Total British dead in Afghanistan reaches 100
June 8, 2008 8:31 PM   Subscribe

UK casualties in Afghanistan hit 100 - The troops not as lucky as Harry the Hero.
posted by Artw (9 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Not really a major news story having to do with the war, given we've done 1,000 war posts already in the past five years. -- mathowie



 
Honest question: What is the definition of NewsFilter? I dunno where the line is drawn.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 8:38 PM on June 8, 2008


Number of lame war-filter posts also hits 100.
posted by tachikaze at 8:49 PM on June 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Afghanistan: Other voices
posted by Artw at 9:08 PM on June 8, 2008


Please note: "casualty" is a term of art in military science with a very specific meaning. A "casualty" is any soldier who is not capable of carrying out his duties, no matter why.

Killed-in-action is a form of casualty. So is injury, wound, disease, insanity, desertion, mutiny, arrest, or being missing in action.

Second, please also note that Prince Harry wanted to serve. His presence in Afghanistan was supposed to be a secret. Once a newspaper in the UK found out about him and published his service information, it was deemed by command to be dangerous for his unit for him to continue serving there, because it was assumed the enemy would deliberately concentrate on that unit in hopes of getting a huge headline by bagging him. And the likelihood was that more of his fellows would become casualties as a result.

It's never smart to paint a target on a unit, and that's what the newspaper did.

Harry didn't ask to be relieved, but like a good soldier he followed orders when told to return. It wasn't his fault, and he never claimed to be a hero. Don't go ragging on him for what happened; blame it on that damned newspaper.
posted by Class Goat at 9:21 PM on June 8, 2008 [5 favorites]


I see what you've done there...
posted by brautigan at 9:49 PM on June 8, 2008


A "casualty" is any soldier who is not capable of carrying out his duties, no matter why.


With the deaths of three soldiers in Upper Sangin valley yesterday, the total of British dead in Afghanistan has reached 100 - 74 through hostile action. Presumably, there are many more casualties.

Harry had his chance to be hero. Had he stayed, he would have focused media attention on what is going on in Afghanistan. That would be worth more to the nation than having him and his buddies alive and safe.
posted by three blind mice at 10:06 PM on June 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Please note: "casualty" is a term of art in military science with a very specific meaning. A "casualty" is any soldier who is not capable of carrying out his duties, no matter why.

Also note: The number of British fatalities is 100. I don't know what the total number of casualties is.
posted by delmoi at 10:09 PM on June 8, 2008


Class Goat is correct - that should probably read "UK Dead in Afghanistan hits 100".
posted by Artw at 10:11 PM on June 8, 2008


Fatalities also works.
posted by Artw at 10:11 PM on June 8, 2008


« Older More than a lucky shot   |   Buzz reloaded Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments