Soldiers Lost At Peace Vs. Soldiers Lost At War

22 Mar, 2006 by John Hawkins

Print this article Font size -16+

A lot of conservatives have pointed out, correctly, that the critics of the war in Iraq lack perspective. For example, you constantly hear liberals comparing Iraq to Vietnam, but seldom do you hear their pointing out that the number of soldiers killed in Iraq throughout the entire length of the war is about the same as the worst month in Vietnam (Through March 20, 2006 in Iraq, there were 2,317 soldiers killed. In May of 1968 in Vietnam, there were 2,316 soldiers killed).

Here’s another detail that you’re not hearing from the gloom and doomers: we’re losing less people in Iraq than we lost in peace time during the eighties.

For example, in 2004 there were 1,887 US active duty military deaths. Keep in mind, that’s the total in Iraq, Afghanistan, at home, abroad — everything. Guess how many there were in 1981, a year where we didn’t lose a single soldier to “hostile action?” There were 2,380 deaths that year. How about 1983, the year we liberated Grenada? There were 2,486 soldiers killed.

The point is that even during peace time, being in the military is a tough, dangerous, and difficult job that requires our troops to risk their lives. It’s not easy work and it’s even harder during wartime. So when you hear people claim the troops can’t take it, that what we’re doing in Iraq is “unsustainable” or that we’re “breaking the military,” you can now tell them with confidence that what they’re saying is complete hogwash.

Hat tip to the The QandO Blog for the story.