[John H K]

As always, for everyone who reads this thread, despite what you hear in the media, casualties does NOT equal deaths. It includes wounded

3,000 casualties would likely be somewhere in the range of 600-800 killed. Not many cities with a population of 6 million have ever been taken from a hostile force with attacking casualties that low. None, in fact.

[motexva]

And casualties would include injuries like spraining your ankle jumping out of the troop carrier, etc.? Anything that's treated gets counted as a casualty.

McCaffrey is a partisan democrat who is as disingenuous a war commentator as he was drug czar. I don't believe anything he says.

[danzaroni]

casualties does NOT equal deaths. It includes wounded

Uh... I didn't realize this. Thank you for the education.

[BushMeister]

3,000 casualties would likely be somewhere in the range of 600-800 killed. Not many cities with a population of 6 million have ever been taken from a hostile force with attacking casualties that low. None, in fact.

I think you're wrong. There's always the French...and Paris.

[LenS]

Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Our only casualties were a handful of US POW's in the blast area.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"3,000 casualties would likely be somewhere in the range of 600-800 killed. Not many cities with a population of 6 million have ever been taken from a hostile force with attacking casualties that low. None, in fact."

But keep in mind that two years ago if I had told you that the WTC towers would collapse within an hour of blasts during the business day, and only 3000 of the ~100,000(?) normal occupants would perish, you would probably tell me that it would require divine intervention to keep the numbers that low.

[Boot Hill]

John H K says:   "Not many cities with a population of 6 million have ever been taken from a hostile force with attacking casualties that low [3,000]. None, in fact."

While Soviet WW II ROE and equipment were vastly different than wielded by our military today, still one interesting comparison that supports your contention, would be the Battle of Berlin during the closing days of WW II which resulted in 305,000 Russian casualties.

Today, similar casualties would produce a death toll approximating that of all the men we lost during the Vietnam War. Even a tenth of that would be staggering to the American people. Yet, without the fall or unconditional surrender of Baghdad, we lose.

--Boot Hill