July marked worst month for Army suicides

At the end of 2001, al-Qaeda fighters were still holding out in the mountains of the Tora Bora region.

On December 3, 2001, a group of 20 U.S. CIA NCS and 5th SFG(A) ODA572 team members of the code name Jawbreaker were inserted by helicopter in Jalalabad, Afghanistan to begin the operation. On December 5, 2001, Afghan Northern Alliance fighters wrested control of the low ground below the mountain caves from al-Qaeda fighters. The Jawbreaker team and SF teams called in Air Force bombers to take out targets. The al-Qaeda fighters withdrew to higher fortified positions and dug in for the battle. Approximately a week later, 70 special forces operators from the Army's Delta Force's A Squadron, Navy, and Air Force arrived overland by vehicle to support the already ongoing bombing campaign operation with ground forces.

The Northern Alliance fighters continued a steady advance through the difficult terrain, backed by air strikes and U.S. and British Special Forces. Facing defeat, al-Qaeda forces negotiated a truce with a local militia commander to give them time to surrender their weapons. In retrospect, however, many believe that the truce was a ruse to allow important al-Qaeda figures, including Osama bin Laden, to escape.

On December 12, 2001, the fighting flared again, possibly initiated by a rear guard buying time for the main force's escape through the White Mountains into the tribal areas of Pakistan. Once again, tribal forces backed by U.S. special operations troops and air support pressed ahead against fortified al-Qaeda positions in caves and bunkers scattered throughout the mountainous region. Twelve British SBS commandos, and one British Royal Signals Specialist from 63 Signals squadron now known as 18SFUK, accompanied the U.S. special operations forces in the attack on the cave complex at Tora Bora. Special Forces Operators of the German KSK took part in the battle as well. They were purportedly responsible for the protection of the flanks in the Tora Bora mountains and conducted reconnaissance missions.[1]

As the Taliban teetered on the brink of losing their last bastion, the U.S. focus increased on the Tora Bora. Local tribal militias, paid and organized by Special Forces and CIA SAD paramilitary operations officers, numbering over 2,000 strong, continued to mass for an attack as heavy bombing continued of suspected al-Qaeda positions.

By December 17, 2001, the last cave complex had been taken and their defenders overrun. No massive bunkers were found, only small outposts and a few minor training camps.[2]

A search of the area by U.S. forces continued into January, but no sign of bin Laden or the al-Qaeda leadership emerged. Former CIA officer Gary Berntsen, who led the CIA team (consisting primarily of CIA Paramilitary Officers from Special Activities Division) in Afghanistan that was tasked with locating Osama bin Laden, claims in his 2005 book Jawbreaker that he and his team had pinpointed the location of Osama bin Laden. Also according to Berntsen, a number of al-Qaeda detainees later confirmed that bin Laden had escaped Tora Bora into Pakistan via an easterly route through snow covered mountains to the area of Parachinar, Pakistan. He also claims that bin Laden could have been captured if United States Central Command had committed the troops that Berntsen had requested. Former CIA officer Gary Schroen concurs with this view[3] and Pentagon documents are suggestive.[4]

In an October 2004 opinion article in The New York Times, Gen. Tommy Franks wrote, "We don't know to this day whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora in December 2001. Some intelligence sources said he was; others indicated he was in Pakistan at the time...Tora Bora was teeming with Taliban and Qaeda operatives ... but Mr. bin Laden was never within our grasp." Franks, who retired in 2003, was the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan at the time. The last time Osama bin Laden was overheard on the VHF radio was on December 14, 2001. In 2008 Andy McNab, the pseudonym of a former SAS trooper echoed the claims of Berntsen, claiming that the Coalition were, "within a whisker" of capturing bin Laden at Tora Bora.

Many enemy fighters made their escape in the rough terrain and slipped away into the tribal areas of Pakistan to the south and east. It is estimated that around 200 of the al-Qaeda fighters were killed during the battle, along with an unknown number of anti-Taliban tribal fighters. No coalition deaths were reported.
Fury's account

A former Delta Force commander, using the pen name "Dalton Fury", who was present at Tora Bora has written that bin Laden escaped into Pakistan on or around December 16, 2001. Fury gives three reasons for why he believes bin Laden was able to escape: (1) the US mistakenly thought that Pakistan was effectively guarding the border area, (2) NATO allies refused to allow the use of air-dropped GATOR mines, which would have helped seal bin Laden and his forces inside the Tora Bora area, and (3) over-reliance on native Afghan military forces as the main force deployed against bin Laden and his fighters. Fury states that the Afghan forces would usually leave the battlefield in the evenings to break their Ramadan fasts, thereby allowing the al-Qaeda forces a chance to regroup, reposition, or escape.[5]

Fury, in an interview on 60 Minutes, stated that his Delta Force team and CIA Paramilitary Officers traveled to Tora Bora after the CIA pinpointed bin Laden's location in that area. Fury's team proposed an operation in which they would assault bin Laden's suspected position from the rear, over the 14,000 foot high mountain separating Tora Bora from Pakistan. But, Fury's proposal was denied by unidentified officials at higher headquarters for unknown reasons. Fury then proposed the dropping of GATOR mines in the passes leading away from Tora Bora, but this was also denied. Forced to approach the al-Qaeda forces from the front, at one point Fury reports that his team was within 2,000 meters of bin Laden's suspected position, but withdrew because of uncertainty over the number of al-Qaeda fighters guarding bin Laden and a lack of support from allied Afghan troops.[6]

A short time later, the Afghan military forces declared a cease fire with al-Qaeda. When Fury's team prepared to advance again on the al-Qaeda forces anyway, Afghan soldiers drew their weapons on the US soldiers. After 12 hours of negotiations, the Afghans stood down, but this had allowed bin Laden and his bodyguards time to relocate. Fury reports that bin Laden, in his radio calls which began in the afternoon of December 13, 2001, was clearly under duress, reportedly saying to his fighters, "the time is now, arm your women and children against the infidel". Then, after a few hours of enduring massive and accurate aerial bombing, he broke radio silence again to say "Our prayers were not answered. Times are dire and bad. We did not get support from the apostate nations who call themselves our Muslim brothers. Things might have been different". Fury describes that Bin Laden's final words to his fighters on that night were "I'm sorry for getting you involved in this battle, if you can no longer resist, you may surrender with my blessing".[7]

A short time later, what was believed to be bin Laden and his bodyguards were observed entering a cave. Fury's team called down several bombing attacks on the cave, and believed that they had killed bin Laden. Six months later, US and Canadian forces returned and checked several caves in the area, finding remains of al-Qaeda fighters, but not of bin Laden. Fury believes that bin Laden was injured in the shoulder by shrapnel during the bombing of the cave, but was then hidden, given medical care, and assisted out of the area into Pakistan by sympathetic local Afghans.[6]
Guantanamo captives' accounts of the battle

U.S. authorities have justified the continued detention of several dozen Guantanamo captives by the suspicion they had participated in the battle, had been present during the battle, or had passed through the area of the battle before or after it concluded.

During his testimony before a procedure convened under the authority of the Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants, Ayman Saeed Abdullah Batarfi, a Yemeni medical doctor described the conditions during the battle.[8] He testified:

"Most of all the total guns in the Tora Bora area was 16 Kalashnikovs and there are 200 people,"
"He [Osama bin Laden] came for a day to visit the area and we talked to him and we wanted to leave this area. He said he didn't know where to go himself and the second day he escaped and was gone."

Aftermath
“ ...a severe and fierce bombardment began...not one second passed without warplanes hovering over our heads...[America] exhausted all efforts to blow up and annihilate this tiny spot – wiping it out altogether...Despite all this, we blocked their daily attacks, sending them back defeated, bearing their dead and wounded. And not once did American forces dare storm our position, what clearer proof of their cowardice, fear and lies concerning the myth of their alleged power is there?! ”

—Osama bin Laden, 2002[9]

Following Tora Bora, U.S. and U.K. forces and their Afghan allies consolidated their position in the country. A Loya jirga or grand council of major Afghan factions, tribal leaders, and former exiles, an interim Afghan government was established in Kabul under Hamid Karzai. U.S. forces established their main base at Bagram Air Base just north of Kabul. Kandahar International Airport also became an important U.S. base area. Several outposts were established in eastern provinces to hunt for Taliban and Al-Qaeda fugitives. The number of US troops operating in the country would eventually grow to over 10,000.

