Senators Kerry and Edwards have made great hay in the last two debates over a supposed figure that America is bearing 90% of the costs, 90% of the casualties, et cetera in Iraq. I think the Vice President caught Senator Edwards short on these numbers in their debate, but I never really put numbers to it.
Luckily, Jed Babbin at National Review Online has, and he finds a different arrangement than the Democratic ticket.
I thought about the whole thing, and something has occurred to me that perhaps needs to be sent to Senators Kerry and Edwards: "Gentlemen. Your statement of casualties in the current Iraqi operations, and your political conclusion subsequently drawn is erroneous. In your conclusion, you neglect the contribution of the Iraqi populace to the recovery effort, and in doing so, you slight them and their sacrifices. Indeed, the Iraqis are suffering at a greater pace than our troops are for the same period. When casualties are to be considered, it is a time for seriousness, and not for cheap electioneering. I would have expected better from someone who has made Vietnam service the centerpiece of his campaign."
It would probably be a good thing if those folks who share a common aisle with me, and also political liberals, would get this sort of message out.
NOTE: I may have found where "ninety percent" comes from, using Babbin's own numbers. Says he: If you count the number of combat dead from May 2003 to October 2004, Americans are 700 out of about 1540 total (which includes the 750 Iraqi and 90 Coalition casualties), or 45 percent.
I broke out my aging TI-85 and punched in the following equation: 700/(1540-750)
This yields 88.61% of combat dead as American troops, once one excludes 750 Iraqi casualties. Senator Edwards is factually accurate, but his fact is incomplete. The most wry thing I could think of off the cuff about this would be if one were to summarize 2004's hurricane activity, and leave the State of Florida out when calculating economic and property loss.
UPDATE: I'm curious: Are we including Iraqi casualties in "Coalition" body counts? If that's already the case, then that point needs to be made by the Administration on a regular basis. If we aren't, then I would, as a policy suggestion, recommend that we consider the Allawi Iraq as a de facto Coalition partner, and adjust our casualty accounting accordingly.
This would have the effect of taking the wind out of the sails for the Kerry charge, but it would also prevent Senator Edwards from having to fumble like he did against the Vice President's charge that he, Edwards, was demeaning the Iraqi contribution to the politico-military effort.
Posted by Country Pundit at October 8, 2004 12:55 PM