Today's depressing, quietly buried news bit about Iraq.......

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
...is here, specifically:

At least 21 US military personnel involved in the Iraq war have committed suicide since the conflict began last March, the Pentagon revealed. It is higher than the normal suicide rate in the US military recently.

Of course a more telling comparison would be comparing this versus the suicide rate of an equally lengthy extensive war/occupation period by the military somewhere, but still, *sigh*.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 03:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Bah, forgot to properly include the link.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 03:53 (twenty-two years ago)

The suicide rate of US soldiers in Iraq is 13.5 per 100,000.

The average suicide rate in New York City between 1977 and 1996 was 18.5 per 100,000. I didn't read that in the newspaper today though. Must be a conspiracy.

By contrast, Europe is a fucking disaster:

Below, the rates per 100,000 Males/Females in selected countries during 1994-95:

33.0/11.9 Austria
29.3/15.6 Denmark
31.6/11.5 France
55.5/16.8 Hungary
22.2/09.5 Sweden
30.9/12.2 Switz.
19.6/04.6 U.S.A

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:49 (twenty-two years ago)

*scratches head* Weren't you that one guy from last year on all the threads?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:50 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't know if you should be calling anybody else "that one guy on all the threads," Ned.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Yup, you're that guy.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:54 (twenty-two years ago)

So you think the media is burying bad news regarding Iraq?

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I think military folk have more people keeping an eye on them, so those numbers don't quite corrolate. I think.

Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Also: Europeans don't have people shooting at them and trying to blow them up as often. But it's still an interesting contrast.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:57 (twenty-two years ago)

That figure will probably go down since the troops are getting rotated out in the next couple of months. What that really means I dont really know. The media makes you think theyre being replaced by fresh units, but for all I know its those guys coming back after being forced to keep on with the military since they're short-staffed.

bill stevens (bscrubbins), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:01 (twenty-two years ago)

It's true, you'd think you wouldn't have to commit suicide, you could just "become a stastic". But I think that too lessens the interest of the contrast -- the stastic that Ned imagines, above, would be more interesting.

Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:01 (twenty-two years ago)

I've been watching this for a while, and while it's quite possible that the rates are comparable to (or lower than) general rates, it's also quite possible that the numbers conceded here are underreported. I kinda doubt they include, for instance, the guy home on leave who wandered out into a freeway.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:11 (twenty-two years ago)

It's 21 suicides among soldiers involved in Iraq... including suicides that occurred after they left Iraq.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Suicide rate for guys who use GPS to find trapped coal miners : 100%

Pleasant Plains (Pleasant Plains), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually, the article says "at least" 21 have been confirmed by the Pentagon, surely a disinterested party. And given the ambiguity of such a question and the investigations involved, surely there are other possibles. This article, for instance, counts 17 confirmed and two dozen additional under investigation, which may or may not be among the 130 "non-hostile" deaths in Iraq.

The article also points out that the figures Stuart cites above are misleading because they are for 12 months as opposed to the 9-10 months of the war/occupation, or the shorter period following the end of major combat during which most of the suicides have taken place.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Also: Europeans don't have people shooting at them and trying to blow them up as often. But it's still an interesting contrast.

???

Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:43 (twenty-two years ago)

What did you think was happening to the U.S. soldiers in Iraq?

Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 15 January 2004 07:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought they were sitting around listening to Red House Painters and Elliot Smith on the call-to-prayer loudspeakers.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 13:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Stuart, what's the US suicide rate for (generally) young, healthy, employed people (ie the group that includes most soldiers)? I'd imagine it's somewhat lower than the NYC rate you cite.

adam (adam), Thursday, 15 January 2004 13:30 (twenty-two years ago)

i gasp think stuart is probably right here

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)

About the Red House Painters?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 13:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Adam: Yes, the suicide rate for young, healthy, employed people is probably somewhat lower than the average NYC rate I cite. So is the rate for young, heavily armed, healthy soldiers in the middle of the desert. I just don't see a crisis brewing, much less one being "quietly buried."

