| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Guard Casualty Rate above Regular Army in Iraq |
| 2004-05-30 |
| WASHINGTON - American troops in Iraq (news - web sites) died in May at a rate of more than two per day, pushing the combined death count for April and May beyond 200, according to Pentagon (news - web sites) figures. For the National Guard and Reserve, whose part-time soldiers make up at least one-third of the 135,000 American troops in Iraq, the trend in casualties during May was especially troubling. At least 22 citizen soldiers died, nearly one-third of all U.S. losses in May. As a percentage of the month’s death toll, that is about double what it had been in most previous months of the war. It also shows that the Guard and Reserve are bearing an increasing combat load. Three states — Arkansas, North Carolina and Washington — now have an Army National Guard combat brigade in Iraq. In the next rotation of troops that will begin late this summer, there will be at least three others, and probably a fourth, plus a National Guard division headquarters. The most persistent killer, more than a year after President Bush declared major combat over, is the homemade roadside bomb. The military calls it an improvised explosive device. This month, they have killed least 19 soldiers, seven of them National Guardsmen. "Our biggest menace now is the improvised explosive device," Maj. Gen. John Sattler, director of operations for the U.S. Central Command, said in a telephone interview with Pentagon reporters Friday. He said multiple agencies of the U.S. government are searching for technological solutions, including electronic jammers that can stop the detonation of hidden bombs. "The laws of physics conspire to keep these things hidden once they’re emplaced, so unless you figure out through other means where they got put down, you’re in trouble," says Michael O’Hanlon, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. Months ago the Army sent a team of experts to Iraq to solve the problem, but to little apparent avail. This kind of bomb took the life of the youngest female soldier to die in Iraq so far — Pfc. Leslie D. Jackson, 18, of Richmond, Va. She was killed in Baghdad on May 20 when her military vehicle was hit. Others have been killed by snipers and suicide bombers, as well as mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons. Accidents, including two electrocutions, also have taken a toll. At least 59 American troops died in May, according to the Pentagon’s published tally. That figure does not include three Marines who died in action Saturday western Iraq. Their hometowns reach across America. Maple Valley, Wash., Ayden, N.C., and Lisbon, Maine. Chicago, New Orleans and Miami. California and Texas. Vermont and Delaware. Mississippi and Missouri. May was deadlier than most previous months, but far less so than April, when the death toll was 136. That was by far the highest for any month since U.S. forces invaded in March 2003. The bloody fight for the city of Fallujah raged throughout April but has calmed down in the past few weeks. In total, the Iraq conflict has taken the lives of more than 800 American troops so far, and last week the Pentagon reported that the number wounded in action is approaching 4,700. The military says it continues to make progress in stabilizing Iraq, but the steadily rising death toll has become a political burden for a White House that also is focused on re-election. Especially troubling, O’Hanlon says, is the continued reluctance of ordinary Iraqis to throw their support behind the American effort. The Marine Corps in March stopped reporting the circumstances of its casualties in Iraq, so the actual number of deaths by the homemade bombs this month is likely higher than the 19 reported by the Army. Among the 22 citizen soldiers killed in May was Staff Sgt. William D. Chaney, of the Illinois Army National Guard. At age 59, he was the oldest soldier to die in Iraq since the invasion began. Chaney, of Schaumburg, Ill., died May 18 at a U.S. military hospital in Germany of complications following surgery for a noncombat related condition that he developed while in Iraq. National Guardsmen often are older than their active-duty counterparts, and May’s death toll reflects that. A 50-year-old Army Reserve soldier from Shreveport, La., died May 14; a 44-year-old Reserve soldier from Owensboro, Ky., was killed by a suicide car bomber that same day. Two Vermont National Guard members were killed in a mortar attack May 25. They were the first Guardsmen from that state to be killed in action since at least the Korean War, half a century ago. A Navy Reserve unit, the Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 14, based in Jacksonville, Fla., suffered extensive losses in May. Five of its men were killed and 28 were wounded in a mortar attack on a Marine base near the city of Ramadi in western Iraq on May 2. Two days earlier, two other members of that unit were killed when their vehicle convoy was hit by a homemade bomb. One has to question the wisdom of sending Reservists into combat instead of garrisons such as Korea or Europe. Further, the utility of the Reserves as a whole ought to be debated. How much could the existing forces be expanded if the Reserves were all deactivated? |
| Posted by:Mr. Davis |
| #9 What a total crock of s++t this article is. So it turns out that our troops' death toll in May was 1/2 that in April. So in order to put a bad spin on the story, the hack journalist (Burns) adds the two months together so he can avoiding stating that our losses actually fell. This type of dreck is worthy of the NYTimes. Also, it's about time that the Army/Marines stop giving details on how the Muslims are killing our troops. It just confirms for them what works and what doesn't. |
