Why the death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan isn't larger

[jhetley]

And you thought we wanted to improve medical care for wounded vets?

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080511/D90JJIBG0.html

In brief, soldiers are surviving wounds that would have killed them in earlier wars.  We're (well, you are, probably not me) still going to be paying for this forty, fifty years from now.

Comments

[green-knight.livejournal.com]

There's also the second army, around the size of the first and apparently with at least as great a death toll. Only it's not called 'an army', they're called 'private contractors'. Most of whom, apparently, were trained by armies proper and left because of a number of causes. As far as I can make out, US government sources are using these people, which makes them semi-official. I guess it comes cheapter - they don't have to look after them.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

Except we will, because the US is going to eventually adopt some kind of universal health care. But you're right that the military contractors won't be counted against the veterans benefits.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

That's OK Jim, we're still going to be paying off the trillion dollar debt from this war in fifty years too. (And like you I don't imagine I'll still be paying taxes in 50 more years, but I can always hope.)