Is that possible?

Reading this blog the other day I ran across a guy ("Cobra") that mentioned that casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq have reached 40,000. This seems like an overly huge number yet it seems to be supported by a link to Globalsecurity.org, yet the 40,000 number is never mentioned or reached (that I could tell- that report seems rife with doublespeak IMHO)...

So - and just so you know, I'm for the GWOT - is this 40,000 casualty number possible?

Sounds way off.  For OIF casualties only:

http://icasualties.org/oif/

"Casualties" can include wounded can't it?  There have been about 17,000 killed or wounded thus far in Iraq.  You never know what "wounded" means though or what criteria are used.

Are we talking about casualties on our side? If so, 40k is an overestimate.

If we're talking about 40k total, then we're not killing enough of the enemy and we should strike Syria and Iran to get the numbers up!

Quoted: Are we talking about casualties on our side? If so, 40k is an overestimate. If we're talking about 40k total, then we're not killing enough of the enemy and we should strike Syria and Iran to get the numbers up!

Kill 'em all, then, huh???            

Yeah, 40,000 sounds like at least double the number of our total casualties.

Now, if you count Iraq and Afghanistan combined, with all coalition troops combined (including the Afghan and Iraqi armies), then yeah, that may be an accurate number.

But 40,000 US casualties is way off.

How about 40,000 Iraqi civilians?  Saw this number days ago.

This page is interesting: http://icasualties.org/oif/

US KIA's are about 1800 as of end of July 05 I believe.
US wounded in action shows in two columns: 7262 were wounded but returned to duty in 3 days (minor), 6759 were wounded not returned to duty after 3 days (more severe).

www.iraqbodycount.net estimates 23,000-27,000 Iraqi casualties.
Unlike the American left, I'm not really worried about the number of Iraqi casualties. Most of the casualty websites tend to want to cry about all of the "women and children who died from American bombs". Curiously, the numbers of these casualties who are shitbag civilians or women and children who are bombers or support their male relatives who are "heroes for Islam" is not mentioned in most of these websites. I have a feeling that the vast majority of the bodycount consist of those described above, and those who at least gave tacit support.
These folks should go check the Dresden bodycount for a better frame of reference.

I think they probably came up with the 40,000 number was arrived at by doing the time honored liberal method of adding all the numbers up on the page and then multiplying by whatever makes for the bloodiest sounding number.