Why Do Politicians and The Main Stream Media Distort the Numbers? Military Deaths!
These are some rather eye-opening facts. Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, the sacrifice has been enormous. In the time period from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 through today, we have lost over 3,000 military personnel to enemy action and accidents As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics: The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006: 1980 ........ 2,392 1981 ......... 2,380 1984 ......... 1,999 1988 .......... 1,819 1989 .......... 1,636 1990 ....... 1,508 1991 .......... 1,787 1992 .......... 1,293 1993 .......... 1,213 1994 .......... 1,075 1995 ...........2,465 1996 ......... 2,318 Clinton years @14,000 deaths 1997 .......... 817 1998 ......... 2,252 1999 .......... 1,984 2000 .......... 1,983 2001 .......... 890 2002 .......... 1,007 2003 ........ 1,410 2004 .......... 1,887 2005 ...... 919 2006.......... 920 Bush years (2001-2006): 7,033 deaths If you are confused when you look at these figures, so was I. Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton 's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war? And, I was even more confused; when I read that in 1980, during the reign of President (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Jimmy Carter, there were 2,392 US military fatalities! These figures indicate that many members of our Media and our Politicians will pick and choose. They present only those "facts" which support their agenda-driven reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth? Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their agenda? Our Mainstream Print and TV media, and many Politicians like to slant; that these brave men and women, who are losing their lives in Iraq, are mostly minorities! Wrong AGAIN! Just one more media lie! The latest census, of Americans, shows the following distribution of American citizens, by Race: European descent (White) ...... 69.12% Hispanic ........................................ 12.5% Black............................................ 12.3% Asian ............................................... 3.7% Native American .......................... . ..1.0% Other ............................................ ... 2.6% Now.. here are the fatalities by Race; over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom: European descent (white) ...... 74.31% Hispanic .................................... 10.74% Black ........................................ 9.67% Asian ........................................... 1.81% Native American ........................ 1.09% Other ........................................... . 0.33% You do the Math! These figures don't lie, but, Media-liars figure and they sway public opinion ! (These statistics are published by Congressional Research Service, and they may be confirmed by anyone at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf Now ask yourself two questions: "Why does the mainstream Print and TV Media never print statistics like these?" and "Why do the mainstream media hate the (world wide) web as much as they do?" Submitted by Roy B. reposted from |
11 comments:
It's not the first time facts have been distorted, and it certainly will not be the last; I generally do not use national media sources. I'm very confused by the media's numbers on the race issue, because it doesn't even make sense to slant those numbers. I don't see very much outrage over who dies where, and from what race. Overall though, the number of causalities are horrible, and war is not needed.
yet we have fewer deaths in war than we have had prior in peace time.
75% of all charts, graphs, and statistics can be made to distort the facts 50% of the time. :)
Look them up your self Numbers cannot lie
Betacommand: an almost laughable problem is that although numbers don't lie, how can you trust that will give you the numbers?
I was quite baffled to look at those numbers and see that the Iraq and Afghan wars caused less casualties than the previous years, but it doesn't surprise me that the media would lie about the facts. However I still don't think we need to be in Iraq, if not for any other reason than the fact that we are spending billions of dollars over there each month, while our economy is sinking, and gas prices continue to rise.
Have you seen gas prices lately? Also, those casualties look small compared to most of the other wars that have lasted this long (e.g. WW2).
RC-0722: This war, in relation to any other war, I do not think, justifies it. It may not be your intention, but comment almost seems like its small casualty count justifies it. I could be wrong though. In the end though, I do not support this war.
You misunderstood me. I am not justifying the war by the casualty count, I am just stating the simple fact that compared to wars of similar length, the casualty count is extremely low.
Okay. Sorry for the confusion.
Certainly, numbers don't lie. I'm surprised this is the first time I've heard of these stunning numbers.
Post a Comment