Ken,
I think if the numbers are casually mentioned to discredit Taliban propaganda, and they are not used as a measure of success, then there may be some merit. However, we both know Army culture and the less talented officers will look for an easy metric to demonstrate success on their rotation and this could drive stupid operations. Is it possible to track body counts without changing the way we operate? Don't know, and as usual you'll probably be right, this will probably end up being a dumb idea in hindsight. Bill
The Army began a rethink when the 101st Airborne Division took over Afghan media operations in April 2008. Commanders worried the U.S.-led coalition appeared to be losing ground. The U.S. military routinely releases information about Americans killed in action. Since Sept. 11, 2001, 618 Americans have died in and around Afghanistan, 456 killed in combat. Remaining silent about enemy deaths gave the false impression that the U.S. was losing, says Lt. Col. Nielson-Green, spokeswoman for the 101st and a proponent of the new approach.
Commanders first decided to publicize body counts from major engagements. "You'd have nights when you literally had 50 or 100 insurgents killed in a single event," Lt. Col. Nielson-Green says. Publicizing that makes it harder for insurgents to credibly claim victory, she says.
Bookmarks