Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > US Troops Killed in Iraq and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than
in Previous Wars
________________________________________
US Troops Killed in Iraq and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than in
Previous Wars
By Sarah Lazare [1] / AlterNet [2]
November 3, 2016
In October of 2008, during the height of the Great Recession,
then-undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, David Chu,
boasted [3] that U.S. military recruitment was soaring. "We do benefit when
things look less positive in civil society," he said. "That is a situation
where more people are willing to give us a chance."
Now, a study released in August with little fanfare is confirming what
America's top military recruiter acknowledged years ago: "America's economic
downturn means that increasingly it is not the governing class, but the
working class that disproportionately sends soldiers to fight and bears the
burden of physical and mental war wounds." This trend has grown more
pronounced throughout history, the researchers argue, meaning that "even
more than previous wars, Iraq and Afghanistan have been working class wars."
The findings were published [4] in the Memphis Law Review by Douglas Kriner,
associate professor at Boston University, and Francis Shen, associate
professor of law at the University of Minnesota. The authors explain that
they based their conclusions on "a series of empirical
investigations-including analysis of over 500,000 American combat casualties
from World War II through Afghanistan, combined with seven unique surveys of
American public opinion."
The researchers note that the Department of Defense "does not release data
on the socioeconomic status of individual soldiers who have died or been
wounded in America's wars." So instead, they looked at the "communities from
which our nation's wartime casualties hail" to determine which socioeconomic
classes were hardest hit during World War II and the wars in Korea, Vietnam,
Iraq and Afghanistan. The following graph shows that what they call the
"sacrifice gap" has widened over time when it comes to wartime deaths.
The study determines that "In raw, inflation-adjusted dollar terms, this
income casualty gap increased over time from a $5,500 gap in Korea, to an
$8,200 gap in Vietnam and now to more than an $11,000 gap in Iraq and
Afghanistan."
This gap, the authors note, also applies to the visible and invisible wounds
of war. "We found that once again there was an unequal relationship:
Counties with lower education and income levels had higher percentages of
their residents wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan," the researchers write.
"Put slightly differently, the nation's poorest communities (those in the
lowest three income deciles) have suffered fifty percent more non-fatal
casualties than the nation's wealthiest communities (those in the top three
income deciles)," the study states. Meanwhile, the authors note that poor
people are likely to face worse health outcomes after their service, due
largely to lack of social support and resources once they are discharged.
Penny Dex, an organizer with Iraq Veterans Against the War, told AlterNet
that there is a clear "economic draft." She said: "In some places in the
country, the dangers of war seem not as bad as having health insurance or
being homeless with your kids. It's the only option for a lot of people, but
if your life ends in Iraq of Afghanistan, it doesn't do you much good."
"When I joined I was in a poor town in Washington where a Walmart moved in,
and it was the only option to have a job," Dex continued. "They set up
military recruiting offices next door. It was the only way out of our poor
town."
Kriner and Shen identify numerous factors behind the "sacrifice gap." In a
nod towards Chu, they note that recruitment soars during times of economic
downturn and high youth unemployment. They also observe that people of lower
socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to be funneled into
lower-enlisted roles that are carry greater risks.
"Because lower-skilled recruits are more likely to come from less advantaged
communities, and because they are subsequently more likely to be assigned to
occupations with greater combat risks than are recruits with higher skills,
the occupational assignment mechanism may produce a casualty gap, even if
the military as a whole were representative of the civilian population," the
authors write.
Yet, the public is largely unaware of the unequal prices paid by military
service members, who today comprise less than one percent of the U.S.
population. Kriner and Shen conducted a nationally representative poll in
2011, in which they found that "just under half those surveyed (45%) believe
that the country is equally sharing military sacrifice. This is roughly the
same percentage as those who correctly believe that there is inequality."
A separate Pew Research Center poll from 2011 found [5] that half of the
public says that U.S. wars have "made little difference in their lives" and
a plurality-45 percent-stated that military campaigns since September 11,
2001 have not been "worth the cost."
According to Kriner and Shen, "The invisibility of casualty inequality
artificially inflates public support for war and the leaders who wage it."
Meanwhile, separate data indicates that the lawmakers who bear
responsibility for U.S. wars are more likely to be wealthy. According to an
analysis [6] released last year by the Center for Responsive politics, 271
of the 533 members of Congress (50.8 percent) are millionaires. The
lawmakers' disclosure filings show that the median worth of a member of
Congress in 2013 was $1,029,505, compared to $56,355 for the average
American household.
Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for
Common Dreams, she coedited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn
Against War. Follow her on Twitter at @sarahlazare [7].
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [8]
[9]
Stay Ahead of the Rest
Sign Up for AlterNet's Daily Newsletter
EMAIL:
+ sign up for additional lists
[x]
Select additional lists by selecting the checkboxes below before clicking
Subscribe:
Rights & Liberties
Education
Drugs
Economy
Environment
Labor
Food
World
Politics
Investigation
Personal Health
Water
Media
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/world/us-troops-killed-iraq-and-afghanistan-more-lik
ely-be-poor-previous-wars
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/sarah-lazare-0
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/11/nation/na-recruit11
[4] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2823978
[5]
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/10/05/war-and-sacrifice-in-the-post-911-
era/
[6]
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/01/one-member-of-congress-18-american-h
ouseholds-lawmakers-personal-finances-far-from-average/
[7] https://twitter.com/sarahlazare
[8] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on US Troops Killed in Iraq
and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than in Previous Wars
[9] http://www.alternet.org/
[10] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > US Troops Killed in Iraq and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than
in Previous Wars
US Troops Killed in Iraq and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than in
Previous Wars
By Sarah Lazare [1] / AlterNet [2]
November 3, 2016
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Google+Share to MoreShare to Email
In October of 2008, during the height of the Great Recession,
then-undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, David Chu,
boasted [3] that U.S. military recruitment was soaring. "We do benefit when
things look less positive in civil society," he said. "That is a situation
where more people are willing to give us a chance."
