History of military death under othe Administrations

This was a forwarded email to me. It's false

Military

losses, 1980 through 2006

( title=http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf"
target=_blank>www.fas.org...)


These are some rather eye-opening facts. Since the start of the war
on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan , the sacrifice has been enormous. In the
time period from the invasion of Iraq& lt; /st1:place> in March 2003
through today, we have lost over 3,000 military personnel to enemy action
and accidents. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces
is, consider the following statistics:

The annual fatalities of
military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980
through 2006:
1980 .......... 2,392 (Carter Year)
1981 ....... 2,380
(Reagan Year)
1984 .......... 1,999 (Reagan Year)
1988 .........
1,819 (Reagan Year)
1989 .......... 1,636 ! (Bush, George HW Year)

1990 .......... 1,508 (Bush, George HW Year)
1991 ...... 1,787
(Bush, George HW Year)
1992 .......... 1,293 (Bush, George HW Year)

1993 ......... 1,213 ( Clinton Year)
1994 .......... 1,075 ( Clinton
Year)
1995 .......... 2,465 ( Clinton Year)
1996 ........ 2,318
(Clinton
Year)
;

Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,000 deaths
1997 ............ 817 ( Clinton
Year)
1998 .......... 2,252 ( Clinton Year)
1999 .......... 1,984 (
Clinton Year)
2000 .......... 1,983 ( Clinton Year)
2001 .........
890 (Bush, George W Year)
2002 ......... 1,007 (Bush, George W Year)

2003 ... ....... 1,410 (Bush, George W Year)
2004 ......... 1,887
(Bush, George W Year) &n!
bsp;
Bush, George W years (2001-2006):
7,033 deaths
2005 ............. 919 (Bush, George W Year)

2006.............. 920 (Bush, George W Year)

If you are confused
when you look at these figures, so was I. Do these figures mean that the
loss from the two latest conflic ts in th e Middle East are LESS than the
loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton's presidency; when America
wasn't even involved in a war? And, I was even more confused; when I read
that in 1980, during the reign of President (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Jimmy
Carter, there were 2,392 US military fatalities!

These figures
indicate that many members of our Media and our Politicians will pick and
choose. They present only those 'facts' which support their agenda-driven
reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist
the truth?
Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their agenda? The
latest census of Americans shows th! e following distribution of American
citizens, by Race:

European descent ........................ 69.12%

Hispanic ...................................... 12.5%
Black
............................................ 12.3%
Asi an ......
....................................... 3.7%
Native American
............................ 1.0%
Other
............................................. 2.6%

Now... here are
the fatalities by Race; over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:


European descent .................74.31%
Hispanic
.................................. 10.74%
Black
.......................................... 9.67%
Asian
......................................... 1.81%
Native American
......................... 1.09%
Other
.......................................... 0.33%

The point here is
that our mainstream media continue s to spin these figures (for liberal
political gain). Nothing more...it's all about! politics, and the liberals
are famous for turning American against American for a vote.

(These
statistics are published by Congressional Research Service, and they may be
confirmed by anyone at: title=http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf"
target=_blank>www.fas.org... )


Now ask yourself two questions:

1. 'Why does the mainstream
Print and TV Media never print or report statistics like

Could this be a way to spin their own #'s? And I wasn't aware the media was liberal, not since 1960s.

where do you find this info, this was just a forwarded email to me?

They are most likely counting retirement, non-active, and retired military personel.

The media is liberal and conservative... but they all work for the same team either way.

This is interesting. I guess we tend to forget recently that Clinton was all over the world policing other nations. Whether these statistics are correct or not(I am leaning towards not), we can't forget that through all of the presidents we have been sticking our nose where it does not belong.

interesting post. Not sure if I can agree but need more research

reply to post by gnosis111

---

The military is composed of about 1.5 million active service members and about 800,000 reserves. ~3000 deaths over five years isn't really going to show up all that significantly against the background of illness, homicide, and accidents. You have to take the sheer scale of it all into consideration.

There's probably just been some changes in training or support counciling that Clinton or Bush put into effect that account for it.

You'd find a much different trend if you looked at injuries or casualties. because of body armor and battlefield medicine, FAR more soldiers are injured than killed. That's what the MSM glosses over. That and the staggering monetary cost.