Thread

1. bitcurious · 1789773644 · focus · HN ↗

   > The newspaper also reported, citing another unidentified official, that not all of the undisclosed deaths were directly tied to the months-long conflict but involved US personnel who were in the Middle East amid ongoing hostilities.

   If someone dies near a war, but not due to the war, is it really fair to count them as a war fatality?

   1. lukan · 1789773824 · focus · HN ↗

      If they are killed by houthi drones and not iranian drones, I would think so.

      If someone on a military base with no attacks going on, got a heart attack by watching the news, probably not a war fatality.

      But we don't know, so any concrete speculation is probably not very helpful.

      1. AnotherGoodName · 1789774086 · focus · HN ↗

         To get more specific this often means 'suicide' which absolutely is a casualty of war given the strain of war conditions, especially given the logistics concerns and duration of tours that they are forcing right now.

         1. mitxela · 1789776774 · focus · HN ↗

            Did it end up being true that the troops on that aircraft carrier had to catch rats and cook them to survive?

            1. ceejayoz · 1789777027 · focus · HN ↗

               Are you, uh, mixing up the term "midrats" with something?

               I've not seen this claim. The fact that they sent it immediately home for a port call (and had SecNavy visit for a pep talk) when the news of conditions on the Lincoln broke is probably indicative.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.