Now, a study released in August with little fanfare is confirming what
America's top military recruiter acknowledged years ago: "America's economic
downturn means that increasingly it is not the governing class, but the
working class that disproportionately sends soldiers to fight and bears the
burden of physical and mental war wounds." This trend has grown more
pronounced throughout history, the researchers argue, meaning that "even
more than previous wars, Iraq and Afghanistan have been working class wars."
The findings were published [4] in the Memphis Law Review by Douglas Kriner,
associate professor at Boston University, and Francis Shen, associate
professor of law at the University of Minnesota. The authors explain that
they based their conclusions on "a series of empirical
investigations-including analysis of over 500,000 American combat casualties
from World War II through Afghanistan, combined with seven unique surveys of
American public opinion."
The researchers note that the Department of Defense "does not release data
on the socioeconomic status of individual soldiers who have died or been
wounded in America's wars." So instead, they looked at the "communities from
which our nation's wartime casualties hail" to determine which socioeconomic
classes were hardest hit during World War II and the wars in Korea, Vietnam,
Iraq and Afghanistan. The following graph shows that what they call the
"sacrifice gap" has widened over time when it comes to wartime deaths.
The study determines that "In raw, inflation-adjusted dollar terms, this
income casualty gap increased over time from a $5,500 gap in Korea, to an
$8,200 gap in Vietnam and now to more than an $11,000 gap in Iraq and
Afghanistan."
This gap, the authors note, also applies to the visible and invisible wounds
of war. "We found that once again there was an unequal relationship:
Counties with lower education and income levels had higher percentages of
their residents wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan," the researchers write.
"Put slightly differently, the nation's poorest communities (those in the
lowest three income deciles) have suffered fifty percent more non-fatal
casualties than the nation's wealthiest communities (those in the top three
income deciles)," the study states. Meanwhile, the authors note that poor
people are likely to face worse health outcomes after their service, due
largely to lack of social support and resources once they are discharged.
Penny Dex, an organizer with Iraq Veterans Against the War, told AlterNet
that there is a clear "economic draft." She said: "In some places in the
country, the dangers of war seem not as bad as having health insurance or
being homeless with your kids. It's the only option for a lot of people, but
if your life ends in Iraq of Afghanistan, it doesn't do you much good."
"When I joined I was in a poor town in Washington where a Walmart moved in,
and it was the only option to have a job," Dex continued. "They set up
military recruiting offices next door. It was the only way out of our poor
town."
Kriner and Shen identify numerous factors behind the "sacrifice gap." In a
nod towards Chu, they note that recruitment soars during times of economic
downturn and high youth unemployment. They also observe that people of lower
socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to be funneled into
lower-enlisted roles that are carry greater risks.
"Because lower-skilled recruits are more likely to come from less advantaged
communities, and because they are subsequently more likely to be assigned to
occupations with greater combat risks than are recruits with higher skills,
the occupational assignment mechanism may produce a casualty gap, even if
the military as a whole were representative of the civilian population," the
authors write.
Yet, the public is largely unaware of the unequal prices paid by military
service members, who today comprise less than one percent of the U.S.
population. Kriner and Shen conducted a nationally representative poll in
2011, in which they found that "just under half those surveyed (45%) believe
that the country is equally sharing military sacrifice. This is roughly the
same percentage as those who correctly believe that there is inequality."
A separate Pew Research Center poll from 2011 found [5] that half of the
public says that U.S. wars have "made little difference in their lives" and
a plurality-45 percent-stated that military campaigns since September 11,
2001 have not been "worth the cost."
According to Kriner and Shen, "The invisibility of casualty inequality
artificially inflates public support for war and the leaders who wage it."
Meanwhile, separate data indicates that the lawmakers who bear
responsibility for U.S. wars are more likely to be wealthy. According to an
analysis [6] released last year by the Center for Responsive politics, 271
of the 533 members of Congress (50.8 percent) are millionaires. The
lawmakers' disclosure filings show that the median worth of a member of
Congress in 2013 was $1,029,505, compared to $56,355 for the average
American household.
Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for
Common Dreams, she coedited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn
Against War. Follow her on Twitter at @sarahlazare [7].
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [8]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[9]
Stay Ahead of the Rest
Sign Up for AlterNet's Daily Newsletter
EMAIL:
+ sign up for additional lists
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/world/us-troops-killed-iraq-and-afghanistan-more-lik
ely-be-poor-previous-wars
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/sarah-lazare-0
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/11/nation/na-recruit11
[4] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2823978
[5]
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/10/05/war-and-sacrifice-in-the-post-911-
era/
[6]
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/01/one-member-of-congress-18-american-h
ouseholds-lawmakers-personal-finances-far-from-average/
[7] https://twitter.com/sarahlazare
[8] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on US Troops Killed in Iraq
and Afghanistan More Likely to Be Poor Than in Previous Wars
[9] http://www.alternet.org/
[10] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