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 15:17 (twenty-two years ago)

no, about that, ned

amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 15:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually, per this article, the 2003 suicide rate of troops involved in Iraq (which Stuart correctly cites) is slightly higher than the 2002 overall Army rate (yes, the Army is a large subset of the troops in Iraq, but I don't know why the Army peacetime rate would differ substantially from the broader military peacetime rate), which itself is almost exactly the same as the 2001 national civilian rate, which in turn is just over half the pre-1997 NYC and US male rates Stuart cites. I'm not saying that this is necessarily a big story/larger problem than usual, but these facts suggest that Stuart's (selectively deployed?) facts are misleading. It's entirely possible, of course, that 2001/2002 are outliers, but what would set 2003 apart from the outlying period?

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 15 January 2004 18:57 (twenty-two years ago)

"The light color in the room, the sunshine seeping in.."

http://optimusfilms.20m.com/directors/sk/w.full.jpg

may pang (maypang), Thursday, 15 January 2004 19:10 (twenty-two years ago)

But the more she sobs, the clearer it becomes that Joseph D. Suell, posthumously promoted to sergeant, was in crisis the day he died - so desperate to come home that he even asked his wife to talk to his commanding officer.

Very sad, and obvious that someone in the chain wasn't paying close enough attention.

Less than 1 percent of the troops in Iraq are treated for mental issues during an average week, he said.

Something wrong with this, as that article says the "stress team" includes a psychiatrist. Aren't they trained to notice "mental issues"? Granted tis prolly at least 50 to 100 patients for every group of stress analysts, but if you see the same people [patients] over a period of time, wouldn't shifts in mood become apparent?

Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Thursday, 15 January 2004 19:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Ummm. Stuart... Ned... What, exactly, are we arguing about here?

flightsatdusk (flightsatdusk), Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Whether Elliott Smith should be played from minarets.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I just noticed all the double entendres in the title of the post. Because I'm smart like that.

don weiner, Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes Nichole I'm sure you could probably do a much better job than the commanders and doctors in the field.

Haha why in the WORLD would somebody get the idea to kill themselves when they're stuck in a desert far from home with next to zero in the way of creature comforts and they're holding a loaded rifle? I suggest everyone read "Jarhead" by Anthony Swafford and then proceed to comprehend that the fact there aren't MORE troops offing themselves in Iraq is the news item here.

Jesus fucking Christ.

TOMBOT, Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Any stats on how the high AWOL rates have been compared to the past? Last I heard, they were pretty high, but I can't remember where I read that. Or how high the suicide rate (or self-inflicted injury, fatal or otherwise rate) is compared to, say, peak periods in Viet Nam, or the previous Gulf War? I'd really like to see these stats. Stuart is comparing apples and oranges; the way to determine whether morale is up or down is to compare it with past military morale, not morale among the general populace anywhere. (I actually haven't read the article; maybe those answers are in there, I dunno. But the number "21" doesn't really say much to me one way or the other...) (And remember, too, in comparing self-inflicted or AWOL rates to Viet Nam, that the soldiers out there in Iraq now are at least in theory VOLUNTEERS, not draftees. And more often older, and more often with spouses and kids back in the States who count on them. Which makes a difference; if the rates are anywhere near Nam-levels, it's shocking.)

chuck, Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Jarhead is an intriguing read. You can take that book down in a day if you're so inclined..

What is unfortunately more underreported than the suicides is the casualty rates. We keep hearing about 500 deaths, but nobody mentions the thousands of decapitations, blindings, etc that seriously affect lives. Nor does the president feel compelled to visit them in the hospital.. unless you know, he has to get his knee scoped or something like that.. than I guess a photo op would be alright.

bill stevens (bscrubbins), Thursday, 15 January 2004 20:58 (twenty-two years ago)

...the thousands of decapitations, blindings, etc that seriously affect lives.

