Of all the infantry who get stationed in Iraq, what percent are KIA or killed by ieds and such? Are the....?

Question

Are the numbers as high as people make it out to be? I'm not talking about the number of infantry who are KIA out of the entire marines, just the number of infantry KIA who are stationed in iraq? Say, for every 100 infantry solders in Iraq, how many are killed in action?

RIP

p.s. yes i know it's a morbid question. And have nothing but the utmost respect for those who are no longer with us who died protecting this country. But i'd like to know if anyone has the numbers.

In "car accidents" are you referring to road side bombs? Unlike the usual not paying attention and running into a tree type of car accidents right?

Answer 1

There has been a little less than 2700 killed in combat. Overall, more have died there but the total number includes vehicle accidents etc. THe DOD says there has been a total of about 450,000 troops in Iraq total. The majority of them are not infantry. Typically 3 out of every 1000 infantry are killed.

Answer 2

I don't know why you are only asking about infantry that is KIA... there are many non-infantry troops who are killed by IEDs as well... and not only Marines are dying, every branch has suffered casualties. War does not discriminate by your service or your MOS/AFSC.

I think everyone else has answered your question... the actual percentages are quite low. The number that has been released *does* include non-combat related deaths. So... our 3,000+ troops we've lost include: hostile action (direct fire, IEDs, etc), vehicle accidents, illness (heart attacks, disease, etc), suicide (rates are not as high as you would think...) and several others.

As far as vehicle accidents, no they are not talking about road side bombs. We have vehicle accidents almost daily here... it is very easy to flip a HMMVW.

Answer 3

If you do the math, we are losing all of about 2.395 men a day in Iraq. Compare that to the number of murders in any large city in the U.S.. Contrary to what those with a defeatest attitude and agenda are telling you, other than Grenada, Panama and Desert Storm, this is the one of the least costly war in the history of all of mankind (in terms of mortality rates). And, when you consider the number of years we've been fighting there, it IS the least costly war. Of the worst, WW I ranks as one of the highest -- all combatant countries combined losses, losses were running around 94,000 men per month for four years. That number does not reflect those who died after the battle, only those who died immediately. The things the news media doesn't want you to know...

Answer 4

The MEDIA loves to report all the negatives but fails to say much about the positives taking place in Iraq. In reality there are more people killed in this country by the gangs and drunks than we lose in Iraq. Naturally the Media could never tell you that.

Answer 5

Actually Deadcatbounce1 your incorrect

Currently the US Armed Forces has more deaths due to automobile accidents than they do in combat. Combat meaning enemy fire/activity.

So, as dumb as it might sound you are making the troops safer by sending them into a "combat zone." Sorry but the statistics dont lie.

Why there is not a huge campaign to "Pull the Troops out of Cars" I dont know. But its fact.

Answer 6

As of today, a total of 1263 of the 3200 plus US KIA were caused by IEDs.

Answer 7

Believe it or not, infantrymen are not the ones that are getting killed as much on foot as other MOS's. All MOS's have about the same death toll when it comes to IED's. Most of the casualties on foot are from sniper fire.

Answer 8

Let's just say you're considerably more likely to be killed in Iraq than you are anywhere in the United States with the exception, perhaps, of the cockpit of the space shuttle.

You can check this site:

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Answer 9

oh bad one ,
no