Re: Uzbekistan Eyewitnesses See Dozens of US Casualties
-- On 13 Dec 2001, at 7:04, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Once again I am seeing eyewitness reports claiming more U.S. Casualties. Yet I don't see simular reports in the U.S. Press confirming or denying these claims.
The dogs bark but the caravan moves on. In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG ml7PAylrLroEpLdqChIZmMA6AiPcaFtXPpLio4+J 4HNvXZNf9H6eIyOEDpLVqNkFM4F/Lv+VKEfE7cELA
I agree. I suspect this may be more propaganda then fact. The publishing group is pro bin laden - or so claims the times of india. On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
-- On 13 Dec 2001, at 7:04, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Once again I am seeing eyewitness reports claiming more U.S. Casualties. Yet I don't see simular reports in the U.S. Press confirming or denying these claims.
The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead.
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG ml7PAylrLroEpLdqChIZmMA6AiPcaFtXPpLio4+J 4HNvXZNf9H6eIyOEDpLVqNkFM4F/Lv+VKEfE7cELA
-- Joe Baptista http://www.dot-god.com/ The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773
On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead.
They also mis-report the cirumstances of the deaths as well. So, if somebody was interested a little traffic analysis would take the number reported 'over there' and then the number reported 'over here' (irrespective of locations and such) and then begin to correlate them (a lot of work and access to info that won't be easy to get, w/o an insider). -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thursday, December 13, 2001, at 09:02 AM, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 13 Dec 2001, at 7:04, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Once again I am seeing eyewitness reports claiming more U.S. Casualties. Yet I don't see simular reports in the U.S. Press confirming or denying these claims. The dogs bark but the caravan moves on. In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead.
Of course, sometimes soldiers who die in a place they weren't supposed to be come up missing in "training accidents" somewhere else. -- "Remember, half-measures can be very effective if all you deal with are half-wits."--Chris Klein
-- On 13 Dec 2001, at 7:04, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
Once again I am seeing eyewitness reports claiming more U.S. Casualties. Yet I don't see simular reports in the U.S. Press confirming or denying these claims.
James A. Donald:
The dogs bark but the caravan moves on. In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead.
On 16 Dec 2001, at 22:48, Petro wrote:
Of course, sometimes soldiers who die in a place they weren't supposed to be come up missing in "training accidents" somewhere else.
The US, unlike the countries whose system so many prefer to impose on the US, has sufficient freedom of speech that that cannot happen without causing grave embarrassment. Recollect that dying in battle gives very different honors, compensation etc. If if the army falsified the circumstances of a soldier's death there would be mutiny in the ranks. CIA deaths can go unreported, and probably usualy do. Army deaths cannot, because of a system designed to encourage and recognize valor. The low death rates in recent conflicts have made some people suspicious. How can the US army get casualty ratio of something like ten thousand to one, when fighting against people with comparable weapons? And if the US is made of supermen, why did it suffer heavy casualties in Vietnam and Korea? In my judgment the big change is the change from a conscript army, a slave army, to a warrior army. Firstly this makes the soldiers more valuable to the officers, since deaths cost the army big money. Every casualty means that the pay and benefits have to be considerably higher. In a free market, the burden of hazardous employment falls on the employer, so the employer has an incentive to provide safe employment. Secondly, the apparatus of coercion that attempts to force conscripts to fight against their will frequently forces them into danger that a competent warrior would never have gone into, or would promptly have left. With warrior armies, the losing side typically suffers almost one hundred percent of the casualties. These absurdly lopsided casualty rates have been normal throughout much of the last few thousand years of history. These recent figures do not indicate the US army is composed of supermen, merely that recent wars have been victorious, and that the US army is now composed of warriors. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG YdA+jxja9u2mKh/t/7M4RTS4WDWB5rB/ToGn2IIw 4IMbW6YIQXFRZY9lKCF8rMgIXbX/hM/6Gg0dg0Zjb
On Monday, December 17, 2001, at 09:17 AM, jamesd@echeque.com wrote: James A. Donald:
The dogs bark but the caravan moves on. In the US, unlike most other countries, there is still sufficient freedom of speech that soldiers cannot go missing without it becoming widely known. The US army does underreport wounded, and minimize the severity of wounds, but dead is dead. On 16 Dec 2001, at 22:48, Petro wrote: Of course, sometimes soldiers who die in a place they weren't supposed to be come up missing in "training accidents" somewhere else.
The US, unlike the countries whose system so many prefer to impose on the US, has sufficient freedom of speech that that cannot happen without causing grave embarrassment. Recollect that dying in battle gives very different honors, compensation etc. If if the army falsified the circumstances of a soldier's death there would be mutiny in the ranks.
Depends on the soldier and the "war" they are fighting. Not all soldiers fight for honors, and some units understand/believe that certain fights in certain places are worth not getting all that much attention. I'm not saying that in *this* war that would happen, there is no need. The American public knows we are in this war, and they understand that there will be some casualties.
The low death rates in recent conflicts have made some people suspicious. How can the US army get casualty ratio of something like ten thousand to one, when fighting against people with comparable weapons? And if the US is made of supermen, why did it suffer heavy casualties in Vietnam and Korea?
Because in Korea and Vietnam we were fighting the enemies fight with largely the the same level of technology (yes, we had better technology, but not *that* much better). We are also fighting smarter these days.
In my judgment the big change is the change from a conscript army, a slave army, to a warrior army. Firstly this makes the soldiers more valuable to the officers, since deaths cost the army big money. Every casualty means that the pay and benefits have to be considerably higher. In a free market, the burden of hazardous employment falls on the employer, so the employer has an incentive to provide safe employment. Secondly, the apparatus of coercion that attempts to force conscripts to fight against their will frequently forces them into danger that a competent warrior would never have gone into, or would promptly have left.
Not that I disagree much with this, but there is also the issue that the American public is much more sensitive to losses than in Korea or Vietnam. "We" are not as naive as we used to be, and we don't trust Uncle nearly as much. This makes those at the top more careful about objectives and methods. -- "Remember, half-measures can be very effective if all you deal with are half-wits."--Chris Klein
participants (4)
-
!Dr. Joe Baptista -
jamesd＠echeque.com -
Jim Choate -
Petro