Meanwhile, the Taliban and al-Qaeda had not given up. A US Senate report concluded that the failure to capture bin Laden "[laid] the foundation for today’s protracted Afghan insurgency and inflaming the internal strife now endangering Pakistan."[10] Al-Qaeda forces began regrouping in the Shahi-Kot mountains of Paktia Province throughout January and February 2002. A Taliban fugitive in Paktia province, Mullah Saifur Rehman, also began reconstituting some of his militia forces in support of the anti-US fighters. They totaled over 1,000 by the beginning of Operation Anaconda in March 2002. The intention of the insurgents was to use the region as a base area for launching guerrilla attacks and possibly a major offensive in the style of the mujahedin who battled Soviet forces during the 1980s.

In December 2009, the magazine New Republic published an article titled "The Battle for Tora Bora"[11] by Peter Bergen, an expert on al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, whose book "Holy War, Inc: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden" came out soon after 9/11. In his critique Bergen reconstructs the encounter with bin Laden at Tora Bora. He stated that Tommy Franks, the then US Army chief, refused to deploy 800 Army rangers from nearby bases to assault the complex of caves where bin Laden was supposedly hiding. Bergen called this "one of the greatest military blunders in recent US history". Bergen argued that the United States failed to capture bin Laden and allowed the Taliban to return from the cold—regrouped, rejuvenated and remarkably stronger—while US officials were diverted to Iraq.

On May 2, 2011, Osama bin Laden was confirmed to have died in a United States Navy SEAL raid on a compound in the city of Abbottabad, Pakistan, more than nine years after the failed attempts to capture or kill him in the Battle of Tora Bora.

Tora Bora "fortress"

Tora Bora was variously described by the western media to be an impregnable cave fortress housing 2000 men complete with a hospital, a hydroelectric power plant, offices, a hotel, arms and ammunition stores, roads large enough to drive a tank into, and elaborate tunnel and ventilation systems.[12] Both the British and American press published elaborate plans of the base which was readily accepted by the public. When presented with such plans in an NBC interview, the United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said "This is serious business, there's not one of those, there are many of those".[13][14][15]

When Tora Bora was eventually captured by the U.S. and Afghan troops, no traces of the supposed 'fortress' were found despite painstaking searches in the surrounding areas. Tora Bora turned out to be a system of small natural caves housing at most, 200 fighters. While arms and ammunition stores were found, there were no traces of the advanced facilities claimed to exist.[15][16]

In an interview published by the Public Broadcasting Service, a Staff Sergeant from the U.S. Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha (ODA) 572 described the caves as thus:[17]

Again, with the caves, they weren't these crazy mazes or labyrinths of caves that they described. Most of them were natural caves. Some were supported with some pieces of wood maybe about the size of a 10-foot by 24-foot room, at the largest. They weren't real big. I know they made a spectacle out of that, and how are we going to be able to get into them? We worried about that too, because we see all these reports. Then it turns out, when you actually go up there, there's really just small bunkers, and a lot of different ammo storage is up there. – Jeff, Staff Sgt. ODA 572[17]

Then George Bush, urged by Dick Cheney, had to be more powerful than Daddy by demonstrating his power punishing Iraq's "axis of evil"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_and_the_Iraq_War

You've rocked my world, BBB. You've torn it to shreds. Donald Rumsfeld was a liar?! At least I can hold out hope that the same will not be proven for GW and Dick.

How many more times can the American people stand being lied to?

Casualties of the Iraq War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about casualties for the war beginning in 2003. For other wars, see Iraq war (disambiguation).

Iraq War

White and red flags, representing Iraqi and American deaths, sit in the grass quadrangle of The Valley Library on the Corvallis, Oregon, campus of Oregon State University. As part of the traveling Iraq Body Count exhibit (not related to Iraq Body Count project), the flags aim to "raise awareness of the human cost of the Iraq War." (May 2008)

Casualties of the conflict in Iraq since 2003 (beginning with the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and continuing with the ensuing occupation of Iraq coalition presence, as well as the activities of the various armed groups operating in the country) have come in many forms, and the accuracy of the information available on different types of Iraq War casualties varies greatly.

The table below summarizes various estimates of the Iraqi casualty figures.
Source Casualties Time period
Iraq Family Health Survey 151,000 violent deaths March 2003 to June 2006
Lancet survey 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths March 2003 to June 2006
Opinion Research Business survey 1,033,000 deaths as a result of the conflict March 2003 to August 2007
Associated Press 110,600 deaths March 2003 to April 2009
Iraq Body Count project 105,052–114,731 civilian deaths as a result of the conflict. Over 162,000 civilian and combatant deaths[1][2] March 2003 to January 2012
WikiLeaks. Classified Iraq war logs[1][3][4][5] 109,032 deaths including 66,081 civilian deaths.[6][7] January 2004 to December 2009

For troops in the U.S.-led multinational coalition, the death toll is carefully tracked and updated daily, and the names and photographs of those killed in action as well as in accidents have been published widely. Regarding the Iraqis, however, information on both military and civilian casualties is both less precise and less consistent. Estimates of casualty levels are available from reporters on the scene, from officials of involved organizations, and from groups that summarize information on incidents reported in the news media.

The word "casualties" in its most general sense includes the injured as well as the dead. Accounts of the number of coalition wounded vary widely, partly because it is not obvious what should be counted: should only those injuries serious enough to put a soldier out of commission be included? Do illnesses or injuries caused by accidents count, or should the focus be restricted to wounds caused by hostile engagement? Sources using different definitions may arrive at very different numbers, and sometimes the precise definition is not clearly specified. As for the Iraqis, where even the death toll has only been very roughly estimated, it appears that no one has attempted to count the wounded.

Overview. Iraqi death estimates by source

Summary of casualties of the Iraq War. Possible estimates on the number of people killed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq vary widely,[8] and are highly disputed.[9] Estimates of casualties below include both the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the following Post-invasion Iraq, 2003–present.
Iraq war logs

Classified US military documents released by WikiLeaks in October 2010, record Iraqi and Coalition military deaths between January 2004 and December 2009.[1][3][4][5][10][10][11] The documents record 109,032 deaths broken down into "Civilian" (66,081 deaths), "Host Nation" (15,196 deaths),"Enemy" (23,984 deaths), and "Friendly" (3,771 deaths).[7][12]
Iraqi Health Ministry

The Health Ministry of the Iraqi government recorded 87,215 Iraqi violent deaths between January 1, 2005, and February 28, 2009. The data was in the form of a list of yearly totals for death certificates issued for violent deaths by hospitals and morgues. The official who provided the data told the Associated Press said the ministry does not have figures for the first two years of the war, and estimated the actual number of deaths at 10 to 20 percent higher because of thousands who are still missing and civilians who were buried in the chaos of war without official records.[13]

The Associated Press

Associated Press stated that more than 110,600 Iraqis had been killed since the start of the war to April 2009. This number is per the Health Ministry tally of 87,215 covering January 1, 2005, to February 28, 2009 combined with counts of casualties for 2003–2004, and after February 29, 2009, from hospital sources and media reports.[13] For more info see farther down at The Associated Press and Health Ministry. More information.
Iraq Body Count

The Iraq Body Count project (IBC) figure of 104,080 — 113,728 civilian deaths from violence up to November 2011 includes civilian deaths due to Coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and increased criminal violence.[14] The IBC site states: "it should be noted that many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media."[15] The IBC website currently states that, "Full analysis of the WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs may add 15,000 civilian deaths."
Iraq Family Health Survey (with WHO)

Iraq Family Health Survey for the World Health Organization.[16][17] On January 9, 2008, the World Health Organization reported the results of the "Iraq Family Health Survey" published in The New England Journal of Medicine.[18] The study surveyed 9,345 households across Iraq and estimated 151,000 deaths due to violence (95% uncertainty range, 104,000 to 223,000) from March 2003 through June 2006. Employees of the Iraqi Health Ministry carried out the survey.[19][20][21] See also farther down: Iraq Family Health Survey.
Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll

Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll conducted August 12–19, 2007, estimated 1,033,000 violent deaths due to the Iraq War. The range given was 946,000 to 1,120,000 deaths. A nationally representative sample of approximately 2,000 Iraqi adults answered whether any members of their household (living under their roof) were killed due to the Iraq War. 22% of the respondents had lost one or more household members. ORB reported that "48% died from a gunshot wound, 20% from the impact of a car bomb, 9% from aerial bombardment, 6% as a result of an accident and 6% from another blast/ordnance."[22][23][24][25][26]
United Nations

The United Nations reported that 34,452 violent deaths occurred in 2006, based on data from morgues, hospitals, and municipal authorities across Iraq.[27]
Lancet studies

The Lancet study's figure of 654,965 excess deaths through the end of June 2006 is based on household survey data. The estimate is for all excess violent and nonviolent deaths. That also includes those due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer healthcare, etc. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 566% confidence interval) were estimated to be due to violence. 31% of those were attributed to the Coalition, 24% to others, 46% unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56%), car bomb (13%), other explosion/ordnance (14%), airstrike (13%), accident (2%), unknown (2%). A copy of a death certificate was available for a high proportion of the reported deaths (92% of those households asked to produce one).[28][29][30]
Ali al-Shemari (earlier Iraqi Health Minister)

Concerning war-related deaths (civilian and non-civilian), and deaths from criminal gangs, Iraq's Health Minister Ali al-Shemari said that since the March 2003 invasion between 100,000 and 150,000 Iraqis had been killed.[31] "Al-Shemari said on Thursday [November 9, 2006] that he based his figure on an estimate of 100 bodies per day brought to morgues and hospitals – though such a calculation would come out closer to 130,000 in total."[32] For more info see farther down at Iraq Health Minister estimate in November 2006.

Overview. Death estimates by group
Iraqi Security Forces (aligned with Coalition)

From June 2003, through December 31, 2010, there have been 16,623 Iraqi military and police killed based on several estimates.[33] The Iraq Index of the Brookings Institution keeps a running total of ISF casualties.[34] There is also a breakdown of ISF casualties at the iCasualties.org website.[35]
Iraqi insurgents

From June 2003, through September 30, 2011, there have been 26,320 Iraqi insurgents killed based on several estimates.[36]
Media and aid workers

136 journalists and 51 media support workers were killed on duty according to the numbers listed on source pages on February 24, 2009.[37][38][39] 94 aid workers have been killed according to a November 21, 2007, Reuters article.[40][41]
U.S. armed forces

Graph of monthly deaths of U.S. military personnel in Iraq from beginning of war to June 24, 2008.[42]

As of May 29, 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Defense casualty website, there were 4,409 total deaths (including both killed in action and non-hostile) and 31,928 wounded in action (WIA) as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom.[43] As a part of Operation New Dawn, which was initiated on September 1, 2010, there were 66 total deaths (including KIA and non-hostile) and 301 WIA. See the references for a breakdown of the wounded, injured, ill, those returned to duty (RTD), those requiring medical air transport, non-hostile-related medical air transports, non-hostile injuries, diseases, or other medical reasons.[43][44][45][46][47]
Coalition deaths by hostile fire

As of 23 October 2011, hostile-fire deaths accounted for 3,777 of the 4,799 total coalition military deaths.[48]
Armed forces of other coalition countries
See Multinational force in Iraq.

As of 24 February 2009, there were 318 deaths from the armed forces of other Coalition nations. 179 UK deaths and 139 deaths from other nations. Breakdown:[44][45][49]

Australia — 2
Azerbaijan — 1
Bulgaria — 13
Czech Republic — 1
Denmark — 7
El Salvador — 5
Estonia — 2
Fiji — 1
Georgia — 5
Hungary — 1
Italy — 33
Kazakhstan — 1
Latvia — 3
Netherlands — 2
Poland — 30
Portugal — 1
Romania — 4
Slovakia — 4
South Korea — 1
Spain — 11
Thailand — 2
Ukraine — 18
United Kingdom — 179

Contractors

Contractors. At least 1,487 deaths between March 2003 and June 2011 according to the list of private contractor deaths in Iraq. 245 of those are from the U.S.[50][51][52][53][54] Contractors are "Americans, Iraqis and workers from more than three dozen other countries."[55] 10,569 wounded or injured.[50] Contractors "cook meals, do laundry, repair infrastructure, translate documents, analyze intelligence, guard prisoners, protect military convoys, deliver water in the heavily fortified Green Zone and stand sentry at buildings - often highly dangerous duties almost identical to those performed by many U.S. troops."[56] A July 4, 2007, Los Angeles Times article reported 182,000 employees of U.S.-government-funded contractors and subcontractors (118,000 Iraqi, 43,000 other, 21,000 U.S.).[51][57]
Additional statistics for the Iraq War

Overview of casualties by type

Dead

Iraqis:

Deadliest single insurgent bombings:[58]
August 14, 2007. Truck bombs - 2007 Yazidi communities bombings (in northwestern Iraq):
796 killed.

Other deadly days:

November 23, 2006, (281 killed) and April 18, 2007, (233 killed):
"4 bombings in Baghdad kill at least 183. ... Nationwide, the number of people killed or found dead on Wednesday [, April 18, 2007,] was 233, which was the second deadliest day in Iraq since Associated Press began keeping records in May 2005. Five car bombings, mortar rounds and other attacks killed 281 people across Iraq on November 23, 2006, according to the AP count."[59]

Graph of monthly wounded in action of U.S. military personnel in Iraq.[47]
Wounded in action

As of January 12, 2007, 500 U.S. troops have undergone amputations due to the Iraq War. Toes and fingers are not counted.[60]

As of September 30, 2006, 725 American troops have had limbs amputated from wounds received in Iraq and Afghanistan.[61]

A 2006 study by the Walter Reed Medical Center, which serves more critically injured soldiers than most VA hospitals, concluded that 62 percent of patients there had suffered a brain injury.[62]

In March 2003, U.S. military personnel were wounded in action at a rate averaging about 350 per month. As of September 2007, this rate has increased to about 675 per month.[47]

Injured/fallen ill

U.S. military: number unknown.
An October 18, 2005, USA Today article reports:

"More than one in four U.S. troops have come home from the Iraq war with health problems that require medical or mental health treatment, according to The Pentagon's first detailed screening of service members leaving a war zone."[63]

Iraqi combatants: number unknown

Refugees

As of November 4, 2006, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimated that 1.8 million Iraqis had been displaced to neighboring countries, and 1.6 million were displaced internally, with nearly 100,000 Iraqis fleeing to Syria and Jordan each month.[64]

Iraqi invasion casualties

In March 2002 — before the Iraq War — at a news conference at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, U.S. General Tommy Franks had said, "we don't do body counts."[65][66]

Franks reportedly estimated soon after the invasion that there had been 30,000 Iraqi casualties as of April 9, 2003.[67] 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 "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.[68]

An October 20, 2003, study[69][70] by the Project on Defense Alternatives at Commonwealth Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, stated that for March 19, 2003, to April 30, 2003, "Based on the analysis that follows we estimate that the 2003 Iraq war produced between 7,600 and 10,800 Iraqi combatant fatalities."

The study also stated: "Our analysis of the evidence leads to the conclusion that between 10,800 and 15,100 Iraqis were killed in the war. Of these, between 3,200 and 4,300 were noncombatants – that is: civilians who did not take up arms."

The study explained that to arrive at these numbers, they had adjusted the underlying incident reports from the field by reducing each count by anywhere from 20% to 60%, based on their own reliability assessments, in order to "control for casualty inflation – a prevalent form of bias."

The study author Carl Conetta reported: "All told, more than 40,000 Iraqis were killed or injured,"

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,[71] 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."[15]

Iraqi civilian casualties

A soldier carries a wounded Iraqi child into the Charlie Medical Centre at Camp Ramadi, Iraq (March 20, 2007).

