba, Uzbekistan and elsewhere. It also includes 250 Non-Hostile deaths such as heart attacks and vehicular accidents. And there have been 1,500 fatalities, including the Warriors of Our Allies. But it doesn't include the fatalities of our Ally Pakistan fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda there. Americans seem to forget we're not doing this alone.
In fact, DoD wide, there were more deaths due to accidents (470) than due to combat actions (352) in 2008. That doesn't include the 43 murdered by citizens, which is unreported in the press. 2009 "numbers" won't be out for several more months.
Since there is no reliable source, I can't report precisely how many enemy combatants we've taken out, but I would place a good sum on it being considerably more than 1500 in recent months alone. 2009 policies have eliminated even the military from reporting numbers in specific engagements. Instead of 13 enemy killed, we now read "several" except on rare occasion when a specific number slips through, such as after the DEA mission ended in a crashed helicopter.
The MSM sells their stories with superlatives. "Dow closes highest in a year," belies the fact that it's trading at 2002 levels and 33% below 2008 highs. When the MSM could no longer report "deadliest month in Iraq since 2003," they resorted to "deadliest month since August." Superlatives sell and they paint a picture that isn't necessarily true.
The same dire predictions we heard in 2006 and 2007, we're hearing now, based on the same superlatives from the same pundits and politicians. The same journalists that abandoned Afghanistan in 2002/03 have abandoned Iraq in 2008/09. American Success is not their gig. The AP prefers to publish the last moments of a Marine's life than that same American Marine's Victories.
Like a magician, they diverted attention from Afghanistan when it was the success and now from Iraq that it is the success. The MSM adds heart attacks in Kuwait to their casualty report for Iraq. They ignore the losses of our allies Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan and lump our Canadian Allies in with Germans and Yemeni as "others."
The "peaceniks" get riled up when a rare opportunity presents itself to accuse American Troops of careless targeting, but ignore the common targeting of Civilians by the enemy. In fact, as early as 2002, they were already making excuses for Taliban theft and draft of food supplies to the Afghan citizen while blaming American "warmongers" of being insensitive to Taliban needs for food, during the war.
But why is 2009 the "deadliest ever" in Afghanistan? First off, Al-Qaeda is pretty much defeated in Iraq. There are a few holdouts and they're trying to demonstrate a presence, but how about this for a headline: "2009: The Safest on Record in Iraq!" Fatalities in Iraq are less than half of the 2nd safest year in Iraq: 2008. Fatalities in Iraq are less than 1/4 the 3rd Safest Year in Iraq: 2003. They're about 1/7th of the other years in Iraq. Less than half the number of Iraqi Civilians are killed by ALL violent crime now than were murdered by Saddam Government agents in an average month.
How about this for a headline: "Afghanistan Still the Safest of Any American War of Length?" That's right, We've been at war for over 8 years and lost fewer than in any major war.
- In the Revolutionary War 1775-1783, we lost over 25,000 Americans for the Right to Representation of the 250,000 that fought for it.
- In the War of 1812, we lost 2,260 of 35,800 Army Soldiers.
- There are 1,563 US Soldiers buried in Mexico City alone from the War with Mexico which took approximately 13,225 American lives from 1846-48.
- The Civil War cost 620,000 American lives between two Armies of a total of 3,164,000 between 1861 and 1865.
- In 3 1/2 months of the Spanish-American War, we lost 345 Troops in 1898. (That would have been more than 1000/year.)
- From 1899-1902, we lost 4,196 in the Philippines Insurrection.
- In the 15 months of US World War I, we lost 116,708 of the 5.7 Million lost on the Allied side alone and 16.5 Million lives lost during the war.
- In World War II, we lost 446,000 Troops from 1941 to 1945 of the 62-78.4 Million lives lost. (Germany was occupied until 1949 and Austria until 1955.)
- The Korean War brought us 36,516 Troop Fatalities and 15,421 POW-MIA's of 480,000 Deployed in a "UN Police Action" from 1950-53. (The South Koreans took 137,899 KIA.)
- Viet Nam lasted from 1955-1973 and of the 2,594,000 US Troops who served there, 58,228 paid the ultimate price, while another 1,740 are still MIA. 1968 was "the deadliest year" of the war with 6,081 US fatalities while 1972 saw only 641 US deaths, still more than the worst on record in Afghanistan. South Korea lost 4,900 in Viet Nam, more than the US in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
- In the 6 weeks of Operation Desert Storm, we lost 294 US Troops, most during the 4 days of the Ground War.
- As a sidenote, in the "NATO Intervention" against Serbia for Kosovo, 500-1200 Civilians were killed under the leadership of Gen Wesley Clark in killing 576 Serbian Soldiers & Police Officers over 2 1/2 months.
- Meanwhile, in the United States, 193 Law Enforcement Officers were killed in the Line of Duty, in 2007 alone, more than any year in Afghanistan, except 2009.
- Each year, 40,000 Americans die on American Highways.
But superlatives imply things that are not truly representative. They sell newspapers and political ideologies.
2009 is more deadly because we have more Troops hunting down more Al-Qaeda & Taliban, while our ally Pakistan pressures them from the other side of the border. 2008 & 2009 are more deadly because we pushed Al-Qaeda out of Iraq, for the most part, in 2007. 2007 was the worst in Iraq because we were actively pursuing the enemy, Al-Qaeda, we hadn't admitted was there until 2006 (and 2008 for some). We still aren't saying much about the other enemy, Hezbollah, that has been there all along.
If the CinC has the intestinal fortitude to do what is best for the US, for the Afghans, and for the World, 2010 may be even deadlier, as he sends more US Troops to pursue the enemy, so that 2011 and 2015 might be more peaceful. It's in his best interests, as a politician on the campaign trail, to listen to the General. Then again, his Secretary of State is currently delivering to an Ally that Peace Talks won't come without Preconditions while his own campaign promise stands that he is willing to talk with Hezbollah's Master and Al-Qaeda's ally, Iran, without Pre-Condition.
There is no Victory without losses. There is no Freedom without cost. There is no Success without risk. But Leaders explain why risk must be taken, why losses are worth the Cost of Freedom. Leaders know they must write letters to Mothers and Fathers whose Sons and Daughters gave all so that others might live free from tyranny and terror. Leaders know how to pick better men than themselves and listen to those trained and experienced in their specialties.
Generals know that every Soldier's life is important, not to be wantonly wasted, but that to bring home as many as possible, some Soldiers will give their lives. Generals weep every Soldier lost, while asking more to risk all, that their Brothers will come home and families remain safe. Great Generals know that aversion to risk puts more lives at risk than does audacity. Generals don't fight bombs but enemy leaders. They don't fight tactics, they overcome them. Generals don't quit because they have a bad day, they learn from it. Generals don't assume the enemy won't learn, they expect it.
When the enemy adapts, Generals adapt and overcome. That's why Generals, not politicians run wars. In war, there are no polls. There are death tolls, even if the General is disallowed from reporting the enemy's.
But with the leader they've turned to in the past indecisive, it's the Europeans standing up and noting the need for Patience and Determination.
Stumble It!
