LA Times Reports on the Lives of Soldiers Wounded in Iraq
"From what I've seen thus far, much of the reporting in the U.S. and abroad has exaggerated the situation, according to General Casey. The number of attacks on mosques, as he pointed out, had been exaggerated. The number of Iraqi deaths had been exaggerated. Interestingly, all of the exaggerations seem to be on one side. It isn't as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues. On the contrary, the steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq."
-Donald Rumsfeld, March 7, 2006
The LA Times is running an a three-part series following the lives of a few of the 17,000 soldiers wounded in Iraq. Unlike most American media outlets, the LA Times has also decided to ignore the Bush administration's desperate call for good news by showing photos we rarely see here in the states.
Part I: Bringing Back the Wounded With Heart, Soul and Surgery
After three years of war, the military has honed a highly efficient lifesaving process that moves the wounded swiftly from the battlefield to emergency surgery in the combat zone, and on to military hospitals in Germany and the U.S. The approximately 17,400 troops wounded since March 2003 have been swept up in a medical effort unmatched in any previous war.
During the Vietnam War, where the nearest combat support hospital was in Japan, it took an average of 45 days to move a wounded soldier from the battlefield to a U.S. hospital. In Iraq, it takes less than four days.
Many of the most seriously wounded would have died in previous wars. In Vietnam, soldiers often bled to death before reaching a hospital. Because the wounded in Iraq are evacuated so quickly, 96% of those who make it alive to the Balad and Baghdad hospitals are saved.
Part II: The Journey Through Trauma
U.S. troops who survive the critical 'golden hour' after being seriously wounded in Iraq owe their lives to a fast-acting team of battlefield medics, pilots, nurses and surgeons.
posted by storiesinamerica @ 12:22 PM
16 comments
16 Comments:
Lucky for Rumsfeld. These soldiers aren't dying in large numbers like they did in Vietnam. Isn't that good news?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0401-05.htm
William F. Buckley Jr., the longtime conservative writer and leader, said George W. Bush's presidency will be judged entirely by the outcome of a war in Iraq that is now a failure.
``Mr. Bush is in the hands of a fortune that will be unremitting on the point of Iraq,'' Buckley said in an interview that will air on Bloomberg Television this weekend. ``If he'd invented the Bill of Rights it wouldn't get him out of his jam.''
Buckley said he doesn't have a formula for getting out of Iraq, though he said ``it's important that we acknowledge in the inner councils of state that it (the war) has failed, so that we should look for opportunities to cope with that failure.''
The 80-year-old Buckley is among a handful of prominent conservatives who are criticizing the war. Asked who is to blame for what he deems a failure, Buckley said, ``the president,'' adding that ``he doesn't hesitate to accept responsibility.''
Buckley called Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a longtime friend, ``a failed executor'' of the war. And Vice President Dick Cheney ``was flatly misled,'' Buckley said. ``He believed the business about the weapons of mass destruction.''
This Buckley man you speak of seems very wise. I would like to hear more. What does Buckley have to say about abortion? And Iran? And tax cuts? And Alito? And Gay Marriage? And Condoleezza Rice?
I will be looking forward to more opinions from Mr. Buckley on a wide variety of issues on this blog. Thank you.
Whoa, watch Timmy get his hackles up. Gee, Timmy, I don't think anyone who reads this site has any doubt as to what Buckley's positions are on a whole host of other conservative issues. I know you like to change the subject to suit your own view, but I think it's pretty clear here that, regardless of what other beliefs Buckley has in common with Bush, he finds them irrelevant in the face of the ginormous cluster fuck that is Iraq. Feel free to clap louder, though, Timmy...I'm sure that will help.
"You know, we sort of noticed it pulled the Constitution. We have a sense that the people in the Pentagon will be very apolitical. Certainly, the political bosses reflect any administration, the administration that places them there, and that's fine. But, I saw a type of politicization almost from the very first week in Near East-South Asia policy, which really violated the idea of an apolitical military. This [Pentagon Office of Near East-South Asia Affairs?] was an agenda-setting organization, and the agenda was war. The agenda was an invasion of Iraq. ... But, certainly the agenda amongst the political appointees there, almost a little nest of very ideologically motivated folks."
-Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski - served under Rumsfeld
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/3/16550/61573
Ah, Karen Kwiatkowski. Well, since we're so fond of Bill Buckley and National Review, you'll find this interesting...
http://nationalreview.com/rubin/rubin200405180836.asp
My hackles are up? Quite the contrary, I'm thrilled to see Bill Buckley has such good standing in the Progressive Community. Buckley does indeed belive that there are shortcomings, but, he also points out that Bush "...has presided over a great deal. The deposition of Saddam, his imprisonment and (never-ending) prosecution; the institution of the working rudiments of democracy. A government. And a continuing effort to train natives to take over policing the rebaptized state." I know, I know...that's small change around these parts, but some of us are just crazy enough to appreciate these things.
The other thing that Buckley believes, and I think he's right, is that "North Korea and Iran present challenges that will tax us contingently, on a larger scale than the Saddam/Iraq war. These will need to take precedence."
Now as much as I respect Buckley there are other people whose opinions I hold in high regard as well, such as Victor Davis Hanson and Christopher Hitchens, that don't share the same degree of Buckley's cynicism...although they all regard Iran as a huge threat we'll need to deal with shortly. Buckley so much so that his problem with Iraq has much to do with preparing for this inevitable showdown in the not so distant future. (By the way, anyone from the progressive camp have some advice on that? I am curious.)
Anyway, that's all I got...but since National Review is all the rage these days, here's Victor Davis Hanson with another viewpoint...
http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200603310745.asp
Oh yeah...this guy also:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92982,00.html
Iran is THREE times the size of Iraq.
Oops, wrong Hitchens link. Here ya go:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008120
"Iran is THREE times the size of Iraq."
And...?
You have to ask?? Are you kidding me?
The iraq war is a fucking mess. The guys in their army had holes in their shoes and we can't stabilize the damn country. Iran is 3x the size and our military is spent. Yeah, let's go to Iran.
If we bomb Iran, we are fucked.
Okay. Let's say you're right...what then? Just ignore that little nuclear weapons in the hands of Jew hating, Death-to-America psychos thing and visualize world peace?
Here's what the All Knowing One had to say about it...
http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200603171430.asp
That's the tragedy of Iraq. Iran and North Korea were ALWAYS bigger problems to contend with. Bogging ourselves down in Iraq (Voluntarily! Without sane reasoning!) was pointless and needlessly costly in lives, institution and treasure.
Okay...let's try this one more time.
Bush is Satan...Republicans are evil...War is hell...Iraq failed.
Again, what should we do about Iran?
unlike everyone on tv, i don't claim to have the answers because i haven't done enough reading on this issue. i do know that the democrats better have some sort of plan in place:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_02/008153.php
So Wesley Clark thinks bombing the crap out of them for 14 days might work, eh?
Hey, maybe he's right, sometimes the Dems know what they're talking about (stopped clock being right etc..) Rose, get ready to cue up some more of those pics of wounded bombing raid victims.
Post a Comment
<< Home