Comments on: American War Casualties: Lists and Statistics http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:23:26 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Bedrose P. Lipschitz http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html/comment-page-1#comment-1079 Bedrose P. Lipschitz Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:51:54 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html#comment-1079 As it turns out, iCasualties thinks that the Dod is doing a pretty decent job of reporting out-of-theater casualties. As it turns out, iCasualties thinks that the Dod is doing a pretty decent job of reporting out-of-theater casualties.

]]> By: Bedrose P. Lipschitz http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html/comment-page-1#comment-1078 Bedrose P. Lipschitz Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:29:57 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html#comment-1078 I'm trying to find the source, but I recall a report that indicated that out-of-theater deaths [e.g., a soldier injured in combat in Iraq dies in a military hospital in Ramstein, Germany], while being counted in the past as casualties, were no longer being counted. If I find the report, I'll cite. it. I’m trying to find the source, but I recall a report that indicated that out-of-theater deaths [e.g., a soldier injured in combat in Iraq dies in a military hospital in Ramstein, Germany], while being counted in the past as casualties, were no longer being counted. If I find the report, I’ll cite. it.

]]> By: Steven Aftergood http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html/comment-page-1#comment-1077 Steven Aftergood Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:15:38 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html#comment-1077 You know what they say about lies, damned lies and statistics. But this report strikes me as quite non-controversial-- unless you include deaths due to illness and accident in the casualty count, while ignoring changes in the overall size of the military population. If you treat all deaths from all causes as "casualties," then you get some counterintuitive results. But if you look strictly at "casualties" due to "hostile action," there is nothing surprising about the figures. You know what they say about lies, damned lies and statistics. But this report strikes me as quite non-controversial– unless you include deaths due to illness and accident in the casualty count, while ignoring changes in the overall size of the military population. If you treat all deaths from all causes as “casualties,” then you get some counterintuitive results. But if you look strictly at “casualties” due to “hostile action,” there is nothing surprising about the figures.

]]> By: Bedrose P. Lipschitz http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html/comment-page-1#comment-1076 Bedrose P. Lipschitz Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:55:48 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2007/08/american_war_casualties_lists_.html#comment-1076 <p>I have several questions regarding this report, as NeoCon groups are now trotting this out as proof that the Bush presidency has less blood on its hands [due to the lower casualty count in recent conflicts] than the Clinton presidency. Who knows, maybe the numbers are as accurate as can be, but something smells.</p> <p>How were the statistics gathered? Are the same types of casualties [friendly fire, etc.] counted as 'casualties' in all conflicts? What is the statistical significance of the numbers [confidence level, error, standard deviation, etc.]?</p> <p>Does the FAS do any analysis of these documents, or do they just provide a source for them?</p> I have several questions regarding this report, as NeoCon groups are now trotting this out as proof that the Bush presidency has less blood on its hands [due to the lower casualty count in recent conflicts] than the Clinton presidency. Who knows, maybe the numbers are as accurate as can be, but something smells.

How were the statistics gathered? Are the same types of casualties [friendly fire, etc.] counted as ‘casualties’ in all conflicts? What is the statistical significance of the numbers [confidence level, error, standard deviation, etc.]?

Does the FAS do any analysis of these documents, or do they just provide a source for them?

]]>