Analysis of U.S. troop deaths in Iraq.
By on Mar 21st, 2008 at 10:15 am
Analysis of U.S. troop deaths in Iraq.
As the United States military approaches 4,000 troop deaths in just over five years of war in Iraq, USA Today has released a comprehensive database and analysis of those who have fallen. According to USA Today, “[o]ne in six were too young to buy a beer. About two dozen were old enough for an AARP card. Eleven died on Thanksgiving Day, 11 on Christmas, and at least five on their birthdays.” Access the full database here.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Republicans, aren’t you proud of this? Want to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan and bump those stats up a bit more? How much more?
March 21st, 2008 at 10:18 amAnd none were neocon spawn.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:21 amThis won’t stop our resident paid liar from defending his masters.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:22 amWhat is the socio-economic break down of the dead?
March 21st, 2008 at 10:27 am90% lower/lower middle
March 21st, 2008 at 10:28 amThis article really doens’t sit well with me. It seems more like macabre trivia than anything else.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:29 amHow many soldiers have came home all messed up in ways that the person that went over there is not the same person that came back. They may not be counted as part of the 4000, but they are casualties. I thought it was bad when Georges’ dad pounded a neighborhood in Panama and killed 3000 civis just to get one guy, but 4000 of the good guys to get one guy in the wrong country. Pitiful.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:29 am“[o]ne in six were too young to buy a beer. About two dozen were old enough for an AARP card. Eleven died on Thanksgiving Day, 11 on Christmas, and at least five on their birthdays.”
And “five-deferrment Dick” responded to this information with an unsympathetic “So?”.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:29 amWe don’t have to listen to librulz and facts, the surge is working and that’s all that damn counts.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:42 amThis report is tragic – all the more so because the war was entirely unnecessary, done for selfish reasons.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:43 amRickS that “so” comment is so appalling to me, I can’t believe there is still a small percentage of our population that thinks this is OK. Tell me, are they just ignorant, or is their ego too big to admit they are that wrong?
March 21st, 2008 at 10:44 amB T W has anyone seen Daryl Hammonds’impression of McCain? He has it pegged.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:46 amI wonder, do most comedians vote for who would be better for the country or who would be more fun to make fun of?
If the latter, I would imagine a “Comedians for McCain” organization would be in the plans.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:52 amIt’s always more palatable to deal with military deaths when they are just numbers. We can always say that 4000 is worse than 3000, but not as bad as 5000, but we don’t always connect that number to people on a level that resonates.
When we find out how many were too young to legally buy a drink and other factoids that humanize them, it’s a bit easier to grasp that 4000 military dead means 4000 flag-draped coffins, 4000 lives cut short from reaching full potential, 4000 grieving families, and heaven knows how many children growing up without a father or mother.
During the Vietnam War, LIFE Magazine once printed the pictures of a week’s worth of Vietnam American dead. I remember looking through the pages of pictures of young men — some military portraits, other pictures showing them just casually hanging out, but showing that the war was killing PEOPLE. Young healthy people who still had lots of life left to live. And my heart broke.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:56 amRepost from ThinkFast:
On this Good Friday, take a few minutes and check out what MSM will never cover.http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/
March 21st, 2008 at 10:57 amwar sucks
March 21st, 2008 at 11:02 amThere is a letter in the NYT from some US army Major that hits all the Republican talking points as to why the US should stay in Iraq–above all so that the sacrifices of the 4,000 (by, I’m guessing, April 15) US dead will have meaning.
They said when it was 3,000 and when it was 2,000 and when it was 1,000. For the deaths of the first 1,000 to mean something, another 1,000 had to die and for the 2,000 another thousand had to die and for the 3,000 another thousand has to die.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:21 amAnd for every 1,000 Americans that have to die, at least 10,0000 Iraqis have to die, so that the coninued piling up of bodies means something.
The logical conclusion is this war is solely for the benefit of those who have died in it whilst those who haven’t yet been killed in it just aren’t that committed.
I saw that letter this morning and while I wasn’t shocked, I was saddened that this person would throw away the lives of his friends to maintain his delusion. At some point, this war will be over. What then? There will never be an idealized American style democracy in Iraq. Most likely there will be a period of intense violence as the different factions fight for power. These people, our sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, are dying for nothing.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:36 amWe need to start ignoring GiGi, that idiot is creating way too much disruption on this site. You guys do know that GiGi is a PAID TROLL, paid to disrupt and you are helping that scum by responding to it.
So please get it together and IGNORE GiGi.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:07 pmLet me make the resident neoclown trolls jobs that much easier for them today:
Typical retardlican responses to this:
“WAAHHHHHHH, THEY VOLUNTEERED FOR IT”
or, in the words of their tin idol five deferment dick, “So?”.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:18 pmwe should take care off our own problems like getting these two greedy oil mongers out of control.
March 24th, 2008 at 1:05 pmif prince Harry can go over there why cant their kid`s or family pay the price chicken *hits. It makes me sick to think of all the oil wells both those idiots are making money off of us shortage of oil my *ss