2026-07-28T18:01:50.849Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/28/politics/trump-iran-war-military-deaths
上周《纽约时报》首次报道称,近期美军在伊朗战场的4名阵亡人员突然从国防部的伤亡报告网站上消失,五角大楼当时坚称这只是“临时数据故障”。
但如今越来越多的证据表明,事实并非全部。而这不过是唐纳德·特朗普总统混乱且时常冷酷无情地处理军人阵亡事件的最新一例。
这些阵亡人员不仅如今以一种对政府而言更便利、更符合政治权宜之计的方式被重新归类——具体来说,这会让特朗普政府发动的伊朗战争的总死亡人数看起来更低,也契合了他关于自身战争授权的说法——而且仅在过去一周内,五角大楼网站就已经三次变更这些死亡人员的分类方式。
这4名阵亡人员已于上周末重新被纳入五角大楼的“国防伤亡分析系统”。但与外界预期的如果只是数据故障应将其重新归入“史诗之怒行动”(伊朗战争任务)不同,他们被新增到了网站上一个全新的类别:宽泛命名的“海外行动”。
作为此次更新的一部分,五角大楼还在系统中记录了超过140名新增受伤军人。
这个新增类别的描述为“统计2026年7月7日起的伤亡人员”,而这正是美国政府声称开启对伊朗新冲突的日期(后文将详述)。
这并非五角大楼网站首次变更这些死亡人员的分类方式。
上周早些时候的一份新闻稿中,五角大楼宣布了4名士兵中的2人阵亡消息,称他们“正在支援坚定决心行动”。
坚定决心行动是2014年启动的旨在伊拉克和叙利亚击败极端组织“伊斯兰国”的任务,但这些士兵实际是遭伊朗袭击身亡的。很快,相关表述被修改为,阵亡官兵“正在约旦支援海外行动”。
换句话说,五角大楼网站目前已将这些官兵与三项不同的行动关联起来——需要强调的是,其中两项行动可以让政府声称这些伤亡并非“史诗之怒行动”的一部分。
目前尚不清楚此举的确切原因,但有两点显然对政府在政治和法律层面有利。
首先,这可以让特朗普声称伊朗战争中的美军死亡人数更少。
上周,特朗普仍在援引18人的死亡数字——其中包括最新的4人——而非14人。但他也明确表露过,十分在意军人死亡人数相关的政治议题。他还曾频繁攻击时任总统乔·拜登,称其在阿富汗撤军混乱行动中造成13名美国人死亡。
其次,此举有助于强化特朗普的法律主张,即他有权在无需国会批准的情况下继续发动战争。
《战争权力法》规定,总统在无需国会授权的情况下发动军事行动的期限为60至90天。为规避这一限制,政府声称首次冲突在4月开始的停火期间结束,新的冲突于7月7日启动。(就连部分共和党人也对这一策略表示质疑。)
如果将这4名最新阵亡人员列为“史诗之怒行动”的参与者,将对该说法不利,因为该行动据称已经结束。于是,政府转而暗示他们属于另一项行动,无论是“坚定决心行动”还是“海外行动”。
但很难将此举理解为其他任何行为,本质上就是在军人死亡人数上做会计账目的把戏。
从实际意义上讲,这4名士兵与此前14名阵亡士兵一样,都死于同一场战争。只是中间有三个月的战斗间歇,当时美国政府和伊朗领导人试图维持一系列断断续续的停火协议。
考虑到五角大楼最初愤怒地回应称,阵亡人员名单被移除只是“临时数据故障”,这一情况显得更加可疑。《纽约时报》当时援引不愿具名的军方官员消息称,此次改动是故意为之,但当时尚不清楚五角大楼计划如何重新归类这些死亡人员。
用如此严肃和敏感的方式对待军人死亡事件,简直不可理喻。这类事情从一开始就应该确保准确无误。
但这对特朗普及其政府而言,也算是常规操作了。
多年来,特朗普一直难以对阵亡和受伤军人表达共情。从已故参议员约翰·麦凯恩,到“懦夫”和“失败者”言论,再到淡化创伤性脑损伤,以及对受伤军人和驻阿富汗北约部队授勋发表不当言论,此类事件不胜枚举。
伊朗战争让他有更多机会谈论这一话题,但显然他依然处理不好。今年3月,他和国防部长皮特·赫格斯都就首批军人阵亡事件发表了尴尬言论。而且,特朗普越来越多地将目前较低的阵亡人数与近期其他战争进行比较,甚至声称阵亡官兵及其家属都支持他的伊朗战争行动——尽管至少有一名家属明确表达了不同意见。
但对特朗普而言,几乎没有什么是神圣不可侵犯的。和其他所有事情一样,军人死亡人数很快就成了需要精心考量和操纵的政治算计工具。
Why the Trump administration altering the US troop death toll in Iran is so suspicious
2026-07-28T18:01:50.849Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/28/politics/trump-iran-war-military-deaths
When the New York Times first reported last week that four recent US deaths in the Iran war had suddenly disappeared from the Defense Department’s casualty-reporting website, the Pentagon was adamant that this was a mere “temporary data disruption.”
