US Iraq Deaths Down in June

I’ve updated my Iraq-Vietnam comparison graphs with the number of US dead for June, 2004. The number was down again from the previous month, with 42 US fatalities in June.

Again, I’m getting these figures from the advanced search tool at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund site, and from Lunaville’s page on Iraq coalition casualties. The figures are for the number of US dead per month, without regard to whether the deaths were combat-related.

The first graph shows the first sixteen months of each war. (Click on any image for a larger version.)

Next, the same chart, with the Vietnam numbers extended out to cover the first four years of the war:

Finally, the chart that gives the US death toll for the entire Vietnam war:

Disclaimer: I’m aware that we have more troops in-theater in Iraq than we had during the corresponding parts of the Vietnam War graph. Vietnam didn’t get numbers of US troops comparable to the number currently in Iraq until shortly after Johnson won the 1964 election, some three-and-a-half years after the starting point of the Vietnam graphs above.

These graphs are not intended to say anything about the relative lethality of the two conflicts. I am completely aware that the number of dead produced by each of these wars correlates closely with the number of soldiers on the ground at any given time. Nor am I trying to make a case that the Iraq war is somehow equivalent to, or worse than, the Vietnam war. I was just curious how the “death profile” of the two wars compared, and these graphs let me see that. You are free to draw your own conclusions.

You can view more discussion of these charts on the following pages, if you’re interested. The graphs are all the same; I just update them in place when the new numbers become available.

9 Responses to “US Iraq Deaths Down in June”

  1. lies.com » US Soldiers Continue to Die in Iraq Says:

    [...] , up for them Thirteen months in Record US deaths in April US War Dead in Iraq for May US Iraq Deaths Down in June Posted by jbc at 6:58 am [...]

  2. lies.com » Eighteen Months In Says:

    [...] , up for them Thirteen months in Record US deaths in April US War Dead in Iraq for May US Iraq Deaths Down in June US Soldiers Continue to Die in Iraq [...]

  3. lies.com » The Bush Legacy in Iraq Says:

    [...] , up for them Thirteen months in Record US deaths in April US War Dead in Iraq for May US Iraq Deaths Down in June US Soldiers Continue to Die in Iraq Eighteen Months [...]

  4. Shelley Says:

    Does this include contractors and other US civilians? Is there any public record for civilian deaths? How about “coalition” members?

  5. John Callender Says:

    The numbers I’m graphing are just US military deaths. If you follow the link to the Iraq Coalition Fatalities page you can get numbers for (non-US) coalition military fatalities. I’m not aware of anyone doing this kind of counting for ongoing civilian deaths, but I haven’t been looking for it; it might be available somewhere.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    hey can anyone help me on my school work

  7. luckey Says:

    im in jrotc and trying to find informatin

  8. luckey Says:

    well got to go i will check back later.

  9. Carl Siglock Says:

    I just ran across this blog today. Very interesting statistics, but the first thing you learn in statistics is you can make any point you desire. The most valuable aspect, in my opinion, is the variety of postings you have, including the pros and cons, but also how many of us just accept what we are told without having any means of determining veracity of any of it.

    Also of interest is the strength of some opinions. I agree with ‘silly me’ (6/24/04) about the bullying tone of some (on both sides). Interestingly enough, it seems the stronger the opinion, the more misspellings.

    As far as ‘republic we stand, liberal we fall’ (7/2/04), I thought about what would have happened to us had Gore been elected instead of W. I still believe 9/11 would have happened, unlike some other posts. I don’t think we would have lost over 1000 Americans and at least 10 times more in locals and coalition soldiers. I believe American interests would have been targets maybe two or three times (ala USS Cole and various embassies/barracks). In other words, no major change of tactics. As such, I think with Gore we would have been much better off today. But what would have happened by 2015? I firmly believe New York City would have suffered a nuclear blast. The modus operandi of al Qaeda was, up to September of 2002 (Afghanistan), to plan out operations over a number of years prior to launching it. I think Al Qaeda is supporting SOME of the terrorists currently in Iraq, because of the targets of opportunity.

    Will the world be better off for the terrible loss in Iraq and Afghanistan? We should know more in the latter after tomorrow, based on how the elections turn out. The same holds for Iraq, by next February when we see how THEIR elections turn out.

    I hear a lot about how we are in Iraq mostly for the oil. How much oil have we gotten from Afghanistan? As I mentioned earlier, I have no personal experience in these foreign lands, so I have to treat EVERYTHING with skepticism. Do the Iraqis want USA doing what we are now? I know from the news that terrorists are blowing up cars and IEDs, killing many who want to join the Police or army. Yet these local heroes keep showing up, even though they know they will be a target again. This tells me they want us to help them get their freedom (and leave as soon as they ask us).

    Mr. Callender stated on 9/18/04 that Bush would not change the course in Iraq – very true. It is up to the Iraqis to do that, by voting early next year.

    Many Americans disagree with the current course we are taking, claiming the Bush lied to us all. After 9/11/01, he told us we needed to start a war on terror, and that it would take many years to finish it. He said he would target those responsible for 911, but also all terrorists, terrorist organizations, and the nations that sponsored or harbored them. Looks to me like that is exactly what we are doing.

    ccs 10/08/04

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.