How would a decapitation not be a death?

hstencil, Thursday, 15 January 2004 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean, I'm no brain surgeon (my brother is, though) and it seems likely to think that if you lose your head, you die.

hstencil, Thursday, 15 January 2004 21:36 (twenty-two years ago)

"Russia is a mean old place, they chop off your head and throw it in your face" -- Al Bernard and his Goofus Five, "Hesitation Blues," 1927

chuck, Thursday, 15 January 2004 21:40 (twenty-two years ago)

decapitation, not castration.

hstencil, Thursday, 15 January 2004 21:41 (twenty-two years ago)

In addition to ~500 fatalities, there have been 2884 non-fatal casualties.

There were 4,557 American deaths in Vietnam in the first 11 months of 1966.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Whoever's ruining the quagmire should quit it so the commies have something worth protesting.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 22:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Damn commies.

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 15 January 2004 22:30 (twenty-two years ago)

It pisses me off how every single time some platoon finds old, unusable, buried weapons from 15 years back that have trace elements of chemicals in them, it makes a big splash as if to say "see??!! might be the smoking gun!" Bullshit.

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 15 January 2004 22:41 (twenty-two years ago)

me too. wonder what happened to those weapons.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:02 (twenty-two years ago)

The best was when they found those rusty barrels full of pesticides.

may pang (maypang), Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Stuart, where did those figures (which have nothing whatsofuckingever to do with suicides, but are still potentially interesting) come from? How reliable is their source?

chuck, Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Presumably such weapons haven't existed in Iraq for years.

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:18 (twenty-two years ago)

i got the non-fatal casualty figures from http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx and their sources are listed as "(1) Department of Defense press releases @ DoD
(2) CENTCOM press releases @ CENTCOM
(3) British Ministry of Defense website @ MoD"

The Vietnam stat i listed came from http://www.aavw.org/served/casualty_1961to1966_abstract02.html via google so it could be wonky, i dunno.

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Military casualty information page: http://web1.whs.osd.mil/MMID/casualty/castop.htm

Stuart (Stuart), Thursday, 15 January 2004 23:59 (twenty-two years ago)

From the Freak File....

Slightly offtopic, but does mention some info about the shrinking number of soldiers enlisting, especially for duty in Iraq.


A SLAVE NATION ONCE AGAIN

Once again the power elite are instituting actual slavery, but this time not just over people of color but also over every young American aged 18 to 26, regardless of race or sex.

Don't like your daughter dying for oil money? That's okay, because she can still be forced against her will to serve for low pay as, well,............anything that strikes the fancy of the Congressional representatives in committee that week.

Now we know why not one military funeral of a U.S. soldier from Iraq has been shown in the TV media, except that of a female. It forces us to think of women in combat roles. It also portends the government's plan for many more dead daughters to come. So as you change the diapers on your adorable baby girl, think of what a great killing machine your government will make of her, one day. Or a statistic on a Pentagon casualty report.

Think of why the government publik skool system is so heavy on teaching obedience to state authority and micromanaging students' personal lives. Same government.

Remember the name of Rep. Charles Rangel, D-NY. He's one of the NWO statists who sponsored this new slavery, this New Draft, titled the UNIVERSAL NATIONAL SERVICE ACT under HR 163 which calls for a MINIMUM slavery period of 2 years to the state, preferably in combat roles as moving targets in third-world countries. This is necessary to insert puppet governments friendly to US oil and trade interests. Almost no one sees the irony of a slave descendant conscripting slaves to make more slave states worldwide.

Conscientious objectors will have no out, this time around. Instead they will be assigned elsewhere as slaves to any location for a lot longer than 2 years, in reprisal for their refusal to support the killing of other poor kids. Remember, the National Service terms are for a "minimum" of 2 years. No maximum is mentioned.