But it’s become increasingly clear that wasn’t the full story. And it’s merely the latest episode in President Donald Trump’s chaotic and often callous handling of military deaths.
The deaths have not only now been reclassified in a more convenient and politically expedient manner for the administration — namely, it makes the total number of deaths due to Trump’s Iran war look lower and plays into his claims about his war authority — but it also turns out the deaths have actually been classified three separate ways on the Pentagon’s website in the last week alone.
The four deaths had suddenly returned to the Pentagon’s Defense Casualty Analysis System over the weekend. But rather than being re-added under Operation Epic Fury (the Iran war mission) — which one would expect if this were indeed just a data glitch — they were instead added to a whole new category on the site: the broadly named “Overseas Operations.”
The Pentagon also recorded more than 140 additional wounded service members in the system as part of that update.
This newly created category is described as accounting for “casualties starting July 7th 2026,” which is the date the administration has claimed it began a new conflict with Iran (more on that in a bit).
That’s not the only time the Pentagon’s website has changed how these deaths were classified.
In a press release early last week, the Pentagon announced the deaths of two of the four soldiers, saying they “were supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.”
Operation Inherent Resolve is the mission started in 2014 to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria, but the service members were killed by Iranian attacks. Soon, the language was changed to say the fallen troops “were supporting overseas operations in Jordan.”
In other words, these service members have now been linked on the Pentagon website to three different operations — two of which, it bears emphasizing, allow the administration to claim the casualties weren’t part of Operation Epic Fury.
And while it’s not clear precisely why this was done, it is clear that’s politically and legally convenient for the administration in a couple of ways.
First, it could conceivably allow Trump to claim there were fewer US deaths in the Iran war.
Last week, Trump continued to cite 18 deaths — the number including the most recent four — rather than 14 deaths. But he’s also made it abundantly clear that he is quite concerned about the politics of the troop deaths and the death toll. He also regularly attacked then-President Joe Biden for 13 American deaths in the chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal.
The second reason it’s convenient is that it bolsters Trump’s legal claim to the authority to continue the war without the required congressional approval.
The War Powers Act gives presidents 60 to 90 days to launch military action without congressional authorization. So to get around this, the administration has claimed the first conflict ended during the ceasefire that started in April, and that a new one began on July 7. (Even some Republicans have cast doubt on this gambit.)
It’s problematic for that argument to list the four latest deaths as occurring in Operation Epic Fury, given that’s purportedly over. And lo, the administration has instead moved to suggest they were part of another operation, whether that’s Operation Inherent Resolve or “Overseas Operations.”
But it’s difficult to comprehend this as anything other than effectively playing accounting games with the deaths of troops.
These four soldiers were, for all intents and purposes, killed as part of the same war the first 14 soldiers were killed in. There was just a three-month lull in fighting in between, as the administration and Iran’s leaders tried to hold together a patchwork pair of ceasefires.
The situation looks even worse given the Pentagon’s indignant initial response claiming the removed troops deaths were merely “temporary data disruptions.” The New York Times had cited unnamed military officials who said that the change was intentional, though at the time it was unclear how the Pentagon planned to recategorize the deaths.
It’s a hell of a way to deal with something as serious and sensitive as troop deaths. These are the kinds of things you want to make sure you get right from the start.
But it’s also kind of par for course for Trump and his administration.
Trump has for years struggled to speak empathetically about dead and injured service members. That spans from the late Sen. John McCain to “suckers” and “losers” to downplaying traumatic brain injuries to off-color comments about awards for injured service members and NATO troops who served in Afghanistan.
The Iran war has given him more cause to talk about the topic, and it’s clearly still something he struggles with. Both he and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made awkward comments about the initial troop deaths back in March. And, increasingly, Trump has set about comparing the lower death toll so far to other recent wars and even claiming that the fallen troops and all their families supported his Iran war effort — despite at least one family member saying something quite different.
But little is sacred to Trump so, like everything else, the troop deaths quickly become part of a political calculation to be minded and massaged.
发表回复