Body Count.
This is coolbert:
The body count. That favorite of the Vietnam War. Something that was controversial at the time. And something the military did NOT want to resurrect for the Iraqi Wars.
Statistics regarding casualties, deaths, etc., ALWAYS seem to be controversial.
Statistics regarding casualties, deaths, etc., ALWAYS seem to be controversial.
All these historians just are NOT able to agree on exact figures. It would seem that this IS a hard topic to agree upon with exactness.
I have blogged about this before.
Did the French have 10,000 troops at Dien Bien Phu or was it 14,000? Did Napoleon have 72,000 troops at Waterloo or was it 75,000?? This is the sort of thing I am talking about.
Serendipitously, I came across this web site that deals with the casualties incurred by the combatants at the Alamo, 1836. Both for the Texican and the Mexican side.
Click here to see the web site.
Over the years a whole lot of REPUTABLE historians have dealt with the topic of the Alamo and surprisingly, there is NOT a whole lot of agreement on what the casualties were.
We are talking about twenty seven [27] historians and historical accounts of the siege of the Alamo and the aftermath.
There IS a general agreement as to the number of deaths among the defenders. Less than two hundred [200], somewhere around one hundred eighty [180] to one hundred ninety [190] usually cited. All the defenders being killed, no prisoners taken, obviously there were NO wounded.
For the casualties sustained by the Mexican Army, the figures are MUCH less precise. A good general figure seems to be around six hundred dead, with figures that show KIA [killed in action] in excess of one thousand also being quite common. Wounded are generally accepted to be about as great as the KIA. So we are talking here about significant numbers.
Preciseness JUST CANNOT be obtained with regard to the Alamo. Record keeping WAS more or less NONEXISTENT!!
Historians, no matter how careful and reputable, JUST CANNOT arrive at exactness in this matter. ONLY approximations are possible.
In these cases, a GENERAL FEEL of what happened is perhaps a better way to approach the matter.
Now, as to that web site. Several entries among the twenty seven shown are done tongue in cheek. These include:
"General Santa Anna, "The Eagle - Autobiography 1988"
600 Texican dead 600 Mexican dead, 1000 or [so] wounded."
"Carlos E. Castaneda, "The Mexican side of the Texas Revolution - 1970" Page 14,105,363
183 Texican dead 70,400,700 Mexican dead 300 wounded"
I think you are getting the general drift of where I am headed.
coolbert.
Serendipitously, I came across this web site that deals with the casualties incurred by the combatants at the Alamo, 1836. Both for the Texican and the Mexican side.
Click here to see the web site.
Over the years a whole lot of REPUTABLE historians have dealt with the topic of the Alamo and surprisingly, there is NOT a whole lot of agreement on what the casualties were.
We are talking about twenty seven [27] historians and historical accounts of the siege of the Alamo and the aftermath.
There IS a general agreement as to the number of deaths among the defenders. Less than two hundred [200], somewhere around one hundred eighty [180] to one hundred ninety [190] usually cited. All the defenders being killed, no prisoners taken, obviously there were NO wounded.
For the casualties sustained by the Mexican Army, the figures are MUCH less precise. A good general figure seems to be around six hundred dead, with figures that show KIA [killed in action] in excess of one thousand also being quite common. Wounded are generally accepted to be about as great as the KIA. So we are talking here about significant numbers.
Preciseness JUST CANNOT be obtained with regard to the Alamo. Record keeping WAS more or less NONEXISTENT!!
Historians, no matter how careful and reputable, JUST CANNOT arrive at exactness in this matter. ONLY approximations are possible.
In these cases, a GENERAL FEEL of what happened is perhaps a better way to approach the matter.
Now, as to that web site. Several entries among the twenty seven shown are done tongue in cheek. These include:
"General Santa Anna, "The Eagle - Autobiography 1988"
600 Texican dead 600 Mexican dead, 1000 or [so] wounded."
"Carlos E. Castaneda, "The Mexican side of the Texas Revolution - 1970" Page 14,105,363
183 Texican dead 70,400,700 Mexican dead 300 wounded"
I think you are getting the general drift of where I am headed.
coolbert.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home