Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

U.S. Combat Fatality Rate Lowest Ever

Military Fatalities Low rate

  • Please log in to reply
232 replies to this topic

#41 Gambler

Gambler
  • Islander
  • 239 posts

Posted 11 December 2004 - 07:20 PM

I just didn't think that Bush would have had the United States become a Rebuilder of Nation(s).*

But I guess it's true~~The US HAS become a rebuilder.











*(Added the (s) because there is a possibility that Iraq might not be the only country the United States re-shapes.)

#42 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 12 December 2004 - 12:09 AM

That more people are surviving is not necessarily as good a thing as it sounds, because more people are surviving with two or more limbs and part of their face missing (basically the body parts not protected by the body armor). We are able to save people who would have died 20 or 30 years ago, and I'm not sure that's necessarily humane or a blessing. How these poor folks will be able to live and function is still unknown.

And here's a better article on the implications:

http://www.military...._120904,00.html

Quote

"This is unprecedented. People who lose not just one but two or three extremities are people who just have not survived in the past," said Dr. Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston who researched military medicine and wrote about it in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine.

The journal also published a five-page spread of 21 military photographs that graphically depict the horrific injuries and conditions under which these modern-day MASH surgeons operate.

"We thought a lot about it," said the journal's editor, Dr. Jeffrey Drazen, and ultimately decided the pictures told an important story.

"This war is producing unique injuries - less lethal but more traumatic," he said.

In one traumatic case, Gawande tells of an airman who lost both legs, his right hand and part of his face. "How he and others like him will be able to live and function remains an open question," Gawande writes.

This isn't about the left or the right - it's about people with horrific injuries and how they survive - some, a Max Cleland or a Christopher Reeve, survive and make lives for themselves.  But a Christopher Reeve is not only a rare human being in terms of his courage, but also in terms of the resources he had access to. Ordinary people can neither afford nor receive the kind of attention and therapy Christopher Reeve did. And until EVERY person with devastating injuries receives the level of attention  and services Christopher Reeve did, it's hard to judge whether survival is such a mercy after all.

I saw people survive the Viet Nam war with injuries that would make you weep to see them. And soldiers are surviving Iraq with even more horrifying injuries.

Edited by Rhea, 12 December 2004 - 12:16 AM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#43 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,905 posts

Posted 12 December 2004 - 07:48 PM

As stated by Ogami:
**It's horrible that any of our soldiers are dead. It's also horrible that we have 10,000 wounded. No one disputes this.

~.~ Good. Then perhaps you would like to explain how you can joke about their sacrifices? That is exactly what your 'left' remark in your thread title is doing, making a joke out of the sacrifices made.

Please edit your remark, it is in very poor taste.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#44 Bouree57

Bouree57
  • Islander
  • 578 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 03:06 AM

[quote name='Ogami' date='Dec 9 2004, 11:54 PM']
QUOTE(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...ec8.html?sub=AR
)

But the remarkable lifesaving rate has come at the enormous cost of creating a generation of severely wounded young veterans and a severe shortage of military surgeons, wrote Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston.

The war in Iraq has produced the "largest burden of casualties our military medical personnel have had to cope with since the Vietnam War," said Gawande's report in the New England Journal of Medicine. By contrast, 24 percent of soldiers wounded in the Vietnam War or the Persian Gulf War did not survive. [/quote]
So it would be less bothersome if they occupied nice cemetary plots instead? What the f@#$??!

President Bush is fighting two wars at once, the war on terror, and a war of disinformation from the partisan media. For what possible reason could they spin positive news as a negative?

I often watched Ceci Connolly on the roundtable of FoxNews Sunday, and am astonished she could write this.

I look at the story again and am in awe. Anything can be spun, anything.
[/quote]
Reading the whole article (from the link provided), I can certainly understand why you would see this as a partisan issue. I'm not sure its necessarily a left vs right issue for me though.

The article does take a left turn after reporting the study and then returns to the topic of medical advancements after (what looks to me) a little soap box issue of "do we have enough resources for our Iraqi vets?".

My point is:
Does this mean this author is biased against conservatives/Bush? or
Does this author have a pet peeve about military health care? or
Does this author just have a poor editor?

