Iraq Troop Protection and Reduction Act

[yall]

By the way...completely fallacious logic. You can't just compare gross quantities of casualties. The 4417 killed from '93-96 are deaths in the entire military, averaging about 1.75 million in active service and reserves, for an annual death rate of 0.84 per thousand. The 3133 killed in Iraq are from a much smaller population - namely, the 120k servicemen or so that are in Iraq at any given time. That's 1050 deaths per year per 120k people...or 8.75 deaths per thousand per annum.

 

So the death rate isn't comparable. It's actually TEN TIMES the peacetime rate for a comparable span of time ten years ago.

 

Killed and wounded in Iraq, BTW, amounts to about 22,500 over three years...or about 6% casualties per year (60 per thousand). That's probably historically normal - if not low - for occupation duty.

 

Plus, those are only the deaths in that particular theater of operation. There are still training deaths that occur stateside, so really we aren't comparing apples to oranges, and like you said doesn't include wounded.

[X. Benedict]

Killed and wounded in Iraq, BTW, amounts to about 22,500 over three years...or about 6% casualties per year (60 per thousand). That's probably historically normal - if not low - for occupation duty.

 

Any idea what the casualty rate was for French Algeria?

[DC Tom]

Any idea what the casualty rate was for French Algeria?

 

No clue. Probably less deaths, but more injuries. Particularly lower body injuries - stubbed toes, sprained ankles - caused by dropping their rifles and running away...

 

The Soviets in Afghanistan, though, had roughly 50 per thousand per year killed and 100 per thousand per year wounded (specifically wounded; if you include illness - the Soviets had a ridiculous hepatitis problem in Afghanistan - it's something insane like 990 per thousand).