Even if they change the Act's wording to say a "maximum of 2 years...," to placate outraged constituents, once the Act is passed they can change the period of involuntary servitude to even 20 years, if they only vote to do so.

All Americans need do is their usual nothing, for this evil to triumph. All they need do is ignore past government promises that our Social Security Numbers would never be used for personal identification and tracking, to accept the government lies they will now hear about the UNSA.

In the U.S. Senate, the UNIVERSAL NATIONAL SERVICE ACT is S 89. Remember also the name of U.S. Senator Fritz Hollings, who is sponsoring the New Slave State fittingly from South Carolina, the cradle of American Black slavery. So much for her contrition for the past, in being an official sponsor of enslaving even more black people.

If you're wondering why the UNSA is being forced on us, remember that we have troops stationed in over a hundred different countries, supporting the installation of local agents who will bring about more profits to U.S. megacorporations, the "military-industrial complex" that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about. All this is being done in the name of a democracy that doesn't even exist in the USA. Yet think of what Patrick Henry said: "Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation?"

The rate of U.S. servicemen re-enlisting is at an all-time low. Those on leave from severe duty such as in Iraq are refusing to return, facing courts martial as a better alternative. So far the media is spiking any stories about our soldiers walking away in disgust because of being ordered to perform human rights atrocities, such as kidnapping the women and children of "terrorist" Muslim soldiers to force them to turn themselves in. Those U.S. soldiers wise enough to have kept evidence are given a quiet discharge with full benefits as long as they keep quiet.

Because they receive such dramatically poor treatment when wounded and their children suffering poverty because of an ungrateful government, U.S. military forces are rapidly shrinking. The cure for this by the Charlie Rangels and Fritz Hollings of the world is slavery, never equity. Instead of providing better dependent care, pay and benefits, especially to those servicemen and women who wind up in wheelchairs, these traitors to their oath of office have chosen instead to keep the dollars for their favorite porkbarrels. It's a lot cheaper and easier to institute the enslavement of our children and only pay an ad agency to sway Americans with false patriotism in measured soundbytes on the nightly news shows.

The time is now for you to do something about this. While you can. Remember the wisest advice, ever, by Winston Churchill:

If you will not fight for your rights when you can easily win without bloodshed,
if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly,
then you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you
and only a small chance of survival.

There may even be a worse case:
you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory
because it is better to perish
than to live as slaves.


Our nation is on the brink of becoming a totalitarian state no different than any communist country, in making the state god over the lives of its citizens by enslaving them to any task that increases its central power. To do that, it must instill fear in its populace.

"Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear, kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of 'grave national emergency.' Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it."
--General Douglas Macarthur, 1957

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of leaders. That's easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
-- Reichsmarshal Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg Trials

Have you ever noticed the CONDITION ORANGE alert in a lower corner on your TV screen that's displayed almost continuously?

Those who care for the rights of poor black people, remember the names of Representatives Rangel, Ambercrombie, Conyers, Lewis (of Georgia), McDermott, Stark and Senator Hollings and each and every statist who is sponsoring the UNSA. Never vote for them again. If you can impeach them, so much the better. They serve not the people, but themselves. No matter what they say, they are bringing DEATH to our poor children, no matter how sweet their words in so doing.

Ask yourself when rejecting the concept of the UNSA, 'In service of whom?' Ask yourself what benefits humanity has reaped from every dead teenager who died in Viet Nam, in Afghanistan and in Iraq? Is your peace and safety any sweeter?

Slavery is SLAVERY, no matter how the statists and their sycophant media campaign to have us accept the yoke. It is slavery of black people AGAIN, pure and simple. That its misery is spread to other races as well does not remove the collars from our black children.

As the Jews say, "Never again!" Never again should the state have such power over her citizens. Never again.

An unnamed Nation Of Islam spokesman has said that Charlie Rangel must be denounced and impeached for the race-traitor that he is, a black man voting FOR the slavery of his own people.

