Thats just what we where discussing here! We came to this answer via google search: 2,740 Americans died in the September 11 attack. As of June 2004, the official death count is listed as 2,976 Hope this helps!

And as of today, I think the casualty count for our troups is 2999, or there-abouts...

To those of you listing the battle deaths since 9/11, are you trying to imply that the the war against terrorism is not worth it? If so, then I think that yo need a bit of perspective. Revolutionary War Deaths: Lexington and Concord = 50 Entire war = 4,435 Civil War Deaths: Fort Sumter = 0 Entire war = ~360,000 Union ~260,000 Confederate WWI Lusitania = 128 Americans 116,516 World War II: Pearl Harbor = 2,403 Entire War = 291,557 So, as you can see, the spark that started American involvement in all of these wars was significantly less than the total casualties. So, if you are going to argue that we should not be fighting against terrorism and those that support the terrorists because the death toll among the military has now exceeded that of the 9/11 attacks, then we should not have fought any of the above wars either. We should have stayed in the British Empire, we should not have fought to keep the Union together and end slavery, we should not have gotten involved in WWI, and we should have allowed Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan to conquer their respective parts of the world. This is the kind of thinking that result from a lack of perspective, a lack of an understanding of history. The people who staged the attacks of 9/11 have been at war with us for years and we did not adequately respond to them. Many of the attacks that we suffered (the African embassy bombings, Khobar Towers, USS Cole) were themselves acts of war, but our government did not treat them as such. The forces arrayed against us are not just Al Qaeda. Others of these organizations have also attack the US and its citizens and we mostly let them get away with it. It is time to pull our collect heads out of the sand and realize that we are at war and that the enemy is bound and determined to impose their belief system on us. Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord http://www.americanfamilytraditions.com/war_casualties.htm http://www.answers.com/topic/fort-sumter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_American_Civil_War http://www.english.emory.edu/LostPoets/Casualties.html http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/pearl.htm http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004619.html ************** "KinKStar: Gee Glenn, I like your perspective and gave you useful, but you know someone is gonna jump on you for not providing an answer to the question with numbers . . ." LordPyro already gave the numbers. This answer is just meant to give perspective on what he emplied with his answer. ************** "Ed_the_HandyMan: By no means am I implying that the "war" on terrorism is not worth it. What I am denying is that invading Iraq had anything to do with it." Then you are naive. Sadam did train and supply terrorists. He did put into motion an attempt to assassinate the elder President Bush. The war on terrorism is not just a war against Al qaeda. It is ultimately a war against all who support terrorism. Therefore Iraq was a legitimate target.

2,976 according to Wikipedia (excluding the 19 hijackers)

Their deaths would have far far more meaning, if we had consigned ourselves to attacking those who attacked us. As opposed to going after folks who's oil filled lands Bu$h coveted.