From: Doug Thayer (d_l_thayer@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Mar 26 2003 - 22:02:24 MST
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 06:58:41PM -0900, John Grigg wrote:
> If we have the usual 15-1 casualties as in WWII or Viet Nam we could wind
> up with about 17,000 dead or maimed. With our superior technology and
> firepower I don't think our casualties will be anywhere that bad, but I
> could see the Gulf War's supposed 157 combat deaths being dwarfed by the
> number fallen in this war. If the deaths on our side are not in the
> thousands after the dust settles I will be happily shocked.
In WWII, the US had a 2:3 kill ratio (2 germans killed for every American).
In Korea, the ratio was 4:1 (4 N Koreans/Chinese for each American).
In Vietnam, the ratio was 15:1.
In Gulf 1, the ratio was 400:1.
In Mogadishu, the ratio was 50:1, but US forces made many serious
operational errors (flying too low with lightly armored helicopters,
driving through streets in unarmored trucks, no air support).
A conservative but realistic estimate might be 200:1, midway between
Mogadishu and Gulf 1. Assuming that Saddam has 150,000 loyal troops who
will fight until they become casualties, US casualties can be estimated
at 750. Typically, 80% of casualties are wounded. Thus US fatalities
can be estimated at 150.
Civilian casualties in Gulf 1 were estimated at 1 per 15 Iraqi soldiers.
Thus Iraqi civilian casualties can be estimated at 10,000, with about
20% fatalities, or 2000.
Based on these estimates I have not been particularly concerned about
Gulf 2. It is generally known that traffic fatalities in the US run to
about 80 per day, or 2400 per month. So far, US war fatalities have run
to about 4 per day.
---- Doug
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 22:12:38 MST