what is an acceptable casualty rate?

Question

every since the beginning of the iraq war i have heard that the casualty rate has been very low so that is why most people are not really worried about it. true the 3000 or so casualties is very low compared to previous wars, but tell that to the mother or father that has lost their son/daughter just like in previous wars!! i remember when everyone thought that when the death count got to 1000 that all hell would break loose. then 2000 and now 3000 and so on. so i just wonder what is an acceptable casualty rate for you out there? 5000,10,000,50,000 more???????????

Answer 1

None Is Acceptable
any more is wrong
for i think the reasons troops are out there are wrong

Answer 2

I have heard military strategists describe casualty rates of less than 10% acceptable for major battles.

However, I think our perceptions are changing as our technology gets better. My guess is that 2-3% casualties will, in the not too distant future, look like "acceptable" rates. A decrease.

For what it's worth, to "win" the Iraqi war (not the peacekeeping mission we have been in for the last three years) we lost 150 people, roughly, or .01%. Even with the total figures included, in both the "war", and the peacekeeping operation, 3000 casualties out of 150,000 soldiers is a casualty rate of 1.5%. Very low casualty rate by ANY standard I've remotely heard about.

Answer 3

3000 is low but any casualty's in my opinion is not acceptable but this is just the way things our. I understand what you mean. I do not want to answer this question because saying 10000 is when we should start to worries is just cruel.

What I am trying to say is I do not think we can pick a number. I am not against this war but I am not for it. I think I sit in the middle. I wish we could all just get along. Why can't everyone be like us. By us I do not mean Canadians or Americans I mean like peaceful people that do not wish to fight.

Answer 4

Research back through all of the things that our fighting men and women have been involved in over the years--- all of the wars. Really get to know what happened and why. Wars aren't fought with time lines and quotas. You fight out of conviction and you fight till it's over or you fight it on OUR soil. Japan, Germany, Italy, France, Poland ----- half of Europe ----- for what? the last three? four? generations--- have been living better lives than they could ever have prayed for under the kinds of leaders they had before we stepped in. Look at the difference between the way people live in South Korea vs. North Korea, and before Regan-- East Germany and West Germany. Go back to each world changing event and ask your-self what the world would be like if we had pulled out one week before that event. Patience, understanding, knowledge, reason, support for our Troops and for THEIR leaders. That's what is needed here at home. It is a tragedy when lives are lost, but at least there is the comfort of knowing the life was lost to a noble cause rather than taken by a suicide bomber (on our own soil) because our quota's were met, the time line expired or to make a political party look good, the funding was cut. Think with your head--- have compassion in your heart for All people, everywhere. Give Thanks daily for our brave troops and for those brave enough to lead them and PRAY FOR PEACE.

Answer 5

lol..Your kidding right? Zero is the aceptable casuality rate for a crime commited by president bush nuts. He is a criminal and should be arrested tried and hung if and when he is convicted. He is responsiable for the deaths for over 3200 of Americas bravest men who Joined our militarry to protect our freedoms, not to fight in some criminal action to appease the oil baronss and to keep his rich oil buddies happy. if you are listening georgie, and I am sure you are, daddy is never going to proud of his little drunk boy who couldn't ammount to much moree than a pile of snake dung....Ther is no acceptable casualty rate for the numbers of innocent Iraqi deaths either. Now standing at more than saddam could have ever imagined. Your hell will be painful george. When you walk into a house of the lord that pain and burnning feeling youget, well that is nothing compared to what is coming. So continue on pig untill your glutney and sloth is satisfied. Bask in your riches. These false feelings of fleeting glee willpass ina moment and you will once again be just georgie with the big ears. You'll rot slowly like the rest of us but no redemption is awaiting you, not if you started confessing tomorrow. Die You PIg!

Answer 6

the lowest number it takes to accomplish our goals. None if possible, but war is hell, I know I was in 'Nam, you do what you have to and hope your number doesn't come up.

I am extremely proud of our troops in Iraq, every where for that matter.

What makes me even prouder of them is they volunteered, I was drafted.

Answer 7

I think that the unacceptable casualty count should be the 50,000 Iraqis (or more) on top of the 3000 soldiers. Collateral damage (if it really is collateral) is the result of sloppy work, even for ground-pounders.

Answer 8

I like 500 to 1. That is a rate. What you are talking about has nothing to do with rates. Comon Lib, get with it!

Answer 9

take any segment of the population numbering say 150,000, get back to me with the caualty rate after 4 years...

Answer 10

Because they think the deaths of 3248 servicemen and women is NOTHING compared to Vietnam.

Unfortunately, these same people haven't seen the true costs of this war.

So to them, it still means NOTHING.