I personally don't see a bias against conservatives because Clinton didn't necessarily do much for veterans. Also the military health care issue is very real and clearly not a new issue (ie Vietnam vets) which in my mind doesn't make it a right vs left issue. I can only assume the editor has the same bias because IMO those 2 paragraphs don't belong in an article about medical advancements in saving soldiers on the battlefield. To me it just looks like sloppy writing.

US News and World Report did an article (actually 2 articles) on the current state of our military healthcare and it didn't paint a pretty picture. (Unfortunately it was in late November's issue and the articles aren't available on the net anymore.) What I saw was an overburden system with mounds of red tape pushing veterans through the system like cattle. They deserve better. Much better.

-- B
My words but a whisper, your deafness a shout!
I may make you feel but I can't make you think.
(from Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull)

He who made kittens put snakes in the grass.
He's a lover of life but a player of pawns.
(from Bungle in the Jungle--War Child, JT)

#45 D'Monix

D'Monix
  • Islander
  • 4,060 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 03:42 AM

Wow, first thread that i've read that 90% of the posters in it are in the ignore catagory.

Oops, forgot one, 91%

(edited to take into account a second page i didn't see...)

Edited by D'Monix, 13 December 2004 - 03:48 AM.


#46 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 10:44 AM

Quote

Kosh wrote:

You putting the Rush spin on this, when the real point of the article is that there are 10,000 wounded from this conflict, and it's something that you almost never see reported.

How dare you disagree with Steven Q! Steven Q clearly pointed out just the other day on the Rumsfeld thread:

Just because the reporter came up with the question, Ogami doesn't invalidate the question

So my question on the motives of the partisan media is still valid, even if someone else also asks it, hmm?

My point was that you were intentionally misinterpting the article, like Rush did on the air.
Can't Touch This!!

#47 schoolpsycho

schoolpsycho
  • Islander
  • 893 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 03:24 PM

***But should Saddam Hussein have been left in power?***

I'm not talking about Saddam.

I'm talking about you mocking death, mocking our soldiers' deaths, their sacrifices, the soldiers having to go to war, and  their families greatest fears, strictly to get at those you disagree with.

You know, one of those soldiers that has gone to war is my brother.

Pardon me, but...

HE WENT TO WAR, AND HE COULD"VE BEEN KILLED!

And you can just sit there, USING PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN KILLED in your subtitle, what, for the sake of bragging??? For the sake of proving you're RIGHT??? Or just to prove a point???

Well, I'm sorry. Whatever your explanation, it shall ring hollow.

See, because like I said before, when it's yours, it's everyone.

Death is Death, Ogami, whether one, or many more. They all matter, they all count. And you DON'T use death to score points. Because LIFE is too important, and it must be valued.

Especially now, when those who fight for us die.

sp

Edited by schoolpsycho, 13 December 2004 - 03:29 PM.

Love is hard...and all there is.

#48 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 05:39 PM

Quote

My point was that you were intentionally misinterpting the article, like Rush did on the air.

Ah.
Explains a lot.

Well, I certainly plan to have some fun with subtitles now that it's apparent that they're free-irresponsible-spin zones.  ;)
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#49 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 05:44 PM

No, they're not free-for-all-zones. OT is still a moderated forum, and if this sort of thing goes on we'll have to step in and ask for changes in the subtitles, whoever is writing them.

But this one has been given an unnaturally long life already. Can't we just go on to something more interesting?

#50 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 06:08 PM

Quote

OT is still a moderated forum, and if this sort of thing goes on we'll have to step in and ask for changes in the subtitles, whoever is writing them.

But this one has been given an unnaturally long life already. Can't we just go on to something more interesting?
This sort of thing *is* going on, Kevin. That's the point. And several posters have objected. Yet subtitle remains--in all its inaccurate, inflammatory glory. And it's rather hard to avoid, it being a subtitle.

It is beyond offensive that someone should imply that his political opponents (anyone to the left of Rush Limbaugh) see a report of low death rates in Iraq as "bad news." It is completely illogical to draw from this article the conclusion that the writer is demonstrating a "leftist bias" because she includes the whole picture: while many are surviving their wounds, which is good, many will be double and triple amputees, paraplegics, etc. She's merely presenting the larger reality. It's an ugly reality but it's reality nevertheless.

