Military Deaths:

[IntruderLS1]

From FAS.org. One of my favorite sites:

Below is some very interesting data referencing deaths in the
military. I guarantee you will not read this in your local newspaper
nor will you see it on the daily news broadcast. I pray this will
encourage you to enlighten folks around you as to the brave and
courageous young people serving in our military.

Deaths in the Military

1980 .......... 2,392
1981 .......... 2,380
1982 .......... 2,318
1983 ......... 2,465
1984 .......... 1,999
1985 .......... 2,252
1986 .......... 1,984
1987 .......... 1,983
1988 .......... 1,819
1989 .......... 1,636
1990 ......... 1,508
1991 .......... 1,787
1992 .......... 1,293
1993 .......... 1,213
1994 ......... 1,075
1995 .......... 1,040
1996 .......... 974
1997 .......... 817
1998 .......... 826
1999 .......... 795
2000 .......... 774
2001 .......... 890
2002 .......... 1007
2003 .......... 1,410 [534*]
2004 .......... 1,887 [900*]
2005 .......... [919*]
2006 .......... [920*]

Figures so noted with an asterisk (*) indicates deaths as a result of
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

You may initially feel confused when you look at these figures
--especially when you see that in 1980, during the term of President
Jimmy Carter, there were 2,392 US military fatalities. What this
clearly indicates is that our media and our liberal politicians pick
and choose and tend to present only those facts that support their
agenda driven reporting. Another fact our left media and politicians
like to slant is that these brave men and women losing their lives are
minorities. Wrong again - The latest census shows the following:

European descent (white) ..... 69.12%
Hispanic .... 12.5%
African American ..... 12.3%
Asian ..... 3.7%
Native American .... 1.0%
Other ..... 2.6%

The fatalities over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom are:

European descent (white) .... 74.31%
Hispanic ..... 10.74%
African American ... 9.67%
Asian ..... 1.81%
Native American .... 1.09%
Other ..... 2.33%

These statistics are published by DOD and may be viewed at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

 

[TheOriginalJames]

I wanna know exact numbers of each of the major wars of the 20th century too.

ww1, ww2, korea, vietnam, etc.

Just think of those 10s of thousands of men/women who lost their lives out there over the past 27 years though.

 

[IntruderLS1]

**Edit**

Look at pages 5-7 on the .pdf. I tried to paste it, but the table is all jacked up. Maybe Tim could figure it out?​

 

[Tim]

To help put those numbers into perspective, you must look at the size of the military. The first column is the year, the second column is total number of active duty military, the third column is the number who died while active duty and the forth column shows the number of active duty per 1 death... so in 1980 there were 903 active duty per death.


1980 ---2,159,630 ----2392 ----903
1981 ---2,206,751 ----2380 ----927
1982 ---2,251,067 ----2319 ----971
1983 ---2,273,364 ----2465 ----922
1984 ---2,297,922 ----1999 ---1150
1985 ---2,323,185 ----2252 ---1032
1986 ---2,359,855 ----1984 ---1189
1987 ---2,352,697 ----1983 ---1186
1988 ---2,309,495 ----1819 ---1270
1989 ---2,303,384 ----1636 ---1408
1990 ---2,258,324 ----1507 ---1499
1991 ---2,198,189 ----1787 ---1230
1992 ---1,953,337 ----1293 ---1511
1993 ---1,849,537 ----1213 ---1525
1994 ---1,746,482 ----1075 ---1625
1995 ---1,661,928 ----1040 ---1598
1996 ---1,613,310 -----974 ---1656
1997 ---1,578,382 -----817 ---1932
1998 ---1,538,570 -----827 ---1860
1999 ---1,525,942 -----796 ---1917
2000 ---1,530,430 -----758 ---2019
2001 ---1,552,196 -----891 ---1742
2002 ---1,627,142 -----999 ---1629
2003 ---1,732,632 ----1228 ---1411
2004 ---1,711,916 ----1874 ----914
2005 ---1,664,014 ----1942 ----857
2006 ---1,664,014 ----1858 ----896

 

[IntruderLS1]

I'll just do this the long way:

Revolutionary war, 1775-1783: 4,435 Deaths

War of 1812, 1812-1815: 2,260 deaths

Mexican War, 1846-1848: 13,283 deaths

Civil War, (Union forces only), 1861-1865: 365,511 deaths

Spanish-American War: 2,446 deaths

WWI, 1917-1918: 116,516 deaths

WWII, 1941-1946: 405,399 deaths

Korean War, 1950-1953: 36,574 deaths

Vietnam Conflict, 1964-1973: 58,209 deaths

Persian Gulf War, 1990-1991: 382 deaths

 

[Tim]

Ok, there was a question as to why I posted my numbers... well let me explain... when you see that in 1985, 2252 active military died. That looks pretty bad. But when you consider that was out of a total of 2,323,185 total active military. That means for every 1032 active duty military there was one death. That's the number that's important. The higher the number the better... and when you put these numbers side by side with civilian deaths, it's better percentage wise...

So yes, there aren't a lot of deaths in this war compared to other wars... but it's not only the number of military deaths, it's the amputees and the wounded. It's the civilian deaths, it's the economy of both countries. It's the dependents of these dead and wounded soldiers. It's a lot more than just the total number of dead active duty servicemen and women.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Ok, there was a question as to why I posted my numbers... well let me explain... when you see that in 1985, 2252 active military died. That looks pretty bad. But when you consider that was out of a total of 2,323,185 total active military. That means for every 1032 active duty military there was one death. That's the number that's important. The higher the number the better... and when you put these numbers side by side with civilian deaths, it's better percentage wise...

