[MNJohnnie]

Which is another way of misleading by statistics. Militarily if the UK cannot sustain this sort of casualty rate the British military may as well be disbanded.

The UK has taken a total of 168 casualties in Iraq

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Out of a total military strength of around 380,000 that is a casualty rate of .000442 in 4.5 YEARS of war.

Out of a total military age population available for service of around 23,500,000 that represents a total casualty rate of .00000714.

IF the UK cannot sustain this rate of casualties, it may as well disband it military since it is of utterly no practical use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Armed_Forces

[uksupport1]

Who has said that the UK military can’t sustain these casualties?

I saw the piece as highlighting that the UK has suffered 240 dead (Rest in Peace) and many hundreds wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan (the only other Western Country after the US to be willing to shoulder these sorts of casualties). There has only been 1 year that Britain hasn’t lost troops in combat since 1968. You can’t exactly call the UK casualty shy.