The subtitle is unfounded and slanderous and ought to be removed.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#51 schoolpsycho

schoolpsycho
  • Islander
  • 893 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 06:11 PM

***But this one has been given an unnaturally long life already. Can't we just go on to something more interesting?***

And there's a reason for it. But, if we're boring you, sobeit, and I'll move on. But, I for one, can think of nothing more important than our wardead being treated with respect.

sp
Love is hard...and all there is.

#52 schoolpsycho

schoolpsycho
  • Islander
  • 893 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 06:21 PM

Hey, Nonny.

Thank you.

sp
Love is hard...and all there is.

#53 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 06:44 PM

schoolpsycho, on Dec 13 2004, 05:11 PM, said:

***But this one has been given an unnaturally long life already. Can't we just go on to something more interesting?***

And there's a reason for it. But, if we're boring you, sobeit, and I'll move on. But, I for one, can think of nothing more important than our wardead being treated with respect.

Oh, sorry! No, that's not what I meant at all. The part I wish we could move on from is Ogami's subtitle and the controversy therein, not the topic of America's soldiers. Sorry about the confusion, schoolpsycho.

Spectacles said:

This sort of thing *is* going on, Kevin. That's the point. And several posters have objected. Yet subtitle remains--in all its inaccurate, inflammatory glory. And it's rather hard to avoid, it being a subtitle.

It is beyond offensive that someone should imply that his political opponents (anyone to the left of Rush Limbaugh) see a report of low death rates in Iraq as "bad news." It is completely illogical to draw from this article the conclusion that the writer is demonstrating a "leftist bias" because she includes the whole picture: while many are surviving their wounds, which is good, many will be double and triple amputees, paraplegics, etc. She's merely presenting the larger reality. It's an ugly reality but it's reality nevertheless.

The subtitle is unfounded and slanderous and ought to be removed.

Look, I agree with everything you said there except the last part. The subtitle is offensive and untrue, but it also seems to be Ogami's actual opinion on this matter. I don't like it, but if we ask him to edit it out then we're acting more like censors than moderators. Imo, of course. Maybe that's the wrong approach here - but if we err, I'd rather err on the side of permissivity rather than exclusion.

If this sort of thing continues then we may have to step in, but right now it seems like an isolated incident.

Edited by Kevin Street, 13 December 2004 - 07:15 PM.


#54 schoolpsycho

schoolpsycho
  • Islander
  • 893 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 07:40 PM

Hello, Kevin.

That's ok. :) I apologize myself. :)

Moving on is easy enough.

But, his subtitle IS about the troops, and that's why I replied the way I did.

sp
Love is hard...and all there is.

#55 Bouree57

Bouree57
  • Islander
  • 578 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 07:51 PM

Kevin Street, on Dec 13 2004, 06:44 PM, said:

Look, I agree with everything you said there except the last part. The subtitle is offensive and untrue, but it also seems to be Ogami's actual opinion on this matter. I don't like it, but if we ask him to edit it out then we're acting more like censors than moderators. Imo, of course. Maybe that's the wrong approach here - but if we err, I'd rather err on the side of permissivity rather than exclusion.

If this sort of thing continues then we may have to step in, but right now it seems like an isolated incident.
Well said Kevin. This is the first thing I've seen in this thread that I do agree with. We all have opinions and should not be ridiculed for having them. There is no better argument against something than a reasoned rational expression.

If that's Ogami's opinion, then it is. I don't agree but I support his right to express himself. He has made edits to the thread title that specificly exclude the members here. Doing anything more than that means the right can't say anything about the left. After the past year seeing some pretty harsh comments from members of this board about the right, that would be terribly hypocritical.

-- B
My words but a whisper, your deafness a shout!
I may make you feel but I can't make you think.
(from Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull)

He who made kittens put snakes in the grass.
He's a lover of life but a player of pawns.
(from Bungle in the Jungle--War Child, JT)

#56 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 13 December 2004 - 08:38 PM

Quote

I don't like it, but if we ask him to edit it out then we're acting more like censors than moderators. Imo, of course. Maybe that's the wrong approach here - but if we err, I'd rather err on the side of permissivity rather than exclusion.

If this sort of thing continues then we may have to step in, but right now it seems like an isolated incident.

