> That pretty much accounts for the size of the 9,000 figure:
> 1500 wounded, and 7500 ill. And 1500 wounded is pretty much
> in line with the general estimate of 5-10 wounded a day.
>
> Now 5-10 wounded a day is a story. But it's not a hidden story.
I think the story here is ~10k fewer bodies over there; they are going to run out quickly at this rate! [Also, I don't think the other category is "ill" -- it's 1500 _combat wounded_ and 7500 "other wounded and ill"] There have been followups about things like blocked retirements and huge reenlistment bonusses (bonii?), and every single reservist I've spoken to in the last 6 months (mostly commercial airline pilots, but still) are super mad about the huge upset in their lives and how they've been treated. There are more reservists called up today than at any other time since WWII.
> There was a plausible argument put forth a few months ago
> that a much higher percentage of Iraq's wounded are seriously
> wounded because of body armor ...
The exact same thing happened in WWI when the British moved to using steel helmets.
> All seemed to agree that all amputees would eventually come
> through Walter Reed Hospital because that was where all the
> special programs were for amputees.
I bet "seriously wounded" doesn't necessarily translate into losing a limb. And I wonder how many people who've been evacuated will eventually rotate back in theatre? If you break your leg, you're not going to sit around with your leg up for 6 weeks _in Iraq_ . . .
/jordan