putting iraq losses into context
Guest blogger Voolfie over at Blonde Sagacity applies *gasp* logic to the number of servicemen we have lost in Iraq. Please do not get me wrong, one is too many, but being that I have promised to give my life in service to this country, I think I can criticize those who wrongly present the facts about those that actually have given their lives. A sample:
So, what is the context that we’re missing? Is it the weather we had at the time these soldiers were lost? (NOTE: I use "soldier" as a generic term, I am not ignoring or downplaying the efforts and sacrifices of marines, sailors or airmen) Is it the color clothing they were wearing? Is it their political affiliation? No. The only context that makes any sense is the military and historical context of their deaths. Only by comparing their loss with similar losses in similar situations can we measure ‘how bad’ these losses are.The whole post here.
To that end, please consider some other facts which can reasonably be compared to the one at issue in order to give us the proper context:
We’ve lost twenty-five hundred personnel in three and a half years of combat in Iraq. However...
-We lost an average of around 12,000 soldiers every month during WWII.
-We lost 2,500 soldiers in just eight hours at Normandy in 1944
-We lost 19,000 soldiers on Okinawa in three months in 1945
When these facts are placed side-by-side with the fact of our losses in Iraq, it becomes quite clear that, while tragic as every lost life is, we are doing damned well at keeping our people safe over there.