OK. Thanks for the clarification. And I do understand the unwillingness to censor. Unfortunately, when a board is set up with rules and moderators, there is an expectation set that it's not entirely a free-speech zone. Even more unfortunately, when it's a political discussion board and partisan opinions erupt, then someone, right or left, invariably crosses a line that others think violates the rules. I've been on the receiving end of such charges, and in this thread I've been the one levelling the charge. I certainly don't envy you moderators your jobs.

However it doesn't seem to be an isolated incident. Also on this page is an Ogami thread with the equally erroneous (and Limbaugh-inspired) subtitle stating that the "liberal media" is offended because false information has been given out to insurgents.

Thanks to his usual partisan baiting, I do have Ogami on "ignore," but those little bits of propaganda in subtitles sneak beneath the radar of the ignore feature, and other than merely irking me, they seem to violate my understanding of a board policy against unfounded generalizations. That's why I have harped on it. But apparently I've misunderstood the policy. So maybe I just need a little more clarification. As long as the unfounded generalizations are opinions, they're kosher?  Or does one get around violating the rule by making unfounded generalizations only about people who do not post here?  After getting some clarity on this so that I don't inadvertently violate the rules myself, I'll drop this.

Quote

The subtitle is offensive and untrue

We definitely agree 100% on that.  :)
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#57 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 12:38 AM

Spectacles said:

However it doesn't seem to be an isolated incident. Also on this page is an Ogami thread with the equally erroneous (and Limbaugh-inspired) subtitle stating that the "liberal media" is offended because false information has been given out to insurgents.

Thanks to his usual partisan baiting, I do have Ogami on "ignore," but those little bits of propaganda in subtitles sneak beneath the radar of the ignore feature, and other than merely irking me, they seem to violate my understanding of a board policy against unfounded generalizations. That's why I have harped on it. But apparently I've misunderstood the policy. So maybe I just need a little more clarification. As long as the unfounded generalizations are opinions, they're kosher?  Or does one get around violating the rule by making unfounded generalizations only about people who do not post here?  After getting some clarity on this so that I don't inadvertently violate the rules myself, I'll drop this.

No, you understand the policy just fine. But after reading your response, it's clear to me that we haven't been enforcing it enough. Thank you for editing your post, Spectacles. You've got a good point about Ogami's previous thread, and I apologize for not seeing it in that light before. After all the flames and generalizations that we've dealt with here, it's easy to get into a sort of "shell shocked" frame of mind where one is glad that the board is simply still running, and overlook potential problems.

But no more. Listen everybody, in this thread there have been a lot of assertions and generalizations thrown around by all sides, and in the end all they've done is strangle discussion on a real and important issue. So I'm asking everyone to please use a little consideration for what they say. Left, right, or center, we all have feelings, and when we throw around accusations like the one in this thread's subtitle (or the ones posted by others in the thread itself) we're hurting the people that we want to convince. It does go against the guidelines, and I'm going to watch for it more often. (The other staff always have.)

We're all friends here, so lets act like it. Okay?

Edited by Kevin Street, 14 December 2004 - 03:14 PM.


#58 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 07:52 AM

Quote

(But I'd still like you to edit your comments in this post, since they're just a personal attack.)

Well, I was holding out for Ogami's genuine edit of the subtitle. But since that's evidently not going to happen, I'll go ahead and delete the part where I call him a...oops. Almost said it again.  ;)

Thanks, Kevin. And I'm sorry for the hassle.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#59 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,905 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:33 AM

hi Kevin Street,

As an admin. on another board, I understand what your job is like, but when someone puts such an offensive remark up, you need to act or they will push even more next time. Given time, this thread will look like a playground.

** (Specs) Well, I was holding out for Ogami's genuine edit of the subtitle. But since that's evidently not going to happen, I'll go ahead and delete the part where I call him a...oops. Almost said it again.  ;)

Thanks, Kevin. And I'm sorry for the hassle.**

~.~ Now if only Ogami will follow Specs' lead.

Add my thanks to Specs', Kevin Street, your job is not easy.

Edited by Elara, 14 December 2004 - 10:36 AM.

El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#60 nutmeg

nutmeg

    Just passing through

  • Islander
  • 169 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 10:58 AM

I see that Spectacles has operated in good faith and removed her post. I still see Ogami's subtitle. I'm presuming he will reciprocate soon?


nutmeg



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Military, Fatalities, Low rate

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users