US War Deaths per Day by Conflict (War, Battle) and How Iraq Compares

GD — Thanks for offering some counter-arguments. Seriously, it’s nice to have someone bring up some counter-points for once. Here’s my response:

1. Sorry, I’m lazy. 🙂 (Although, FWIW, the casualty figures on the ‘pedia for battles that I’m pretty familiar with — Guadalcanal and Okinawa — cited very reputable sources that I’ve used in my personal research.)

2a. Right. I think my thesis didn’t get expressed clearly enough. People seem to get panicky about the growing death count. But the death count is growing relatively slowly. Ergo, it seems like the wrong thing to get upset about. If the war’s worth fighting, the cost of human life in this one is very minimal relative to past engagements. If the war’s to be criticized, then let’s criticize it for something where its poor qualities are egregious.

2b. I disagree on a couple levels.

2b-1. First off, there have been circa (couldn’t find a good number, if someone else has one, thanks) 300,000 US troops involved in the current Iraq war, out of which 3,973 have died. At the Battle of Antietam, there were 132,000 involved — less than half the number, even though the death counts were similar. And all the deaths at Antietam happened over the course of ONE DAY. The Battle of Okinawa had 548,000 Allied combatants — not quite twice as many as Iraq — yet the death toll was 3x over the course of three months. Understandably, I’m comparing a “mere battle” to an “entire war”, but I’m guessing that if we look exclusively at the Battle of Basra, we’d see similar numbers hold.

2b-2. I strongly disagree, though, that the percentage of *combatants* killed is the important number. The complaint I’m issuing here is in regard to the homefront perception of the degree of tragedy being experienced in the given war. The current Iraq war has brought about the death of 0.001% of the US population. One out of every 75,000 (roughly) Americans has died in this war. So if you personally know 37,500 people, odds are 50-50 you know someone who’s died in Iraq and can claim to have been personally affected. (I have 96 people on my LinkedIn network, so I’m guessing I’m not even close to personally knowing 37,500 people — but then again, I’m a hermit.) In one battle in Europe, the Battle of the Bulge, 0.015% of the US population died, 1 out of 6,847 people. This means that it was 10 TIMES more likely that an American personally knew someone who died in the Battle of the Bulge than it is that an American personally knows someone who’s died in Iraq. In WW2 overall, 416,800 US combatants died — 0.39% of the US population, one out of ever 317 people. I can understand how *that* ratio might throw a nation into a tizzy. Relative to 1-in-317, 1-in-75,000 is a minor blip, statistically speaking.

But even if it *were* about the number of combatants, the numbers still point to Iraq being underwhelming as conflicts go. Heck, Vietnam: 553K US troops sent (not quite 2x the number in Iraq), 58,209 dead — 15x the number in Iraq and over 10% of US participants.

2c. I don’t see where this counters my argument. If FDR had shown the requisite gumption to tell Churchill that Europe could hang themselves while we went and took care of America’s problems (read: the Pacific Theater), we probably would have seen far fewer casualties than we received fighting two simultaneous wars. But he didn’t and we didn’t, therefore 416,800 US servicemen and servicewomen died in the war, completely dwarfing the relative impact of Iraq.

2d. That’s true and, admittedly, the “per-day” rate is a little unfair to consider when comparing a battle like Bull Run I to a protracted engagement like Iraq has turned out to be. Still, the death rate in Iraq has been very minor when compared to the our country’s other protracted engagements (Vietnam, Korea, WW2, etc.).

3. I don’t think the numbers are slanty, although, yes, there are other metrics that could be considered (e.g., I think a comparison of deaths per day against actual benefit of the campaign might be an interesting one where Iraq’s results start looking less hot — although that would lead to a horrifying debate about what the “benefits” of any war under consideration may or may not have been). In terms of total deaths, deaths per day, and deaths as a percentage of the US population, ignoring the value of the war itself, the Iraq War has been relatively very minor. I don’t see how that’s debatable.

4. Heh. Well, I agree 100% — the objectivity-challenged evening news watchers of the world aren’t going to be moved by anything not already being sponsored by Coca-Cola. (That’s a slight hyperbole, yes. And if anyone at Coke wants to advertise on my blog, just let me know what you’d like to see retracted!) But I’m pretty used to cursing the darkness anyway — it seems to be what I was born to do.

Thanks again,

bkd

That would be another interesting thing to look at — evaluate all the non-fatal casualties and assign a “quality of life” discount to them somehow. For instance, life with both legs missing might be worth only 65% of life with both attached, therefore should be counted as .35 of a death. Could also take into consideration age of the deceased combatants and compare that to the then-current life expectancy — if the average age of the deceased was 25 and the average life expectancy was 65, that seems less tragic than an average deceased age of 20 with an average life expectancy of 70. Wonder if anyone offers a PhD in valid-but-futile statistical analysis…

“Actuaries”, eh? They sound miserable. BTW, this page is ranking #7 for “iraq war deaths per day”, fwiw.

Thanks for the comment.

Sorry to hear about your son. Hope from here on out he gets all the luck he’s got coming to him.

bkd

I’m only citing American combat deaths. I found another source that lists 2,938 marines dead or missing, 4,675 US soldiers dead and missing, and another 4,900 sailors dead and missing (= 12,513 — heh, okay, it’s the same number). The biggest tragedy of Okinawa was the number of innocently bystanding Okinawans who were killed — many of whom dying when Japanese imperial troops convinced them to commit suicide. I wouldn’t be surprised if 180,000 were the number of Okinawans who died during the campaign, although that could also be the total dead including civilians and Japanese fighters (the estimate on Japanese combatants’ deaths is 60,000). If you ever want to hate the imperialist Japanese for the way they waged war, I highly recommend further research into the Battle of Okinawa.

When old say that in war and love every thing is fair. then how you belive any government like USA when he say only 2 death is this true you belive this but me say no.THIS IS RICH PEOPLE CHAS GAME.THIS GAME DEPEND ON LIE.

Hello what I wonder about is the effect of extreme stress lack of sleep(my comma key is not working for some reason.)poor nutrition, that was experienced in ww2 and if the result of that was early deaths of the soldiers returning home.
I’ve also read some articles about the ‘brain drain’ resulting from these war casualties. How many people died in these wars who could have had a very positive impact on quality of life for the US and even the world? Did the pioneer of cancer research who discovered a cure for cancer die or a president die on D day who would have led the US toward a much brighter and enlightened future? Did someone die who would have found the cure for AIDS Alszheimers the common cold and flu or perhaps a great environmentalist and researcher who discovered a green power source that started a green movement which drastically reduced environmental pollution. Perhaps the person who was to write the greatest work of literature died on that beach or who was to become a great philosopher whose teachings would have touched all mankind toward a more peaceful coexistence. I just wonder that one reason it seems to me our country is just getting lazier and crazier could have been prevented if we had not been involved in so many wars that caused so many deaths.
Many families who lost a loved one in a conflict would tell us that one death is too many and i believe them to be correct. History teaches us that war and battles and soldiers have always been a way of life for us, but I wonder if there was a person who died in such a conflict who would have grown into the person that changed that historical fact and we would have nations who concentrated on education, health care, medical research, and the soldiers of war becoming soldiers of peace by assisting all people of all nations in learning how to positively impact not just an individual’s quality of life but the quality of life for all our nation’s people.
I have always been fascinated by the number of churches in our towns but true kindnesses and acts of charity being newsworthy because it is just not that common. It makes little sense to me. I read a quotation that said if there was a heaven there would be very few people but many many animals. I guess that why most of my buds are of the four legged variety and I am somewhat of a recluse. Most people disapppoint me.