Study: Almost 75 Percent of All Afghanistan Deaths Occurred Under Obama

President_Barack_Obama220px-MortDebarquementFor many years, this and other blogs have criticized President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders for their failure to pull out of Afghanistan after his election. There was clearly an unwillingness to risk the political costs of being blamed for a withdrawal or a perceived defeat. As a result, our personnel were left in harm’s way, even as the country’s president called us “demons”, our allies denied basic rights to woman and religious minorities, and polls showed intense anti-American sentiments. Hundreds of billions were spent to provide political cover for leaders who needed to show that they were tough on terror. Of course, many were made millionaires off the war while others paid the price on the ground. Roughly 75 percent of the fallen were from working class families. Now, a study by a conservative organization has shown that 73 percent of all U.S. Afghan War casualties have occurred since Jan. 20, 2009 when Obama was inaugurated. While another site shows slightly different numbers, the result is the same: most of the deaths have occurred under Obama (a fact that is seldom reported)

There have been 91 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan just in 2013. You can compare that to the 30 and 31 troops killed in 2002 and 2003. This is the result of Congress giving Bush a blank check on September 14, 2001. While leaders like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry agreed to the language, many at the time objected to the resolution as a transparent effort to avoid accountability for an actual declaration of war as required by the Constitution. Instead of showing leadership, they approved a resolution authorizing the president “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” Once started, none of them had the courage to demand that it end while lobbyists continues the streaming of billions into the pocket of contractors. By last count, 2,144 U.S. military personnel have killed in the war and 1,575 of those occurred under Obama.

There are differences between the numbers of the conservative site and icasualties.org, though the difference still shows a vast majority of deaths occurring with Obama.  Here are the CNS statistics:

Total U.S. Combat Deaths in Afghanistan

2001: 5

2002: 30

2003: 31

2004: 49

2005: 94

2006: 87

2007: 111

2008: 151

2009: 303

2010: 497

2011: 494

2012: 294

2013: 91 (From Jan. 1, 2013 to Sept. 10, 2013)

Here are the statistics from icasualties.org:

Year US UK Other Total

2001 12 0 0 12
2002 49 3 18 70
2003 48 0 10 58
2004 52 1 7 60
2005 99 1 31 131
2006 98 39 54 191
2007 117 42 73 232
2008 155 51 89 295
2009 317 108 96 521
2010 499 103 109 711
2011 418 46 102 566
2012 310 44 48 402
2013 97 6 20 123
Total 2271 444 657 3372

79 thoughts on “Study: Almost 75 Percent of All Afghanistan Deaths Occurred Under Obama

  1. BTW – How do I know David Koch sponsored the “Because Obama” video above? Try watching it again and pause it near the end at 3:22. It’s in opaque color on a opaque background. It says “Paid for by Koch Industries”. Then quickly goes away at 3:30.

  2. @Jill – Only morons like John Travolta and Tom Cruise believe in “Xenu”. I’m so happy Leah Remini got out when she did. I think David “Xenu” Miscavige may in fact be a murderer. Have they found his wife Michelle yet? His predecessor (inventor of Xenu etc.) was a total embarrassment to the CIA. (IMO that is).

  3. The Constitutional issue in a nutshell:

    “… a non-vote by Congress would be as wrong as the yes vote that seems no longer in the cards. What happens, in fact, if Congress doesn’t say no?” — Peter Van Buren

    The House and Senate need to assemble, vote “no” on any war of aggression against Syria, and then tell President Obama that he should busy himself with national health care, rejuvenating the stalled economy, rebuilding a first-rate public educational system, and other issues more important to the American people than his “credibility” as a war-whore for Saudi Arabia and the Apartheid Zionist Entity.

    The United States cannot afford for Congress to duck this historic chance to slap down the Imperial Presidency and restore the Constitutional balance of power to that envisaged by the far-sighted designers of our democratic republic.

  4. So essentially let me see if I have the basic events of what happened:

    President draws red line in the sand regarding chemical weapons in Syria

    Chemical Weapon deployment in Syria

    President roils saying he Syria needs to be attacked.

    Majority of public against strike, congress members balk and declare they should consent.

    President says he can use force if he chooses to.

    President loses support of the British

    President says he retains the power to attack but he wants to do the right thing by having congress make the vote to back him

    Senior officials in congress declare that the right course of action is to attack Syria and try to get fellow and junior members of congress to rubber stamp this.