Estimates of Iraqi civilian casualties are highly disputed.[72][73] It is difficult for most estimates of Iraqi casualties to separate civilian from combatant casualties. Various estimates are discussed below, and elsewhere in this article. See also the section on total Iraqi casualties. In December 2007, the Iraqi government reported that there were five million orphans in Iraq — almost half of the country's children.[74][75]

For the major combat phase of the war from March to April 2003, Abu Dhabi TV reported on April 8, 2003, that Iraqi sources had claimed that 1,252 civilians had been killed and 5,103 had been wounded. The Iraq Body Count project (IBC project), incorporating subsequent reports, has reported that by the end of the major combat phase up to April 30, 2003, 7,419 civilians had been killed, primarily by U.S. air-and-ground forces.[14][71]
People's Kifah

A study by an Iraqi political party, the People's Kifah, or Struggle Against Hegemony (PK), reported the findings of a survey it conducted between March and June 2003 throughout the non-Kurdish areas of Iraq. They tallied 36,533 civilians killed in those areas by June 2003. Information on this study was first published in August 2003 on the website of Jude Wanniski, a retired reporter for The Wall Street Journal.[76] While detailed town-by-town totals are given by the PK spokesperson, details of methodology are very thin and raw data is not in the public domain. A still-less-detailed report on this study appeared some months later on Al Jazeera's website.[77] The Al Jazeera report claims the study covered up to October 2003, but this cannot be accurate, as exactly the same figures were already published on the Wanniski website in August 2003.

Note that both the IDC project below and PK above define the word civilian to exclude the various paramilitary forces operating in Iraq as well as the official military forces that existed under Saddam Hussein's regime.
Iraq Body Count project

An independent UK/US group, the IBC project compiles "reported" Iraqi civilian deaths resulting from the invasion and occupation, including those caused directly by coalition military action, those caused directly by the Iraqi insurgency, and those resulting from excess crime (the IBC project asserts that the Occupying Authority[clarification needed] is responsible to prevent these deaths under international law). It shows a minimum of 99,004 and a maximum of 108,076 as of December 2, 2010.[14]

This total represents civilian deaths that have been reported by media organizations, non-governmental-organization-based reports, and official records.[15] The IBC project has been criticized by some who believe it counts only a small percentage of the number of actual deaths because it only includes deaths reported by respected media agencies.[26][78] The IBC project's director, John Sloboda, has stated, "We've always said our work is an undercount, you can't possibly expect that a media-based analysis will get all the deaths."[79] However, the IBC project rejects many of these criticisms as exaggerated or misinformed.[80]

Following are the yearly IBC project civilian-death totals[14] (as of August 14, 2011):

Year Civilian deaths
2003 12,087
2004 11,152
2005 15,491
2006 28,225
2007 25,063
2008 9,385
2009 4,713
2010 4,045
2011 4,087

Concerning the yearly totals, IBC project states: "All figures are taken from the "maximum" confirmed deaths in the IBC database. However, IBC's rates and counts will rise over the coming months, as data is still being added to the IBC database for 2006 and other periods covered here."[81]

The IBC project released a report detailing the deaths it recorded between March 2003 and March 2005[71] in which it recorded 24,865 civilian deaths. The report says the U.S. and its allies were responsible for the largest share (37%) of the 24,865 deaths. The remaining deaths were attributed to anti-occupations forces (9%), crime (36%) and unknown agents (11%). It also lists the primary sources used by the media — mortuaries, medics, Iraqi officials, eyewitnesses, police, relatives, U.S.-coalition, journalists, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), friends/associates and other.

Iraqi refugees crisis
Main article: Refugees of Iraq

As of November 4, 2006, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees estimated that 1.8 million Iraqis had been displaced to neighboring countries, and 1.6 million were displaced internally, with nearly 100,000 Iraqis fleeing to Syria and Jordan each month.[64]

As of 2007 more Iraqis had lost their homes and become refugees than the population of any other country. Over 3.9 million people, close to 16 percent of the Iraqi population, have become uprooted. Of these, around 2 million have fled Iraq and flooded other countries, and 1.9 million are estimated to be refugees inside Iraq.[82]

Roughly 40 percent of Iraq's middle class is believed to have fled, the U.N. said. Most are fleeing systematic persecution and have no desire to return. All kinds of people, from university professors to bakers, have been targeted by militias, Iraqi insurgents and criminals. An estimated 331 school teachers were slain in the first four months of 2006, according to Human Rights Watch, and at least 2,000 Iraqi doctors have been killed and 250 kidnapped since the 2003 U.S. invasion.[83]

Project Censored cites the large number of Iraqi refugees as additional support of their argument that the number of Iraqi casualties is much larger than generally addressed in the mainstream media.[9]

A May 25, 2007, article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer noted that in the past seven months only 69 people from Iraq had been granted refugee status in the U.S.[84] As a result of growing international pressure, on June 1, 2007, the Bush administration said it was ready to admit 7,000 Iraqi refugees who had helped the coalition since the invasion. According to Washington, D.C.-based Refugees International, the U.S. has admitted fewer than 800 Iraqi refugees since the invasion, Sweden had accepted 18,000, and Australia had resettled almost 6,000.[85]
Non-Iraqi civilian casualties

Many non-combatants from both coalition and non-coalition countries have also been killed or wounded, including journalists and international aid personnel and foreign civilians. See the main overview chart at the top for numbers and more information.

Coalition military casualties
Coalition deaths by country

USA: 4,459
UK: 179
Italy: 33
Poland: 23
Ukraine: 18
Bulgaria: 13
Spain: 11
Denmark: 7
El Salvador: 5
Georgia: 5
Slovakia: 4
Latvia: 3
Romania: 3
Australia: 2
Estonia: 2
Netherlands: 2
Thailand: 2
Azerbaijan: 1
Czech Republic: 1
Fiji: 1
Hungary: 1
Kazakhstan: 1
South Korea: 1

TOTAL: 4,777

Most U.S. casualties, like these in a C-17 military transport aircraft, return to Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware. (unknown date)

For the latest casualty numbers see the overview chart at the top of the page. See also the icasualties.org site:[44] or the Iraq Page.[86]

Since the official handover of power to the Iraqi Interim Government on June 28, 2004, coalition soldiers have continued to come under attack in towns across Iraq.

National Public Radio, iCasualties.org, and GlobalSecurity.org have month-by-month charts of American troop deaths in the Iraq War.[8][87][88]

The British Casualty Monitor has a fortnightly updated graphical analysis of British casualties.[89]
A U.S. Marine killed in April 2003 is carried away after receiving his Last Rites.

The combined total of coalition and contractor casualties in the conflict is now over ten times that of the 1990–1991 Gulf War. In the Gulf War, coalition forces suffered around 378 deaths, and among the Iraqi military, tens of thousands were killed, along with thousands of civilians.
Troops fallen ill, injured, or wounded

See the overview chart at the top of the page for recent numbers.

On August 29, 2006, The Christian Science Monitor reported:[90] "Because of new body armor and advances in military medicine, for example, the ratio of combat-zone deaths to those wounded has dropped from 24 percent in Vietnam to 13 percent in Iraq and Afghanistan. In other words, the numbers of those killed as a percentage of overall casualties is lower."
Wounded U.S. personnel flown from Iraq to Ramstein Air Base, Germany, for medical treatment. (February 2007)

Many U.S. veterans of the Iraq War have reported a range of serious health issues, including tumors, daily blood in urine and stool, sexual dysfunction, migraines, frequent muscle spasms, and other symptoms similar to the debilitating symptoms of "Gulf War syndrome" reported by many veterans of the 1991 Gulf War, which some believe is related to the U.S.'s use of radioactive depleted uranium.[91]

A study[92] of U.S. veterans published in July 2004 in The New England Journal of Medicine on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other mental disorders in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans found that 5 percent to 9.4 percent (depending on the strictness of the PTSD definition used) suffered from PTSD before deployment. After deployment, 6.2 percent to 19.9 percent suffered from PTSD. For the broad definition of PTSD that represents an increase of 10.5 percent (19.9 percent - 9.4 percent = 10.5 percent). That is 10,500 additional cases of PTSD for every 100,000 U.S. troops after they have served in Iraq. ePluribus Media, an independent citizen journalism collective, is tracking and cataloging press-reported possible, probable, or confirmed incidents of post-deployment or combat-zone cases in its PTSD Timeline.[93]

Information on injuries suffered by troops of other coalition countries is less readily available, but a statement in Hansard indicated that 2,703 U.K. soldiers had been medically evacuated from Iraq for wounds or injuries as of October 4, 2004, and that 155 U.K. troops were wounded in combat in the initial invasion.[94]

Leishmaniasis has been reported by U.S. troops stationed in Iraq, including visceral leishmaniasis. The number of those who may become infected could reach 750 to 1,250 or even more, what made up to nearly one percent of U.S. troops serving in Iraq in from 2003 to 2004.[95]
Accidents and negligence

As of August 2008, sixteen American troops have died from accidental electrocutions in Iraq according to the Defense Department.[96] One soldier had been electrocuted in a shower, while another had been electrocuted in a swimming pool. KBR, the contractor responsible, had been warned by employees of unsafe practices, and was criticised following the revelations.[97]

Nightline controversy

Ted Koppel, host of ABC's Nightline, devoted his entire show on April 30, 2004, to reading the names of 721 of the 737 U.S. troops who had died thus far. He did not mention deaths in Afghanistan. (The show had not been able to confirm the remaining sixteen names.)

