Search This Blog

Showing posts with label war casualties. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war casualties. Show all posts

Sunday, July 14, 2013

Buy an E-Z Pass

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

Do you drive frequently on tollways? If so, you should buy an E-ZPass.

Why? Well, Lindsay Abrams reported an interesting health benefit involving E-Z Pass in the June 2013 Atlantic.
Exposure to pollution matters, too. One of the more inventive recent studies involves, of all things, E‑ZPass. The toll-collection system eased traffic on New Jersey and Pennsylvania highways, improving air quality, which seems to have in turn affected fetal health. Among pregnant women living within a mile or so of an E-ZPass toll plaza, premature births fell by 8.6 percent, and low birth weight, by 9.3 percent. [Emphasis in original.]
Abrams references Currie and Walker, “Traffic Congestion and Infant Health” (American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Jan. 2011).

The short Abrams piece cites a number of other studies involving maternal and fetal health. It turns out that nuclear fallout is bad for newborns, but you would have guessed that. The piece also references data suggesting that national tragedies (think 9/11) and war are also harmful to fetuses -- but so is famine. Indeed, even voluntary fasting during regular religious holidays seems to have unfortunate health consequences for babies.


Visit this blog's homepage.

For 140 character IR and foreign policy talk, follow me on twitter.

Or for basketball, baseball, movies or other stuff, follow this personal twitter account.

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Duck

Over at the Duck, today, I posted "Where'd you hide the body?" about the decline in civilian death rates in Iraq. About 2 million people have fled their homes this year -- 1.2 million of those are reportedly from Baghdad -- so, where's the good news, exactly? While it is true that those who fled are not dead, it is NOT necessarily true that they were saved by the success of the surge.

Also noteworthy: a former student sent me a link to an interesting photoblog called Life Goes on in Tehran. The photographer is someone who used to live in California, but now lives in Tehran. Check out the great images -- and envy the ready availability of pomegranates.


Visit this blog's homepage.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Iraq: the war dead

Thanks to the so-called "rally 'round the flag" effect, war is initially popular with the American public. Virtually all wars become less popular, however, and political scientist John Mueller argues that the casualty figures matter:
American troops have been sent into harm's way many times since 1945, but in only three cases -- Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq -- have they been drawn into sustained ground combat and suffered more than 300 deaths in action. American public opinion became a key factor in all three wars, and in each one there has been a simple association: as casualties mount, support decreases. Broad enthusiasm at the outset invariably erodes.
To date, nearly 3300 US soldiers have died in Iraq.

What is sometimes missed, however, is that this figure would likely be much higher if it weren't for modern medicine. Consider this fact presented by physician Ronald Glasser:
In Iraq, the American military has lost one for every ten soldiers hit in combat, compared to a one-in-four fatality rate in Vietnam, and one in three during the Second World War.
If the current war had occurred thirty years ago, it is quite likely that there would be more than 8000 dead. Within this coming year, America might have been expecting its 10,000th casualty.

Obviously, no one can be sure if a greater number of American victims would make the war even less popular than it already is.

In any event, I would note that another scholar, Christopher Gelpi , challenges Mueller's claim. Gelpi argues that the key indicator of public support is public perception of a war's success -- or failure:
public support for a military operation will erode sharply in the face of mounting casualties when the public believes the war is failing but will remain relatively robust when the public believes the war is succeeding. This argument is based on extensive analyses of scores of surveys...
It would seem logical that a high number of American war deaths would help foster a perception of failure.

It will be interesting to see if American perceptions of the war are influenced by the recent declaration by cleric Moqtada Sadr, who told his followers that US forces are "your arch enemy." Hundreds of thousands of Shia responded by protesting non-violently in the holy city of Najaf.

Their message was clear: "No, no, no to America." They want the US troops out of Iraq.

Based on the polling data, most Americans also want the US troops out of Iraq soon. Though there's been a slight uptick since "the surge" began, most Americans say "not too well" (32%) or "not at all well" (24%) when asked by Pew Research: "How well is the US military effort in Iraq going?

A few months ago, a combined 64% of respondents answered "not too well" or "not at all well," so the surge may be buying the Bush administration some time. In March, 10% responded "very well" and 30% said "fairly well." In the prior six polls since September 2006, the average for those responses had been about 6% and 28%, respectively.


Visit this blog's homepage.