Iraq Troop Deaths Down for Several Months; So Where Are the Stories?
As monthly reported troop deaths began falling in Iraq a few months ago, CNN’s Robin Wright was in an early October interview with the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” that was blogged on by NB’s Noel Sheppard.
In it, Wright explained why September’s US troop death figure, at the time the lowest in over a year, did not deserve significant news coverage:
We’ve had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.
Okay, maybe Ms. Wright can work up some “excitement” about this (Source: icasualties.org) –
Since Wright expressed her skepticism over September, monthly US troop deaths have dropped into the realm of the lowest on record. Only six other months in the past 4-1/2 years (June 2003, August 2003, September 2003, February 2004, March 2005, and March 2006) had fewer fatalities. Though it’s very early, it’s possible that December’s figure could be the lowest ever.
“Excited” yet, Robin? Perhaps this will get you going (Source again: icasualties.org) –
With about three weeks remaining in the quarter, hostile deaths (63 thus far) are on track to be the lowest in nearly four years.
Of course, we all would prefer that the numbers come down to zero. But the fact is that troop deaths have fallen to a level that is now much closer to zero than the figures reported in the early part of this year.
A Google News Search on “Iraq War Casualties” (without quotes) ends up only listing articles about polls and command changes. The one Reuters article about casualties only reports cumulative totals since the beginning of the war.
So now that it appears to be the trend she was looking for, why isn’t Robin Wright, or anyone else in Old Media, “excited” enough to report the specifics?
Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.
___________________________________
UPDATE: Commenter “SDF” below notes that the wounded numbers at icasualites (scroll down about 75% of the way at the link) are coming down as well, though November’s information appears to be either incomplete or in need of correction.
Tom,
Thanks for your article. It needs to be said. I looked at the Icasualties site and would point you to the wounded figures farther down the page. They are even more expressive of the massive changes for the good going on in Iraq. I posted this at northshorejournal.com a few days ago:
…note that U.S. wounded figures given at the ICCC site you linked fell from 296 in oct-2007 to a *stunningly low* 23 in nov-2007. The lowest previous monthly number I find there is 55 in may-2003. The second lowest number seems to be 147, june-2003. The total wounded is given at 28451, over a period of 57 months yielding an avg. 499 wounded/month. Is it possible that the large difference between 23 and 499 may be a better indicator of circumstances on the ground in Iraq than the KIA numbers?
Thanks again.
SDF
Comment by sferr — December 11, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
SDF, that is a GREAT point.
Upon further review, the detail making up the 23 has a -77 in it. I don’t understand enough about the mechanics of processing the data and the news. It could also be some kind of erro. So I’m going to hold off until I see what comes in as of the end of December or close to it. I did a quick Update above to note that I am alert to it.
Taken until Oct., the trend is definitely in the right direction.
Comment by TBlumer — December 11, 2007 @ 3:41 pm