Claiming that this would constitute a political statement, the Sinclair Broadcast Group took the action of barring the seven ABC network-affiliated stations it controls from airing the show. The decision to censor the broadcast drew criticism from both sides, including members of the armed forces, opponents of the war, MoveOn.org, and most notably Republican U.S. Senator John McCain, who denounced the move as "unpatriotic" and "a gross disservice to the public".

Amputees

Amputee U.S. soldier (February 2007)

As of January 18, 2007, there were at least 500 American amputees due to the Iraq War. According to a January 18, 2007, Time magazine article, the 500th victim was a 24-year-old corporal, who lost both legs in a roadside bomb explosion on January 12, 2007. He was cared for at the military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, and then was transferred to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, located in Washington, D.C.

The article reports: "The 500 major amputations — toes and fingers aren't counted — represent 2.2% of the 22,700 U.S. troops wounded in action. But the number rises to 5% in the category of soldiers whose wounds prevent them returning to duty."[60]

However, in a presentation given by Dean Kamen at a TED conference in March 2008, Dean reports that a senior Department of Defense official disclosed that "1,600 of the kids we've sent out have come back missing at least one full arm. Whole arm. Shoulder disartic..."[98]
Traumatic brain injuries

A March 4, 2009, article in USA Today[99] reported that according to a Pentagon estimate, as many as 360,000 U.S. veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts may have suffered traumatic brain injuries (TBI), including 45,000 to 90,000 veterans with persistent symptoms requiring specialized care. (A separate estimate for the Iraq conflict alone was not specified.)

A February 2007 article in Discover, "Dead Men Walking — What Sort of Future Do Brain-Injured Iraq Veterans Face?", reports: "One expert from the VA estimates the number of undiagnosed TBIs at over 7,500. Nearly 2,000 brain-injured soldiers have already received some level of care, ..."[100]

USA Today reported in November 2007:

At least 20,000 U.S. troops who were not classified as wounded during combat in Iraq and Afghanistan have been found with signs of brain injuries, according to military and veterans records compiled by USA TODAY.

The data, provided by the Army, Navy and Department of Veterans Affairs, show that about five times as many troops sustained brain trauma as the 4,471 officially listed by The Pentagon through September 30. These cases also are not reflected in the Pentagon's official tally of wounded, which stands at 30,327.[101]

Mental illness and suicide

A top U.S. Army psychiatrist, Colonel Charles Hoge, told the U.S. Congress in March 2008 that nearly 30 percent of troops on their third deployment suffer from serious mental-health problems, and that one year was not enough time between combat tours.[102]

A March 12, 2007, Time article[103] reported on a study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine. About one third of the 103,788 veterans returning from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars seen at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs facilities between September 30, 2001, and September 30, 2005, were diagnosed with mental illness or a psycho-social disorder, such as homelessness and marital problems, including domestic violence. More than half of those diagnosed, 56 percent, were suffering from more than one disorder. The most common combination was post-traumatic stress disorder and depression.

In January 2008, the U.S. Army reported that the rate of suicide among soldiers in 2007 was the highest since the Army started counting in 1980. There were 121 suicides in 2007, a 20-percent jump over the prior year. Also, there were around 2100 attempted suicides and self-injuries in 2007.[104] Other sources reveal higher estimates.[105]

Time magazine reported on June 5, 2008:

Data contained in the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team report indicate that, according to an anonymous survey of U.S. troops taken last fall, about 12% of combat troops in Iraq and 17% of those in Afghanistan are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope. ... About a third of soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq say they can't see a mental-health professional when they need to. When the number of troops in Iraq surged by 30,000 last year, the number of Army mental-health workers remained the same — about 200 — making counseling and care even tougher to get.[102]

In the same article Time also reported on some of the reasons for the prescription drug use:

That imbalance between seeing the price of war up close and yet not feeling able to do much about it, the survey suggests, contributes to feelings of "intense fear, helplessness or horror" that plant the seeds of mental distress. "A friend was liquefied in the driver's position on a tank, and I saw everything", was a typical comment. Another: "A huge f______ bomb blew my friend's head off like 50 meters from me." Such indelible scenes — and wondering when and where the next one will happen — are driving thousands of soldiers to take antidepressants, military psychiatrists say. It's not hard to imagine why.[102]

Concern has been expressed by mental health professionals about the effects on the emotional health and development of returning veterans' infants and children, due to the increased rates of interpersonal violence, posttraumatic stress, depression, and substance abuse that have been reported among these veterans.[106][107] Moreover, the stressful effects of physical casualties and loss pose enormous stress for the primary caregiver that can adversely affect her or his parenting, as well as the couple's children directly.[108] The mental health needs of military families in the aftermath of combat exposure and other war-related trauma have been thought likely to be inadequately addressed by the military health system that separates mental health care of the returning soldier from his or her family's care, the latter of whom is generally covered under a contracted, civilian managed-care system.[109]
Rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment

BBC News reported 17 April 2009, "According to several studies of the US military funded by the Department of Veteran Affairs, 30% of military women are raped while serving, 71% are sexually assaulted, and 90% are sexually harassed."[110]

Iraqi insurgent casualties

In 2003, 597 insurgents were killed, according to the U.S. military.[111] From January 2004 through December 2009 (not including May 2004 and March 2009), 23,984 insurgents were estimated to have been killed based on reports from Coalition soldiers on the frontlines.[112] In the two missing months from the estimate, 652 were killed in May 2004,[113] and 45 were killed in March 2009.[114] In 2010, another 676 insurgents were killed.[115] In January and March through October 2011, 451 insurgents were killed.[116][117][118][119][120][121][122][123][124] Based on all of these estimates some 26,405 insurgents/militia were killed from 2003, up until late 2011.

However, this number could be an overestimate and may include some civilian fatalities, since there have been contradictions between the figures released by the U.S. military and those released by the Iraqi government. For example, the U.S. military's number of insurgents killed in 2005, is 3,247, which is in contrast to the Iraqi government's figure of 1,734.[125] In 2007, 4,544 militants were killed according to the Iraqi ministries,[126] while the U.S. military claimed 6,747 died. Also, in 2008, 2,028 insurgents were reported killed[127] and in 2009, with the exception of the month of June, 488 were killed according to the Iraqi Defence Ministry.[128] These numbers are also not in line with the U.S. military estimate of some 3,984 killed in 2008 and 2009.[129]

U.S. military- and Iraqi Defence Ministry-provided numbers, including suicide bombers

2011 — 451 (not including February & August)
2010 — 676
2009 — 488 (not including June)
2008 — 2,028
2007 — 6,747 (U.S. military), 4,544 (Iraqi Defence Ministry)
2006 — 3,902
2005 — 3,247 (U.S. military), 1,734 (Iraqi Defence Ministry)
2004 — 6,801
2003 — 603

In addition as of August 22, 2009, approximately 1,719 suicide-bombers had also been reported killed.
Main article: Suicide bombings in Iraq since 2003

2009 — 73
2008 — 257
2007 — 442[130]
2006 — 297[130][131]
2005 — 478[132]
2004 — 140[132]
2003 (from August to December) — 32[133]

Grand total — 21,221–26,405 insurgents dead

On September 28, 2006, an Al Qaeda leader claimed that 4,000 foreign insurgents had been killed in the war.[134]

On June 6, 2008, an Iraqi Army official revealed that about 6,000 Al Qaeda fighters were among the insurgents killed since the start of the war up until April 2008.[135]

Insurgent deaths, like civilian deaths, are hard to count or estimate. See:[136][137]

See also the examples of undercounting shown in one of the sections below.

The Lancet surveys did not ask respondents if the dead they were reporting were combatants or not.
Contractor casualties

Their status as civilian is controversial. They are employees of U.S. government contractors and subcontractors, private military contractors, U.S. Department of Defense, etc. The contractors come from many nations including Iraq and the U.S.