So yes, there aren't a lot of deaths in this war compared to other wars... but it's not only the number of military deaths, it's the amputees and the wounded. It's the civilian deaths, it's the economy of both countries. It's the dependents of these dead and wounded soldiers. It's a lot more than just the total number of dead active duty servicemen and women.

Everything you said here is 100% Tim. Would you agree however that civilian deaths, amputations, and non-combat related deaths are a part of every conflict man has endured?

Me personally, I'll take fewer numbers of actual dead as my primary.

In general, the anger at the war is not an economic anger IMO, but an anger at the cost of U.S. service members lives.

FWIW, I appreciate that you have a much deeper grasp on the situation than most "angry liberals."

 

[IntruderLS1]

2003 ---1,732,632 ----1228 ---1411
2004 ---1,711,916 ----1874 ----914
2005 ---1,664,014 ----1942 ----857
2006 ---1,664,014 ----1858 ----896

LOL If Saddam were alive, he would sure be pissed off at this one!!

We fought his mighty military in '03, and the terrorists took over in '04.


Proof that technology isn't always the answer I suppose.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Let us not forget the casualties after wars.

Suicide is climbing amongst specifically the Iraq vets.

 

[Tim]

My anger with this war does not come from the total number of deaths we have suffered, but the fact that they are dying in vain. Our occupation in Iraq (notice I don't call it a war) has nothing to do with terrorism or our safety and everything to do with corporate greed. To loose one life for that is one to many.
We can argue all day about how there is some justification in continuing the fight today (killing Al Qaeda forces that weren't there before our invasion) but that doesn't change the fact that Bush and his Neocon buddies were planning to invade long before 9/11 and when the opportunity came (9/11 and America's up swelling) he had his cronies lie to make any connection possible to Saddam and why he needed to go... He got what he wanted, war. And the lives we are losing there are lives that we are losing in vain... that's where my anger comes from

 

[GraceAbounds]

I'm sorry you feel like the lives being lost there are in vain.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I'm sorry you feel like the lives being lost there are in vain.

Well they are not being lost in vain, look at how much we have done in Iraq to gain stability...Oh and lookie all the oil we get to take and not benefit from as a nation.

Sorry for the sarcasm, but we have nothing there to ensure a brighter day for the U.S., instead we have lessened public opinion about our great nation and have piled up bodies of our nations young and old alike to do it.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Ok, there was a question as to why I posted my numbers... well let me explain... when you see that in 1985, 2252 active military died. That looks pretty bad. But when you consider that was out of a total of 2,323,185 total active military. That means for every 1032 active duty military there was one death. That's the number that's important. The higher the number the better... and when you put these numbers side by side with civilian deaths, it's better percentage wise...

So yes, there aren't a lot of deaths in this war compared to other wars... but it's not only the number of military deaths, it's the amputees and the wounded. It's the civilian deaths, it's the economy of both countries. It's the dependents of these dead and wounded soldiers. It's a lot more than just the total number of dead active duty servicemen and women.

The thing that gets me is so many have to die. Even when it's just a small percentage. Out of every 1,032 there's one mother grieving.

I don't really have a relevant point here.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Well they are not being lost in vain, look at how much we have done in Iraq to gain stability...Oh and lookie all the oil we get to take and not benefit from as a nation.

Sorry for the sarcasm, but we have nothing there to ensure a brighter day for the U.S., instead we have lessened public opinion about our great nation and have piled up bodies of our nations young and old alike to do it.

Sorry you feel that way. You get an A for your use of sarcasm.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Sorry you feel that way. You get an A for your use of sarcasm.

It's my native tongue

 

[GraceAbounds]

Lol!!!!!!!!!

 

[IntruderLS1]

The thing that gets me is so many have to die. Even when it's just a small percentage. Out of every 1,032 there's one mother grieving.

I don't really have a relevant point here.

For not having a point James, you sure make a great one.

We must always remember that truth.

 

[Tim]

The thing that gets me is so many have to die. Even when it's just a small percentage. Out of every 1,032 there's one mother grieving.

I don't really have a relevant point here.

Actually if you compare active military death rate to the death rate of the general population death rate for the age group of 25-44 for that year, the military had a death rate of 44 per 100,000 active duty and the general population was 178 per 100,000. So they were much better off than the general population age 25-44. Age 15-24 was 90 per 100,000... still the military was half that.

and these are numbers for 1985, there was no war going on then.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Actually if you compare active military death rate to the death rate of the general population death rate for the age group of 25-44 for that year, the military had a death rate of 44 per 100,000 active duty and the general population was 178 per 100,000. So they were much better off than the general population age 25-44. Age 15-24 was 90 per 100,000... still the military was half that.

and these are numbers for 1985, there was no war going on then.

I know, still doesn't change the fact that someone didn't get to go through life.

 

[Peter Parka]

Actually if you compare active military death rate to the death rate of the general population death rate for the age group of 25-44 for that year, the military had a death rate of 44 per 100,000 active duty and the general population was 178 per 100,000. So they were much better off than the general population age 25-44. Age 15-24 was 90 per 100,000... still the military was half that.

and these are numbers for 1985, there was no war going on then.

But I'm guessing the stats for civilians included a lot more people who just died of old age ect. I'm guessing there arn't really a lot of old people in the military and most of the military personnel are in or were in good physical shape.