    Backlash against party leaders of duopoly by rank and file members of congress. It seems increasingly clear that president won’t get vote to “approve” his expedition.

    President then guilt trips international community saying that international community needs to decide the Syrian gov’t is to be held accountable and to act.

    Russia steps in and makes suggestion that Syria give up its chemical weapons stash possibly turning it over to Russia and international inspectors.

    Some administration officials accuse Russia of not helping but trying to arm Iran and Syria and taking sides.

    Congress sees way out of what they see as a politically dangerous thing (acting) and hope that Russia will possibly take this chemical weapons / red line /face saving issue and make it go away and calls off vote so they don’t have to deal with the issue. The president doesn’t get voted down, they don’t have to deal with the issue.

    Administration declares responsibility for this situation is now Russia’s.

    Russian president Putin puts in Op-Ed article in NY Times appealing to American Public and government to not be too proud or attack Syria which could lead to much loss of life and destabilization in the Middle East.

    Russian president is attacked publically by congress (which has 72% unfavorable rating by American Public) of how dare he insult them

    ~+~ Nice to see American Exceptionalism at work in our gov’t ~+~

  5. @Darren Smith – I agree with most of what you said. However, (big butt coming), let me reply by analyzing what you said:

    “So essentially let me see if I have the basic events of what happened:

    President draws red line in the sand regarding chemical weapons in Syria
    OK true…

    Chemical Weapon deployment in Syria
    Yes but by WHOM? Not necessarily Assad…

    President roils saying he Syria needs to be attacked.
    Saber-rattling by Obama to inspire fear in Assad? Mr. Obama was probably never really going to give USN a “green light” on launch. I think NRO/NSA/CIA had been watching PRC and Russian troop and ship movements into middle east BEFORE hand and it was looking pretty grim. Also Israel was probably fueling up it’s F-15 bombers and prepping their IDF for ground action (actually salivating over it – then got bummed out over the buster order coming soon).

    Majority of public against strike, congress members balk and declare they should consent.
    Worldwide Public is jumping to conclusions not in evidence. POTUS was talking about LIMITED Tomahawk strikes on REMOTE facilities deep inside Syria. These are MILITARY installations that are surrounded by razor-tape fences in the desert with guards and dogs. Yes the later would be victims but that’s what they signed on for right? Scientists have been evacuated to safer locales since 5th Fleet showed up off coast of Tartus Syria. Collateral damage would be minimal if not zero (IMHO).

    President says he can use force if he chooses to.
    Yes he can under the Constitution. See First and Second War Powers Act of 1941 signed into law by FDR.

    President loses support of the British
    No Cameron is still in but Parliament has no balls. They over-ruled the PM. Italy is out due to some back door crap going on (typical). But France still wants to level the place. France is in. The question is is why isn’t Ban-Kin Moon (United Nations) taking this action and can use NATO forces. Why? Because his North Korean-born cousin Rev. Sun Y. Moon (avid Republican and owner of Washington Times and major US drug dealer) doesn’t want him to. IMO that is…

    President says he retains the power to attack but he wants to do the right thing by having congress make the vote to back him
    Correct…

    Senior officials in congress declare that the right course of action is to attack Syria and try to get fellow and junior members of congress to rubber stamp this.
    Did not know that…

    Backlash against party leaders of duopoly by rank and file members of congress. It seems increasingly clear that president won’t get vote to “approve” his expedition.
    That either…

    President then guilt trips international community saying that international community needs to decide the Syrian gov’t is to be held accountable and to act.
    Whoever did this killed hundreds of children. Even Jesus once said that whoever does such a thing should be thrown into the Mediterranean Sea with a stone collar around his neck – Matthew 18:6

    Russia steps in and makes suggestion that Syria give up its chemical weapons stash possibly turning it over to Russia and international inspectors.
    I think Putin meant turning them over to Ban-Ki Moon not him…

    Some administration officials accuse Russia of not helping but trying to arm Iran and Syria and taking sides.
    They already did that. Where do you think Iran and Syria get most of their weapons? Not just Israeli black market arms salesmen.