A July 4, 2007, Los Angeles Times article reports:

"More than 180,000 civilians — including Americans, foreigners and Iraqis — are working in Iraq under U.S. contracts, according to State and Defense department figures obtained by the Los Angeles Times. ...

"The numbers include at least 21,000 Americans, 43,000 foreign contractors and about 118,000 Iraqis — all employed in Iraq by U.S. tax dollars, according to the most recent government data."[57]

A July 3, 2007, Reuters article reports:

"The department said it had recorded 990 deaths — 917 in Iraq and 73 in Afghanistan — by the end of March. Since then, according to incident logs tallied by Reuters in Baghdad and Kabul, at least 16 contractors have died in Iraq and two in Afghanistan. ...

"The Labor Department's statistics put the number of wounded in Iraq between March 1, 2003 and March 31, 2007 as 10,569. The corresponding figure for Afghanistan, from September 2001 to March 2007, is 2,428. ...

"Joseph McDermott, the Assistant Inspector General for Iraq, quoted Labor Department statistics as saying that of 900-plus contractors killed by the end of April, 224 were U.S. citizens."[50]

From a New York Times article published May 19, 2007:

"At least 146 contract workers were killed in Iraq in the first three months of the year, by far the highest number for any quarter since the war began in March 2003, according to the Labor Department, which processes death and injury claims for those working as United States government contractors in Iraq.[55]

The April 30, 2007, quarterly report to Congress of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction states:

"Since Iraq reconstruction began, 916 death claims for civilian contractors working on U.S.-funded projects in Iraq have been filed. In the quarter ending March 31, 2007, the Department of Labor reported 146 new death claims. DoS reports that 16 U.S. civilians died in Iraq this quarter. Since the beginning of the U.S. reconstruction effort, 224 U.S. civilians have died in Iraq."[52][53][54]

A February 23, 2007, Associated Press article reports that there are 120,000 contractors. It states that through the end of 2006 there have been 769 deaths and "3,367 injuries serious enough to require four or more days off the job."[138]

A January 28, 2007, Houston Chronicle article[139] reports that the Pentagon estimates around 100,000 contractors are currently in Iraq, and that the Pentagon does not track contractor deaths. The article reports: "Halliburton's KBR is the largest military contractor operating in Iraq, with more than 50,000 employees and subcontractors working there, as well as in Kuwait and Afghanistan."

The article reports from Labor Department information that more than 770 civilian contractors of U.S.-based companies in Iraq died between March 2003 and December 31, 2006. 7,761 have been injured in Iraq. "How many of these civilian-contractor casualties were American citizens is unknown. Labor officials say they cannot provide a breakdown by nationality."

The article also reports:

The Labor Department has these numbers because it tracks workers' compensation claims by injured workers or families of slain contractors under the federal Defense Base Act. "Using employee time lost is a kind of a weird way to track casualties", Singer noted. "But it's part of the bizarre nature of this industry and the way it's been used in Iraq." Still, the Labor Department figures don't tell the full story.

An October 10, 2006, Reuters article[140] reports, "Their number in Iraq is estimated at up to 100,000, from highly-trained former special forces soldiers to drivers, cooks, mechanics, plumbers, translators, electricians and laundry workers and other support personnel."

An April 2, 2004, Boston Globe article[141] reports: "Just how much the growing security burden in Iraq is costing US taxpayers is hard to gauge because few reconstruction contracts are made public and there is no official estimate of how many security specialists are active there. Analysts estimate that corporations have some 30,000 to 40,000 workers in Iraq"

Concerning the number of security-related contractors an April 19, 2004, New York Times article[142] states: "But more and more, they give the appearance of private, for-profit militias — by several estimates, a force of roughly 20,000 on top of an American military presence of 130,000.

That article also reports: "Sorting out lines of authority and communication can be complex. Many security guards are hired as 'independent contractors' by companies that, in turn, are sub-contractors of larger security companies, which are themselves subcontractors of a prime contractor, which may have been hired by a United States agency."

An April 13, 2004, Robert Fisk article[143] reports: "At least 18 000 mercenaries, many of them tasked to protect US troops and personnel, are now believed to be in Iraq."

The article reported: "At least 80 foreign mercenaries — security guards recruited from the United States, Europe and South Africa and working for American companies — have been killed in the past eight days in Iraq." The article noted that this was more than the roughly 70 coalition troops who were killed in the same period.
Iraqi healthcare deterioration

A November 11, 2006, Los Angeles Times article[144] reports:

The [Iraq] nation's health has deteriorated to a level not seen since the 1950s, said Joseph Chamie, former director of the U.N. Population Division and an Iraq specialist. "They were at the forefront", he said, referring to healthcare just before the 1991 Persian Gulf War. "Now they're looking more and more like a country in sub-Saharan Africa."

A November 9, 2006, International Herald Tribune article reported what Iraq's Health Minister, Ali al-Shemari, said about the issue:

Al-Shemari said Iraq needed at least 10 years to rebuild its infrastructure, and that the medical situation in the country was "gloomy." There was a shortage of medical supplies, which sometimes took months to reach the country from abroad, while roadblocks prevented people from getting to hospitals, he said. No hospital has been built in Iraq since 1983, and the country's 15,000 available hospital beds were well short of the 80,000 beds needed. The minister also noted that many doctors had left the country. "We need help from anybody", Al-Shemari said.[31]

Most Iraqi children suffering from psychological symptoms

Seventy percent of children are suffering from trauma-related symptoms according to a study of 10,000 primary school students in the Sha'ab section of north Baghdad, conducted by the Iraqi Society of Psychiatrists and the World Health Organization. "We're now finding an elevation of mental health disorders in children – emotional, conduct, peer, attention deficit", according to Iraqi psychiatrist Hashimi. "A number are even resulting in suicide."[145]

Total Iraqi casualties
Unbalanced scales.svg

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (September 2010)

Estimates of the total number of Iraqi war-related deaths are highly disputed. National Public Radio has a bar chart with various estimates.[8] Project Censored has named the "corporate media blackout" of the number of Iraqi deaths caused by U.S. occupation (which it estimates at over one million) as the number-one censored story for 2009.[9] In December 2007, the Iraqi government reported that there were five million orphans in Iraq — almost half of the country's children.[74]
Various estimates

In December 2005 President Bush said there were 30,000 Iraqi dead. White House spokesman Scott McClellan later said it was "not an official government estimate", and was based on media reports.[146][147]

The United Nations reported that 34,452 violent civilian deaths occurred in 2006, based on data from morgues, hospitals, and municipal authorities across Iraq.[27]

For 2006, a January 2, 2007, Associated Press article reports: "The tabulation by the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defence and Interior, showed that 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers had been killed in the violence that raged across the country last year. The Associated Press figure, gleaned from daily news reports from Baghdad, arrived at a total of 13,738 deaths."[148] The Australian reports in a January 2, 2007, article: "A figure of 3700 civilian deaths in October '[2006]', the latest tally given by the UN based on data from the Health Ministry and the Baghdad morgue, was branded exaggerated by the Iraqi Government."[149] Iraqi government estimates include "people killed in bombings and shootings but not deaths classed as 'criminal'." Also, they "include no deaths among the many civilians wounded in attacks who may die later from wounds. Nor do they include many people kidnapped whose fate remains unknown."[149]

A June 25, 2006, Los Angeles Times article, "War's Iraqi Death Toll Tops 50,000",[150] reported that their estimate of violent deaths consisted "mostly of civilians" but probably also included security forces and insurgents. It added that, "Many more Iraqis are believed to have been killed but not counted because of serious lapses in recording deaths in the chaotic first year after the invasion, when there was no functioning Iraqi government, and continued spotty reporting nationwide since." Here is how the Times got its number: "The Baghdad morgue received 30,204 bodies from 2003 through mid-2006, while the Health Ministry said it had documented 18,933 deaths from 'military clashes' and 'terrorist attacks' from April 5, 2004, to June 1, 2006. Together, the toll reaches 49,137. However, samples obtained from local health departments in other provinces show an undercount that brings the total well beyond 50,000. The figure also does not include deaths outside Baghdad in the first year of the invasion."

