Military Deaths Down from Peacetime
November 13, 2007
Everything in life is a matter of perspective. The recent downtick in military combat deaths really doesn't mean too much when one of those killed is your own son. However, clear-headed military decisions cannot be made when one is too close to a war in terms of casualties.
We've certainly had our share of setbacks in Iraq. However, I still feel the cause is noble and those people in Iraq are much better off with Saddam gone. As I continue to support our actions in Iraq, I'm often asked contemptuously, “Would you send your son to die in Iraq?” Such statements are long on emotion and short on logic. First of all, I wouldn't have sent my son to die in any war, not even the Revolutionary War. No father would intentionally send his son to a certain death. But, no one goes off to war with the expectation of being killed. There's certainly that possibility but no one goes looking for death.
The most important point to the question of sending your son to die in Iraq is that no parents are sending their sons anywhere. These are young adults who have made the conscience decision to join the military. There was no draft. They volunteered. There was no forced enlistment. These soldiers proudly join to serve and they have a reasonable expectation that they will serve with distinction and come home. The vast majority do.
It's hard not to get caught up in the pain these families of fallen soldiers are feeling. It seems so senseless when a roadside bomb randomly snuffs out a young life. However, great progress is being made. The generals on the ground in Iraq now tell us that every neighborhood in Baghdad has been secured. That was unthinkable just 8 months ago. The so-called troop surge appears to have worked. Combat casualties are down considerably.
But here's something quite interesting to note. According to a new Congressional Research Service report prepared for members of Congress, we averaged more military casualties in the 1980s, a decade of peace, than we averaged in the last four years in Iraq and Afghanistan. Let me put it another way. More military personnel died in every year of the 1980s, except two, than died last year in the military, including all combat deaths. Military deaths averaged 2,123 in the 1980s, due to training exercise, murder, suicide, etc. Total military deaths in 2006 including combat, suicide, murder, etc. were 1,858. The average for the war is 1,726 compared to 2,123 for the ‘80s. Most of the more recent casualties were combat-related, of course, but the incidence of accidental death was way down from 1980s levels. The point being, people have become hysterical over the war, pointing to the loss of military personnel when we're, historically speaking, at relatively low numbers.
That's not to take anything away from anyone who has lost a loved one in this conflict. It's only to illustrate that military life can be dangerous no matter what the circumstances.
Were you to ask the average person on the street if military deaths were down from the ‘80s, you'd likely be met with scowls of skepticism. The mainstream media have the exact same information I just dispensed to you. I'll make a prediction right here. This may very well be the only place you hear this. The information certainly is interesting, to say the least. No doubt it's newsworthy, what with all the talk about combat casualties. It would surely be instructive to compare and contrast historic military losses.
As I said, everything's a matter of perspective.