|
WSWS
: News &
Analysis : Middle
East : Iraq
US death toll reaches 3,000 in Iraq, with no let-up in sight
By Joe Kay
3 January 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The number of US soldiers killed in Iraq since the invasion
topped 3,000 just before the New Year. This new milestone comes
as the Bush administration is planning to increase the number
of soldiers in Iraq, in preparation for a major military offensive
that will lead to a sharp increase in Iraqi and US casualties.
With 111 soldiers killed, December 2006 was the deadliest month
for US forces since the brutal invasion and destruction of Fallujah
in November 2004.
The number of US soldiers killed would be much higher were
it not for the introduction of more advanced medical techniques
and body armor, which leave more soldiers alive, but seriously
injured. The number of soldiers sustaining serious injuries, in
combat and non-combat operations, is estimated at 46,800an
extremely high proportion of the total number of soldiers in Iraq.
By all accounts, the frequency and impact of attacks on US
soldiers have increased over the past period. Nearly half of American
casualties are now caused by roadside bombs, which Iraqi insurgents
have developed to more effectively puncture the armored vehicles
that carry US soldiers on patrol.
A considerable proportion of the recent deaths has occurred
in the western Iraqi province of Anbar, where US soldiers have
been engaged in a lengthy offensive against the largely Sunni
population in the region. This conflict has gone virtually unreported
in the US media, which confines itself to reporting from the green
zone of Baghdad.
The US soldiers killed in Iraq are generally youth from rural
and working class backgrounds. A New York Times article
from January 1 noted, The service members who died during
this latest period fit an unchanging profile. They were mostly
white men from rural areas, soldiers so young they still held
fresh memories of high school football heroics and teenage escapades.
Many men and women were in Iraq for the second or third time.
Some were going on their fourth, fifth or sixth deployment.
The number of US soldiers killed is of course dwarfed by the
number of Iraqis who have died in the carnage created by the American
occupation. An estimate for Iraqi deaths in excess of the pre-invasion
mortality rate, published by the medical journal Lancet,
put the figure at 655,000 through June 2006. This would mean that
the death figure is now well above 700,000.
To this must be added 250 killed from other countries besides
the US, along with 750 serious injuries.
The Bush administration and military brass reacted with predictable
indifference to the consequences of their war policy. White House
spokesman Scott Stanzel said that Bush grieves for
every soldier who dies, while insisting that he will ensure
their sacrifice was not made in vain. The war on terror will be
a long struggle. In other words, the response of the grieving
Bush will be to continue, and escalate, the military campaign
of the United Statesthe blood of these 3,000 will presumably
be made worthwhile by adding thousands more to the list of those
killed.
Neither the Pentagon nor the White House issued official statements
on the milestone, while various generals gave background comments
to the press downplaying the significance. The Los Angeles
Times reported in its January 1 article, US Marine Corps
Commandant Gen. James T. Conway said in an interview that, given
the significance of Iraq and Afghanistan to US national security,
the death toll in those two countries was not excessive.
These comments are made for a specific purpose: to prepare
the US public for a sharp growth in the number of Americans and
Iraqis killed. The Bush administration has made clear that it
has decided on a surge option, the details of which
will be announced later this month. It is expected that somewhere
between 15,000 and 40,000 additional troops will be sent to Iraq,
primarily to secure Baghdad by carrying out a massive
offensive against opponents of the American occupation.
Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, who has
been one of the leading advocates of the surge option,
has been blunt in his assessment of the consequences of this policy
for US casualties. In a report published last month (Choosing
Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq), Kagan asked rhetorically
whether more US casualties could be expected. Yes,
he responded, adding that a short-term increase in casualties
is not a sign of failure.
Elsewhere, Kagan has made clear that what he envisions is not
a temporary increase in US troop levels, but one that will last
at least 18 months. In preparation for the consequences of such
an escalation in Iraq, the military is planning to permanently
increase the size of its forces, while also calling for the loosening
of restrictions on the deployment of individuals in reserve units.
Most members of the military reserves have already completed their
required tours of duty, but there is now a major push to force
them to return again to Iraq for at least another year. Thousands
more are being prepared to serve as cannon fodder for American
militarism.
These preparations come as opposition to the war steadily increases,
including within the military itself. According to a poll conducted
by the Military Times and released December 29, only 35
percent of US soldiers approve of Bushs handling of the
war, down from 54 percent in 2005 and 63 percent in 2004. Only
41 percent said they thought that the US should have invaded Iraq
in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003.
Among the general population, only 11 percent support an increase
of US troops in Iraq, while the majority favors a withdrawal.
This opposition, however, finds no expression within the framework
of American politics. The Democrats, who won control of Congress
in November largely due to popular opposition to the Iraq occupation,
have made clear that they will take no serious steps to oppose
the Bush administrations policy. Even though 69 percent
of Americans, according to a recent Gallup Poll, say that addressing
the war in Iraq should be the top priority, the Democrats have
not included any measures on Iraq in their plan for the first
100 days of the new Congress.
Democratic Party leaders have already foresworn any suggestion
that they will cut off funding for the Iraq occupation, and the
supposed opposition party will certainly help pass a $100 billion
Iraq war request from the Pentagon due early this year. Several
top Democrats have also indicated that they are willing to go
along with an increase in troops in Iraq.
Thus the number of US soldiers killed will certainly increase
in the coming period. And for what purpose? It is often said among
some opponents of the war that the deaths of US soldiers have
been senseless, that they have died for no reason.
The truth, in fact, is worse. They have died for a purpose, but
a purpose that is unjust and criminal, a purpose for which every
effort has been made to keep them ignorant.
These 3,000 US soldiers, mainly working class youth, have been
killed while carrying out a brutal policy of colonial domination,
justified and perpetuated on the basis of lies, in pursuit of
the geopolitical interests of the American ruling elite. They
have died while carrying out a policy that has decimated an entire
country and destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent
people, in order to seize control of the natural resources of
Iraq.
Responsibility for these deaths does not lie with the Iraqi
resistance. Indeed, this resistance is entirely justified, targeting
soldiers who are part of a foreign occupation. This basic truth
cannot even be hinted at within the political, media and corporate
establishment because its counterpart is the fact that the responsibility
for these deaths, along with the deaths of hundreds of thousands
of Iraqis, lies with those who have launched the war and helped
justify itthat is, with this same political, media and corporate
establishment.
See Also:
More US troops to
Kuwait, as Bush moves to escalate the war in Iraq
[30 December 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |