base strike aftermath There were a number of insinuating reports making the rounds this morning suggesting Trump’s claim of “no casualties” immediately after the airstrikes were false. I smell the foul odour of fake news. The strikes took place 10 days ago on January 7/19 ( EST)Breaking News: Reports of Iranian Strikes on Iraqi Base (Housing Americans) At that time there were no reports of casualties- Zero. (As was reported)Let’s talk about the meaning of casualties “someone injured or killed or captured or missing in a military engagement”In this case the military ‘engagement” :a hostile meeting of opposing military forces in the course of a war, would have occurred when Iranian missiles hit the Iraqi base.Now that we're all on the same page, let’s read below, together:Iran missile strike: US military contradicts Trump’s ‘no casualties’ claim
Trump, then: “The American people should be extremely grateful and happy no Americans were harmed in last night’s attack by the Iranian regime. We suffered no casualties, all of our soldiers are safe, and only minimal damage was sustained at our military bases.”
Pentagon spin, now:
The Pentagon has reported that 11 US troops were injured in Iranian missile strikes on two air bases in Iraq last week, contradicting prior claims that no one was wounded.
Were these alleged casualties, ya know, really casualties?And if they were casualties, were they injured at the time of the Iranian airstrikes?
the (alleged) wounded personnel are “being screened for traumatic brain injuries”
“out of an abundance of caution”, service members from the Al-Asad base had been taken to Landstuhl Regional Medical Centre in Germany and Camp Arifjan in Kuwait for “follow-on screening”.“as a standard procedure, all personnel in the vicinity of a blast are screened for traumatic brain injury, and if deemed appropriate, are transported to a higher level of care”.
Well that should clear things up, right? Of course not! Clarification was not the intention of this latest gibberish. It's not at all clear that there were or are casualties or that Trump "lied" Or that there is any contradiction from his original statement to this latest claim.
“However, a Department of Defense official this week told CNN that Trump and Esper’s statements were based on “the commander’s assessment at the time”, and that the wounded troops’ “symptoms emerged days after the fact”.
The commander's assessment was there were no casualties, but then, 'symptoms emerged days after the fact' Which begs the question.. We’re these soldiers involved in other hostile activities “days after the fact” that may or may not have caused the alleged injuries being looked into?Bottom line this news of alleged casualties after the airstrikes reads like just more propaganda promotion in order to demonize Iran. Just More fake news.