Iraq Body Count

The Iraq Body Count (IBC) project has recorded the numbers of civilians killed in violence since the 2003 invasion of Iraq based on a "comprehensive survey of commercial media and NGO-based reports, along with official records that have been released into the public sphere. Reports range from specific, incident based accounts to figures from hospitals, morgues, and other documentary data-gathering agencies." Current IBC figures, to December 2010, place the number of civilians killed at 99,151–108,234. The IBC was also given access to the WikiLeaks disclosures of the Iraq War Logs and has estimated that these documents show the total number of Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion to be over 150,000, with about 80% being civilian.[151][113]

Iraq Living Conditions Survey

A study commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), called the Iraq Living Conditions Survey (ILCS), sampled almost 22,000 households across all Iraqi provinces. It estimated 24,000 war-related violent deaths by May 2004 (with a 95 percent confidence interval from 18,000 to 29,000). This study did not attempt to measure what portion of its estimate was made up of civilians or combatants. It would include Iraqi military killed during the invasion, as well as "insurgents" or other fighters thereafter.[152] This study has been criticized for various reasons. For more info see the section in Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties that compares the Lancet and UNDP ILCS studies.
Iraqiyun estimate

In the introduction of the report for the 2006 Lancet survey are listed some previous death estimates. One was the Iraqiyun estimate: "An Iraqi non-governmental organisation, Iraqiyun, estimated 128,000 deaths from the time of the invasion until July, 2005, by use of various sources, including household interviews." The reference listed in the Lancet report: "NGO Coordination Committee in Iraq. Iraq emergency situation, final report. Baghdad: NGO Coordination Committee in Iraq, 2006."[28] A July 2005 United Press International (UPI) article said the number came from the chairman of the Iraqiyun humanitarian organization in Baghdad, Dr. Hatim al-'Alwani. He said 55 percent of those killed were women, and children aged 12 and under. The UPI article reported: "Iraqiyun obtained data from relatives and families of the deceased, as well as from Iraqi hospitals in all the country's provinces. The 128,000 figure only includes those whose relatives have been informed of their deaths and does not include those were abducted, assassinated or simply disappeared."[153] A 2010 book by Nicolas Davies reported the Iraqiyun estimate, and that Iraqiyun was affiliated with the political party of Interim President Ghazi Al-Yawer. Davies wrote: "The report specified that it included only confirmed deaths reported to relatives, omitting significant numbers of people who had simply disappeared without trace amid the violence and chaos."[154][155] A peer reviewed article by Professor Michael Spagat notes that "a single UPI article is the sole basis for the claim that a survey was done," and that no official report on this survey has ever surfaced. The paper also notes that the UPI article is repeating claims made in a report by Mafkarat al-Islam, or Islam Memo, a source that has been referred to by Middle East historian Juan Cole as "the radical Sunni Arab newspaper", and which a US State Department report has described as "perhaps the most unreliable source of 'news' on the internet", describing how it repeatedly reported that large numbers of US toops had been killed when few or none had been killed.[156]
The Associated Press and Health Ministry. More information

The Associated Press reported that the Health Ministry of the Iraqi government had recorded 87,215 violent deaths of Iraqi citizens since the beginning of 2005. The data was in the form of a list of yearly totals for death certificates issued for violent deaths by hospitals and morgues between January 1, 2005, and February 28, 2009. The number excludes thousands of people who are missing and civilians who were buried in the chaos of war without official notice. If included, those would raise the number of dead for that period by 10 to 20 percent according to the government official who provided the data to The Associated Press.[13]

The Associated Press used this data to estimate that more than 110,600 Iraqis had been killed since the start of the war to April 2009. This number is derived by combining the Health Ministry tally of 87,215 with counts of casualties for 2003–2004, and after March 1, 2009, from hospital sources and media reports, citing Iraq Body Count as its main source for this data. The AP article stated that it had "reviewed the Iraq Body Count analysis and confirmed its conclusions by sifting the data and consulting experts. The AP also interviewed experts involved with previous studies, prominent Iraq analysts and provincial and medical officials to determine that the new tally was credible."

The AP also reported: "Experts said the count constitutes an important baseline, albeit an incomplete one. Richard Brennan, who has done mortality research in Congo and Kosovo, said it is likely a 'gross underestimate' because many deaths go unrecorded in war zones. The Iraqi Body Count numbers are likely even more incomplete, given that many killings occurred in incidents journalists were unaware of or in inaccessible areas. Mass graves have been turning up as improved security allows patrols in formerly off-limits areas, but how many remain will never be known."[13]
Iraq Family Health Survey

The Iraq Family Health Survey published in the New England Journal of Medicine surveyed 9,345 households across Iraq and was carried out in 2006 and 2007. It estimated 151,000 deaths due to violence (95% uncertainty range, 104,000 to 223,000) from March 2003 through June 2006.

The study was done by the "Iraq Family Health Survey Study Group", a collaborative effort of six organizations: the Federal Ministry of Health, Baghdad; Kurdistan Ministry of Planning, Erbil; Kurdistan Ministry of Health, Erbil; Central Organization for Statistics and Information Technology, Baghdad; World Health Organization Iraq office, Amman, Jordan; World Health Organization, Geneva.
Opinion Research Business survey of Iraqi war deaths in August 2007

A September 14, 2007, estimate by Opinion Research Business (ORB), an independent British polling agency, suggests that the total Iraqi violent death toll due to the Iraq War since the U.S.-led invasion is in excess of 1.2 million (1,220,580). Although higher than the 2006 Lancet estimate through June 2006, these results, which were based on a survey of 1,499 adults in Iraq from August 12–19, 2007, are more or less consistent with the figures that were published in the Lancet study.[23][24][25][26]

On January 28, 2008, ORB published an update based on additional work carried out in rural areas of Iraq. Some 600 additional interviews were undertaken and as a result of this the death estimate was revised to 1,033,000 with a given range of 946,000 to 1,120,000.[22][157]

Participants of the ORB survey were asked the following question:

"How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003 (ie as a result of violence rather than a natural death such as old age)? Please note that I mean those who were actually living under your roof."

The revised results[157] were
Number of deaths

in household
Percent

of responders
None 72%
One 14%
Two 3%
Three 1%
Four or more "more than zero but less than 0.5%"
Don't know 2%
No answer 8%

This ORB estimate has been strongly criticised as exaggerated and ill-founded in peer reviewed literature[158]
D3 Systems poll in early 2007

From February 25 to March 5, 2007, D3 Systems [36] conducted a poll for the BBC, ABC News, ARD and USA Today.[159][160][161][162][163][164]

ABC News reported: "One in six says someone in their own household has been harmed. ... 53 percent of Iraqis say a close friend or immediate family member has been hurt in the current violence. That ranges from three in 10 in the Kurdish provinces to, in Baghdad, nearly eight in 10."[160]

The methodology was described thus: "This poll for ABC News, USA Today, the BBC and ARD was conducted February 25–March 5, 2007, through in-person interviews with a random national sample of 2,212 Iraqi adults, including oversamples in Anbar province, Basra city, Kirkuk and the Sadr City section of Baghdad. The results have a 2.5-point error margin. Field work by D3 Systems of Vienna, Virginia, and KA Research Ltd. of Istanbul."[160][162][165]

There was a field staff of 150 Iraqis in all. That included 103 interviewers, interviewing selected respondents at 458 locales across the country.[162] "This poll asked about nine kinds of violence (car bombs, snipers or crossfire, kidnappings, fighting among opposing groups or abuse of civilians by various armed forces)."[162]

Question 35 asked:

"Have you or an immediate family member - by which I mean someone living in this household – been physically harmed by the violence that is occurring in the country at this time?"