    Congress sees way out of what they see as a politically dangerous thing (acting) and hope that Russia will possibly take this chemical weapons / red line /face saving issue and make it go away and calls off vote so they don’t have to deal with the issue. The president doesn’t get voted down, they don’t have to deal with the issue.
    Did not know that…

    Administration declares responsibility for this situation is now Russia’s.
    Actually I think it’s Assad’s responsibility as he is the heavy here not Putin…

    Russian president Putin puts in Op-Ed article in NY Times appealing to American Public and government to not be too proud or attack Syria which could lead to much loss of life and destabilization in the Middle East.
    That was a ballsy article. However, the Gray Cardinal is known to be a very ballsy character even back in KGB…

    Russian president is attacked publicaly by congress (which has 72% unfavorable rating by American Public) of how dare he insult them
    They said that? LMAO – the nerve of Putin huh?🙂

  6. Construction of the Trans-Afghanistan oil pipeline resumed after 2005, and most of the deaths listed about happened after 2007, when the route for the pipeline was being “prepared” (read: Afghan populations ethnically cleansed from the area). The correlation is unsurprising.

  7. P Smith 1, September 13, 2013 at 1:08 pm

    Construction of the Trans-Afghanistan oil pipeline resumed after 2005, and most of the deaths listed about happened after 2007, when the route for the pipeline was being “prepared” (read: Afghan populations ethnically cleansed from the area). The correlation is unsurprising.

    If memory serves me correctly that was the UNOCAL project from Caspian Sea oil to the Gulf of Hormuz? That was a Dick Cheney “sacred cow” project for Halliburton and KBR I think. Are you saying that GW Bush went to war with SW Asia to actually build this thing using the lives of US military to support it? You mean they actually located strategic military bases along this thing?

    Wow! And USSR tried it back in the 80’s and got their butt handed to them via George HW Bush’s and Ollie North CIA shenanigans.Jimmy Carter tried to stop them with Charlie Wilson but Reagan got the job done and then had Ollie go on to do some more lunatic-fringe stuff with Iran-Contra.

    Wow all of this GOP-inspired stuff makes Obama look like a saint in comparison. You should have told us about this sooner!😉

  8. @ jill i counted the words in your reply to pdm you fell short by 1,2,33 1/2 lol j/k

    @ SOTB actually obama isnt under the control of koch or soros. every read ” The three stooges go to washington” if not im sure you will find it fascinating but im gonna give the spoiler right here…

    BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.s real name is barry sotero no he isnt hawaiian but ill leave that to you to find out what his real nationality is. now this part will bug you out and it may scare you. but here goes…

    barack is a rockefeller the rockefeller son who disappeared back in the 50’s on that lil known island in paraquay and was never heard from again you know Michael rockefeller. is baracks father i wont tell you who his mother is ill let you figure that one out also.. just take a look at his name.. keeping in mind how the elites love to put everything in our faces thinking we are to stupid, drugged up, and uneducated to realize it…BA ROCK. its already been shown and proven many times over that the pics of his so called younger years and with that so called family are photo shopped. boy were the pictures good for many laughs if you know what you looking for. but they will help you figure it out. and you’re allowed to go dig up the same pictures from another site entirely and the photo shop is obviously make sure to hold and keep the ones where one side of his body looks like he’s a body builder while the other side looks like a match stick.. heres the link

    link to part 1 i read the links on don nicholoffs site they have since shut his site down but the stories and pics can still be found

    http://proliberty.com/observer/20080512.htm

    http://www.whale.to/b/nicoloff3.html

    • Let me correct you AND Seamus… I never Seamus was the originator of the YouTube video. He obviously only found it and posted it. If he is a Obama-Supporter then I apologize. I thought it was very cynical and unfunny video. My comments about Koch Industries were not all aimed at David. His late father who died in 1967 was the ex-communist who moved to Russia with his business when it did not do well in USA. Seamus is just being a weisenheimer and having fun with me.

      I never said Mr. Obama is under ANYONE’s “control”. Control is such a subjective word. He can be “influenced” and “manipulated” but control is a bit too harsh. Certainly Koch doesn’t control him as Koch is a Conservative Republican who voted for both Bushes.

      Soros is not a controller either. He is a very rich American-Hungarian of Jewish descent. He reports directly to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) or Micahel Kassen of Westport CT. However, just like Warren Buffet, George Soros has Mr. Obama’s ear. He listens to George when he speaks. Whether or not he does anything about it is up for debate.

      As to Mr. Obama parents, I’m sure you don’t know what your talking about. It is quite clear and well documented who his parents were and what they did for a living. Rockefeller is a bit too wacky of a conclusion and you offer absolutely no credible evidence to support your contention. Sounds like more Birther nonsense that was planned and executed in Tel Aviv by a Mossad katsa (officer) named Dr. Orley Taitz.

Comments are closed.