U.S. Soldier Becomes 400th Killed in Iraq

[Seraphim]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq&cid=540&ncid=716


BAGHDAD, Iraq - A U.S. soldier was killed Saturday when his vehicle was struck by a roadside bomb, the 400th U.S. serviceman to die in Iraq (news - web sites) since hostilities began March 20.


Two other soldiers were wounded when the device exploded next to a two-vehicle patrol, a military spokesman said.


The British military has reported 52 deaths so far in Iraq. Sixteen Italians also have died, along with one soldier each from Denmark, Spain, Ukraine and Poland.

[Jack Mehoff]

I hope they don't include the casualties from accidents

[Seraphim]

Yes they included Accidents and Non-Combat deaths.
Quite miss leading if you ask me.

[Jack Mehoff]

People die in accidents all the time. This NG battalion i'm currently with already lost two guys from a 5-ton accident just last month alone. How nice the media only mention accident casualties during war time and oversea. :roll:

[Seraphim]

Whats the official definition of Non-Combat deaths...are those blue on blue and negligent discharges, or is that the other way around?

[Trident-za]

It's not misleading at all - IF they had said the 400th to die in combat since hostilities began, then you would have a point. They did not say that, so it is basically the truth. Simple.

You make a good point though Jack, but if the media were so say that 2 guys from that NG unit had died last month that would also be true, yes? Misleading, no.

Do you think the 58 000 odd deaths on record for Vietnam only includes combat related figures?

[Salty Dog]

maybe they should have sombody on foot or whatever, scout ahead, so they don't hit anymore road side bombs or soemthing, because that seems to be all i hear about. damn roadside bombs.

[spier]

One thing I find a bit misleading is that news sources rarely state the total Coalition fatalities, just the US losses. The total is currently at: 471 fatalities.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

[Jack Mehoff]

It's not misleading at all - IF they had said the 400th to die in combat since hostilities began, then you would have a point. They did not say that, so it is basically the truth. Simple.

You make a good point though Jack, but if the media were so say that 2 guys from that NG unit had died last month that would also be true, yes? Misleading, no.

Do you think the 58 000 odd deaths on record for Vietnam only includes combat related figures?

umm..no, 400 is the total number from combat(ambushes, fire fights, roadside bombs, etc) AND noncombat(weapon discharged, automobile accidents, etc.) related deaths.


They did not say that, so it is basically the truth. Simple
so the media says elephant can fly do you believe that too?

[ArmedPacifist]

so the media says elephant can fly do you believe that too?

Was it said on CNN or Al Jazeera?

[Trident-za]

umm..no, 400 is the total number from combat(ambushes, fire fights, roadside bombs, etc) AND noncombat(weapon discharged, automobile accidents, etc.) related deaths.

I KNOW they meant combat + non-combat related. I don't see how my post makes you believe otherwise. And their post did not specifiy combat-only, that was precisely my point.....



so the media says elephant can fly do you believe that too?

Nope, but I'm usually more inclined to believe something I read in the media than something I read here written by one of the "I'm so completely objective it's scary" brigade :P Are you trying to dispute the fact that 400 soldiers have died, just because its written in the media?? Surely not....

[He219]

For comparison, during the 1968 Tet Offensive approximately 11,000 Americans were killed and 45,000 wounded.

Since the campaign to remove Saddam from Iraq began, 401 americans have been casualties, of these 273 in combat.

Saddam Hussein's government is believed to have buried as many as 300,000 opponents in 263 mass graves that dot the Iraqi landscape.