| Posted by: MrGrumpyDrawers 2004-05-31 2:16:07 AM |
| #8 ditto too RKB - also think there's a value when the military's made up not just of professional soldiers (hey, not arguing against the volunteer force - put down the pitchforks and torches!), but also of our civilian friends, coworkers and neighbors who voluntarily joined the Reserve. It keeps a trained resource that we wouldn't want to have every year... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-05-30 9:22:17 PM |
| #7 Ditto on the Food/Drink Alert. LOL the utility of the Reserves as a whole ought to be debated. How much could the existing forces be expanded if the Reserves were all deactivated? Two quick responses to that. First, please folks - ditch the assumption that we could easily and quickly expand the active duty forces. Or rather, that we could do so with good results. This isn't WWII. Today's soldiers require, and get, extensive training to make good use of the technology and doctrine we give them. That takes time, money and experienced trainers - not something one develops overnight. Do we pull top NCOs out of duty in Iraq to train new recruits, leaving their units without their leadership and experience? NCOs are the backbone of our services - this, to a far greater degree than in many other countries, and to our great benefit. You can't clone them quickly ... Moreover, there are sound reasons for having a Reserve. One is that when you need them unexpectedly - say, if terrorists declare war on you - they're there and can be called up for service quickly. The other is, at least in my mind, the value in a democracy of having many citizens not only trained for military service, but connected to the defense of our country and our society. |
| Posted by: rkb 2004-05-30 9:11:11 PM |
| #6 Thanks for asking. He's doing OK; it's pretty quiet down where he is, and they stick pretty close to the base. A few weeks back he went with a bunch of the guys on a joyride to the port at Umm Qasr. This is him, in the middle: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dilatush/ummqasr4.jpg Not a clue who the two Iraqi dudes are, he says they just wanted their pictures taken with every GI they could find and chattered like magpies. The people were friendly, and a great time was had by all. Big thing right now is the heat: he wrote to me on Wednesday, saying that at 9:00 a.m. it had reached 100 degrees; at noon it was 125; and the forecast high for the day was 140. He says that when there's a wind, it feels just like standing behind an idling jet engine. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-05-30 9:06:44 PM |
| #5 Dave, may I ask how your son is doing? |
| Posted by: Matt 2004-05-30 8:53:11 PM |
| #4 "War in Iraq Distracts Bush from Controlling Highway Traffic Deaths" Too bad there wasn't a Food/Drink Alert on that one- damn near choked on a Fig Newton when I grokked it. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-05-30 8:37:52 PM |
| #3 Dave, good post but this is how the Times would spin it: "War in Iraq Distracts Bush from Controlling Highway Traffic Deaths" "Casualties in Iraq Approach Those in Vietnam, WWII" The flippin' Book Review section today had a full-page article on global warming books including a reference to the Kyoto treaty , "which President Bush has rejected anyway." (As I recall it was a 95-0 vote of the US Senate during King William's reign that rejected it.) |
| Posted by: Matt 2004-05-30 8:26:46 PM |
| #2 Rantburg University. Thanks Dave D.! |
| Posted by: ex-lib 2004-05-30 6:13:56 PM |
| #1 OH DEAR MOTHER OF GOD!!!!!!! LET'S ALL PANIC!!! THE CASUALTY RATE FOR RESERVISTS IS MOUNTING AND NOW IT'S... ...no different than the rest of our troops. Sorry, but this horseshit article is nothing more than the result of that idiot Robert Burns sitting down with a fifth of Scotch and some statistics tables and weaving a slyly worded, but otherwise vacuous, tale of woe for no other purpose than to cause people to lose heart (and vote for John Kerry, of course, because we're in a really terrible fix and it's all Bush's fault). "One has to question the wisdom of sending Reservists into combat..." No, one does not. What one has to do is refrain from getting hoodwinked by dishonest journalists operating on hidden agendas. Our reservists are doing the job they were sent over there for and they're doing it quite well, thank you. Instead of getting taken in by Robert Burns' contrived, manipulative hand-wringing, consider these for perspective: Q: How many months worth of U.S. highway fatalities are represented by the casualties in Operation Iraqi Freedom to date? A: 6.7 days worth. Q: At the present casualty rate, how much longer will it be before the number of Americans killed in OIF equals the number killed in Vietnam? A: Another 73 years; unless you're very young, it sure as hell isn't going to happen in your lifetime. Q: How much longer before our casualties equal those of World War 2? A: Adjusting for the difference in U.S. population between then and now (132 million v. 290 million), it'll take another one thousand, one hundred years. "Especially troubling, O’Hanlon says, is the continued reluctance of ordinary Iraqis to throw their support behind the American effort." And the single most important reason for that, is that they're worried we might lose our nerve and abandon them. The best thing we can do right now to avoid failure, is to quit worrying about failure. Time to buck up. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2004-05-30 4:12:54 PM |