Were their really 43 Americans killed last week in Iraq or is Randi Rhodes

[Quixote1818]

wrong? On her program she flat out said their was 43 Americans killed but I don't remember hearing that any place. I thought their were 43 wounded? Which is it?

[indianablue]

1. i was wondering the same thing..NT

[Reverend_Smitty]

2. I don't remember reading that 43 died...

I think she was mistaken, because that many were injured in the prison attacks

[Horse with no Name]

She was including the chopper crash no doubt. n/t

[babylonsister]

7. A plane crashed and we lost many poeple, so that

is where the high numbers come from. I heard 18 dead, and not a clue about injured but it's been a few days... I don't know?

[Wickerman]

3. Did she combine with Afghanistan?

big losses there this week.

[Quixote1818]

6. Their has been 13 soldiers killed in Iraq in April but I don't know

the stats on civillian Americans. http://icasualties.org/oif/

[TrueAmerican]

4. I think she blew that one

Official word is no one died. Frankly, I hope Randy is wrong on this one. Better alive and wounded than dead. That was the Abu Ghraib attack.

Edit: she maybe talking about helicopter crash and such.

[BattyDem]

8. Randi's own web site says 44 wounded ...

Looks like she "misspoke" ;-)

(Hey, if the word is good enough for the Bushies when they lie outright, it's fine for Randi when she screws up, LOL!)

[Midnight Rambler]

5. I was thinking that too

I think it's probably confusion over the word "casualties." I usually think of it as meaning deaths, but I know it signals wounded as well. Maybe Randi had the same confusion.

[Quixote1818]

9. Yes, I think you nailed it!!!!! That is probably what I did.

I got casualties confused with killed. Thanks for clearing that up!

[libnnc]

10. she got that wrong and

there were people on her message board who were trying to post corrections but I don't think she reads her message board while she's on the air. There were a couple of threads questioning her statements.

Tim Allan should have caught it IMHO. I was screaming at my computer.

[Reverend_Smitty]

11. This whole discussion pretty much makes her point...

I would consider this group at DU as attentive to world events as anyone, yet the news is so screwed up in this country that even the news junkies can't get a clear picture of what is going on.

[Quixote1818]

13. Thanks for clearing that up nt

[Sapphire Blue]

12. March 2005 - 36 US deaths, 3 UK, 1 'other'

http://icasualties.org/oif/prdDetails.aspx?hndRef=3-2005

[DemonFighterLives]

16. I think it was Pat Buchanon who was saying that deaths

were down to the lowest levels in Iraq. Democracy was taking root.
Of course the 44 wounded at Abu Gharib (forgot how to spell) were on page B and the big helicopter crash in Afghanistan was sandstorm.
Carter lost some men to a sandstorm in 79? and he is still paying for it.
As long as the poppy crop is at 350%, the BFEE is doing fine.

[Contrary1]

17. Numbnuts failed to mention...

that there were 82 more American troops killed during the first 3 months of '05, than there were in '04.

And who knows how many actually did die? I've heard those that die later on from their wounds are not
even included in the official count.

[Worst Username Ever]

14. Was the show a rerun?

[Reverend_Smitty]

15. No she was just on a roll and misspoke

a freeper called in and made her blood boil.

[zann725]

18. It was 40-some American soldiers injured at the attack on Abu Gharib.

Some of that 40 might be "dead." Like most of what's going on over there now, little of it's even making the news any more. But the large attack on Abu Gharib really DID happen.

[babylonsister]

19. And we still have no end result of this?

Then, supposedly 18 died in a plane crash in Afghanistan. Give us the damn truth! And are these numbers added to the dead, or not because they didn't die in actual combat? Give me a break. Many more people have died than anyone is aware of; this admin SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!