Ya... i'll just disagree with you on that. But this is a debate for another day. You should watch this.
I stand corrected. I would still highlight that we weren't intentionally targeting civilians, unlike Putin. But circling back to my original point, I think this is the first major war of the advanced age where everyone has a camera phone and internet fast enough to upload it and platforms like Reddit and youtube to share it. This is the first war where it feels like we're right there in the middle of it.
Iraqi invasion casualties[edit]
Franks reportedly estimated soon after the invasion that there had been 30,000 Iraqi casualties as of April 9, 2003.
[82] That number comes from the transcript of an October 2003 interview of U.S. Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld with journalist
Bob Woodward. They were discussing a number reported by
The Washington Post.[
when?] But neither could remember the number clearly, nor whether it was just for deaths, or both deaths and wounded.
A May 28, 2003,
Guardian article reported that "Extrapolating from the death-rates of between 3% and 10% found in the units around Baghdad, one reaches a toll of between 13,500 and 45,000 dead among troops and paramilitaries."
[83]
An October 20, 2003, study by the
Project on Defense Alternatives at
Commonwealth Institute in
Cambridge, Massachusetts, estimated that for March 19, 2003, to April 30, 2003, the "probable death of approximately 11,000 to 15,000 Iraqis, including
approximately 3,200 to 4,300 civilian noncombatants."[84][85]
The
Iraq Body Count project (IBC) documented a higher number of civilian deaths up to the end of the major combat phase (May 1, 2003). In a 2005 report,
[86] using updated information, the
IBC reported that 7,299 civilians are documented to have been killed, primarily by U.S. air and ground forces. There were 17,338 civilian injuries inflicted up to May 1, 2003. The IBC says its figures are probably underestimates because: "many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media."
[19]