If slavery was wrong earlier in U.S. history, it is wrong now.

Rise UP. Call your congressional representatives and senators. DAILY. Or pay for your apathy not only with the freedoms of your children, but perhaps with their blood.

Remember, thats Fritz Holling (Senator for the State of Disney); Yes, he was one of the (cough) Brains (cough cough) behind the DMCA...

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Friday, 16 January 2004 21:56 (twenty-two years ago)

altho, nothing helps a discussion better than slinging the word "slavery" around...

Kingfishee (Kingfish), Friday, 16 January 2004 22:23 (twenty-two years ago)

well, except if we all start randomly yelling "Nazi" and "Commie" and a few poorly chosen curse words.

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Friday, 16 January 2004 22:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Or "emo"

Gear! (Gear!), Friday, 16 January 2004 22:50 (twenty-two years ago)

is gonzomoose an actual person, or just a kind of robot computer programme triggered by far left liberal posts about Iraq?

DV (dirtyvicar), Friday, 16 January 2004 23:43 (twenty-two years ago)

whose gonzomoose?

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Saturday, 17 January 2004 00:24 (twenty-two years ago)

but the pentagon doesn't want universal conscription.
charles rangel thinks the war is racist cause the military is made up of more non-whites than the general population mix but the infantry is predominantly caucasian, something like 86%. charles rangel loves castro though so there is little doubt that he has totalitarian ambitions and might exercise those if he ever ascended to the chair of the ways and means committee.

keith m (keithmcl), Saturday, 17 January 2004 01:32 (twenty-two years ago)

but the pentagon doesn't want universal conscription

Thank heavens for that.

charles rangel loves castro though so there is little doubt that he has totalitarian ambitions

How you say...I don't quite follow?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 17 January 2004 02:42 (twenty-two years ago)

charles rangel thinks the war is racist cause the military is made up of more non-whites than the general population mix
Waitasec, if you look at ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY DEATHS - RACE/ETHNICITY SUMMARY (As of March 15, 2003) you see that white dudes outnumber everybody else by at least 4-1 in military dead.
Whua!?
If theres more non-whites in the armed forces, but more whites getting killed...does that mean that when the shooting starts, all the white guys stand up in the trench to see whats goin on while everybody else is crouched down? WTF!?

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Sunday, 18 January 2004 01:41 (twenty-two years ago)

charles rangel thinks the war is racist cause the military is made up of more non-whites than the general population mix
Waitasec, if you look at the "ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY DEATHS - RACE/ETHNICITY SUMMARY (As of March 15, 2003)" (at http://web1.whs.osd.mil/MMID/casualty/castop.htm) you see that white dudes outnumber everybody else by at least 4-1 in military dead.
Whua!?
If theres more non-whites in the armed forces, but more whites getting killed...does that mean that when the shooting starts, all the white guys stand up in the trench to see whats goin on while everybody else is crouched down? WTF!?

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Sunday, 18 January 2004 01:46 (twenty-two years ago)

oops. sorry 'bout that.

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Sunday, 18 January 2004 01:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Custos, "more non-whites than in the general population mix" != "more non-whites than whites"

Curt1s St3ph3ns, Sunday, 18 January 2004 03:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes, whites are ~75% of the population, but ~60% of the military.

Stuart (Stuart), Sunday, 18 January 2004 03:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Ah. (Sorry. I had to take some more cold medicine and its muddying my thought process.)

Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Sunday, 18 January 2004 03:48 (twenty-two years ago)

If they reinstate the draft, I'll march with the hippies.

Stuart (Stuart), Sunday, 18 January 2004 04:56 (twenty-two years ago)

to the draft centre.

DV (dirtyvicar), Sunday, 18 January 2004 09:52 (twenty-two years ago)

with torches and forks

Stuart (Stuart), Sunday, 18 January 2004 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.