It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Government Report: More Military Deaths in Some Years of Peace Than War

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Government Report: More Military Deaths in Some Years of Peace Than War


www.foxnews.com

More active members of the military died during two years of peacetime in the early 1980s than died during a two-year period of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a government report.

The Congressional Research Service, which compiled war casualty statistics from the Revolutionary War to present day conflicts, reported that 4,699 members of the U.S. military died in 1981 and '82 — a period when the U.S. had only limited troop deployments to conflicts in the Mideast. That number of deaths is nearly 900 more than the 3,800 deaths during 2005 and '06, when the U.S. was fully committed to large-scale military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The most staggering number I think is that in 1981-82 there were 1,524 deaths due to accident. This is one of the reasons that the numbers are lower now, as accidents reduction has been a very big goal of the US armed forces. I just wonder why people have not made a big as issue of this? I know everyone is going to question the source, as it is FOX NEWS, but they are taking raw data from a public policy research arm of the Congress. I know people are going to question the fact that FOX cherry picked certain years to make their article work, but isn't that what the IPCC did when they discounted certain decades that did not originally work with the hockey sticks theory related to global warming??? Data can be manipulated. You can read it one way, I can read it another.

So let me be the one that debunks the thread before you all jump on me. Please note that number of active personal in 1981-1982 was much higher than that of today. The article should go into the percentage of deaths in 1981-82 vs. the percentage of deaths in 2005-06. I would like to see actual statistics for that before I start demanding the media pay more attention to this. They don't give the actual number for 1981-82, but indicate that the peak was in 1986 at 2.18 million troups vs. 1.38 million today.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Being in the military, I can confirm that the numbers of service members killed in peacetime can be quite high historically speaking. There have been huge pushes to come up with risk reduction, mandatory safety training, etc... to combat accidental fatalities. The biggest killer is alcohol. You get young soldiers who think they're invincible, give them alcohol, they do something stupid, and end up killing themselves or their buddies. Fatigue is another killer. Other big killers are operating military vehicles in close proximity to dismounted troops, without a ground guide. Military training is inherantly hazardous, so more steps need to be taken to avoid unnecessary fatalities.



posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   
what was the number of troops the us had in that period?
vs
and how many do they have now?

wasnt it the height of the cold war?

also wernt there a few terrorists attacks in the early 80's?

the bombing of the american us base that killed 250 or so marines springs to mind.

i guarantee the injury rate is currently running higher than any peacetime period.



posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by wierdalienshiznit

what was the number of troops the us had in that period?
vs
and how many do they have now?

wasnt it the height of the cold war?

also wernt there a few terrorists attacks in the early 80's?

the bombing of the american us base that killed 250 or so marines springs to mind.

i guarantee the injury rate is currently running higher than any peacetime period.



The fact that it was during the Cold War, or that there were more total troops doesn't really have much bearing. The big difference is a greater emphasis on safety in recent years.



posted on Nov, 14 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


it must have some influence,

the more troops there are,the more injuries will occur, whilst fewer troops equals less injuries.

hasnt the us army shrunk considerably since then?.



new topics

 
0

log in

join