These facts are all very interesting, but was interests me more is his note on human cost. If we are capable of fending off Death from US soldiers, what sort of life are they left with? Sure, they are alive, but in what state? Many are missing limbs or organ systems, such as, I dunno, their rectums.

This is what popped in my brain:
1. This is expensive. 
2. This presents a lot of surgical training opportunities aka Fun For Me, Not For You. 
3. The defense secretary gets to boast that less people are dying in these wars than previously.

I think most of us realize that the majority of people here in the US are dumb. If the media wants to exploit this fact, it may cause a nationwide influence that sounds more like: “This isnt a real war; look, less soldiers have died than in WWII or Vietnam!” instead of what it really means, being: “This is costing us more money than any war before, not only in the number of people (soldiers and civilians) injured, but also in the millions and billions of dollars spent on keeping them alive, rehabilitated, and socially acceptable.”

And what I find personally intriguing is that it also benefits 
anyone associated with medical education, by offering more
guinea pigs, if you will, for training and research. I hate and love it.

My god, didnt Trumbo attempt to tell us this over 50 years ago? (if u haven’t read it already, go pick up Johnny Got His Gun)

(originally written 14 February 2009)