Here are the results[162] in percentages:
Groups Yes No No opinion
All 17 83 0
Sunni 21 79 0
Shiite 17 83 0
Kurdish 7 93 0

17% of respondents reported that at least one member of the household had been "physically harmed by the violence that is occurring in the country at this time." The survey did not ask whether multiple household members had been harmed.
Iraq Health Minister estimate in November 2006

In early November 2006 Iraq's Health Minister Ali al-Shemari said that he estimated between 100,000 and 150,000 people had been killed since the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion.[31][32][166][167] The Taipei Times reported on his methodology: "Al-Shemari said on Thursday [, November 9, 2006,] that he based his figure on an estimate of 100 bodies per day brought to morgues and hospitals – though such a calculation would come out closer to 130,000 in total."[32] The Washington Post reported: "As al-Shemari issued the startling new estimate, the head of the Baghdad central morgue said Thursday he was receiving as many as 60 violent death victims each day at his facility alone. Dr. Abdul-Razzaq al-Obaidi said those deaths did not include victims of violence whose bodies were taken to the city's many hospital morgues or those who were removed from attack scenes by relatives and quickly buried according to Muslim custom."[167]

From a November 9, 2006, International Herald Tribune article:[31]

"Each day we lost 100 persons, that means per month 3,000, per year it's 36,000, plus or minus 10 percent", al-Shemari said. "So by three years, 120,000, half year 20,000, that means 140,000, plus or minus 10 percent", he said, explaining how he came to the figures. "This includes all Iraqis killed — police, ordinary people, children", he said, adding that people who were kidnapped and later found dead were also included in his estimate. He said the figures were compiled by counting bodies brought to "forensic institutes" or hospitals.

From a November 11, 2006, Taipei Times article:[32]

An official with the ministry also confirmed the figure yesterday [November 10, 2006], but later said that the estimated deaths ranged between 100,000 and 150,000. "The minister was misquoted. He said between 100,000-150,000 people were killed in three-and-a-half years", the official said.

2006 Excess Mortality Study
Main article: Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties

The October 2006 Lancet study[28][29] estimated total excess deaths up to July 2006. Total deaths (civilian and non-civilian) include all additional deaths due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer healthcare, etc.. The survey estimated 654,965 excess deaths related to the war. The 2006 study involved surveys between May 20 and July 10, 2006. More households were surveyed than during the 2004 study, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths. The result was disputed by President Bush, epidemiologists, demographers, the Iraq Body Count, and many others, based both on the number of deaths and the alleged methodology.[168]

Although the British Government initially tried to dispute the accuracy of the Lancet survey, the U.K. Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser wrote in an email on the day of publication that the survey's methods were "close to best practice" and the study design was "robust".[169] An October 12, 2006, San Francisco Chronicle article[170] reported: "Asked at the news conference what he thinks the number is now, Bush said: 'I stand by the figure a lot of innocent people have lost their life.' At a separate Pentagon briefing, Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said that the [Lancet] figure 'seems way, way beyond any number that I have seen. I've not seen a number higher than 50,000. And so I don't give it that much credibility at all'."
2004 Excess Mortality Study
Main article: Lancet surveys of Iraq War casualties

The October 2004 Lancet study[171] done by public health experts from Johns Hopkins University and published on October 29, 2004, in The Lancet medical journal, estimated that 100,000 "excess" Iraqi deaths from all causes had occurred since the U.S. invasion began. The study did not attempt to measure how many of these were civilian, but the study's authors have said they believe that the "vast majority" were non-combatants, based on 7% of the casualties being women and 46% being children under the age of 15 (including Falluja data). To arrive at these excess death figures, a survey was taken from 988 Iraqi households in 33 clusters throughout Iraq, in which the residents were asked how many people lived there and how many births and deaths there had been since the war began. They then compared the death rate with the average from the 15 months before the war. Iraqis were found to be 1.5 times more likely to die from all causes after the invasion (rising from 0.5% to 0.79% per year) than in the 15 months preceding the war, producing an estimate of 98,000 excess deaths. This figure excluded data from one cluster in Falluja, which was deemed too much of an outlier for inclusion in the national estimate. If it included data from Falluja, which showed a higher rate of violent deaths than the other 32 clusters combined, the increased death rate would be raised from 1.5 to 2.5 fold, violent deaths would be 58 times more likely with most of them due to air-strikes by coalition forces, and an additional 200,000 fatalities would be estimated.[172]

The study contains the following Summary:[clarification needed]

Background: In March, 2003, military forces, mainly from the USA and the UK, invaded Iraq. We did a survey to compare mortality during the period of 14.6 months before the invasion with the 17.8 months after it.

Methods: A cluster sample survey was undertaken throughout Iraq during September, 2004. 33 clusters of 30 households each were interviewed about household composition, births, and deaths since January, 2002. In those households reporting deaths, the date, cause, and circumstances of violent deaths were recorded. We assessed the relative risk of death associated with the 2003 invasion and occupation by comparing mortality in the 17.8 months after the invasion with the 14.6-month period preceding it.

Findings: The risk of death was estimated to be 2.5-fold (95% CI 1.6-4.2) higher after the invasion when compared with the preinvasion period. Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in one cluster in the city of Falluja. If we exclude the Falluja data, the risk of death is 1.5-fold (1.1-2.3) higher after the invasion. We estimate that 98,000 more deaths than expected (8000-194,000) happened after the invasion outside of Falluja and far more if the outlier Falluja cluster is included. The major causes of death before the invasion were myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and other chronic disorders whereas after the invasion violence was the primary cause of death. Violent deaths were widespread, reported in 15 of 33 clusters, and were mainly attributed to coalition forces. Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were men. The risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher (95% CI 8.1-419) than in the period before the war.

Interpretation: Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,

Coalition casualties in Afghanistan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Casualties of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan" redirects here. For civilian casualties, see Civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present).
Coalition fatalities per month since the start of the war.[1]

Coalition deaths in Afghanistan by country

USA: 1,939*
UK: 425
Canada: 158*
France: 88
Germany: 56
Italy: 50
Denmark: 42
Poland: 37
Spain: 34*
Australia: 33
Netherlands: 25
Romania: 20
Georgia: 17
Turkey: 14
Norway: 10
Estonia: 9
New Zealand: 7
Hungary: 7
Sweden: 5
Czech Republic: 5
Latvia: 3
Finland: 2
Jordan: 2
Portugal: 2
South Korea: 2
Albania: 1
Belgium: 1
Lithuania: 1

TOTAL: 2,990

As of 5 August 2012, there have been 2,997 coalition deaths in Afghanistan as part of ongoing coalition operations (Operation Enduring Freedom and ISAF) since the invasion in 2001.[1] In this total, the American figure is for deaths "In and Around Afghanistan" which, as defined by the United States Department of Defense, includes some deaths in Pakistan and Uzbekistan[2] and the deaths of 12 CIA operatives.[3]

In addition to these deaths in Afghanistan, another 33 U.S. and one Canadian soldier were killed in other countries while supporting operations in Afghanistan. The total also omits the 62 Spanish soldiers returning from Afghanistan who died in Turkey on May 26, 2003, when their plane crashed.

During the first five years of the war, the vast majority of coalition deaths were American, but between 2006 and 2011, a significant proportion were amongst other nations, particularly the United Kingdom and Canada which have been assigned responsibility for the flashpoint provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, respectively. This is because in 2006, ISAF expanded its jurisdiction to the southern regions of Afghanistan which were previously under the direct authority of the U.S. military. As Robert Gates pointed out on June 10, 2011, in his "last policy speech" as U.S. Secretary of Defense, "more than 850 troops from non-U.S. NATO members have made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan. For many allied nations these were the first military casualties they have taken since the end of the Second World War."[4] Additionally, there have been 63 fatalities among troops from the non-NATO contributors to the coalition (Australia, Georgia, Sweden, New Zealand, Finland, Jordan, South Korea and Albania).

With 711 Operation Enduring Freedom and ISAF deaths, 2010 was the deadliest year for foreign military troops since the U.S. invasion in 2001, continuing the trend that has occurred every year since 2003.[1]

In 2009, there were 7,228 improvised explosive device (IED) attacks in Afghanistan, a 120% increase over 2008, and a record for the war.[5][6] Of the 512 foreign soldiers killed in 2009, 448 were killed in action. 280 of those were killed by IEDs.[7] In 2010, IED attacks in Afghanistan wounded 3,366 U.S. soldiers, which is nearly 60% of the total IED-wounded since the start of the war.[8] Of the 711 foreign soldiers killed in 2010, 630 were killed in action. 368 of those were killed by IEDs, which is around 36% of the total IED-killed since the start of the war to date.[1] Insurgents planted 14,661 IEDs in 2010, a 62% increase over the previous year.[9]

The number so far for this year (as of 18 August 2012) is 293.[10]
Contents

1 Details regarding the fatalities
1.1 United States
1.2 Albania
1.3 Australian
1.4 British
1.5 Canadian
1.6 Danish
1.7 Dutch
1.8 Estonian
1.9 French
1.10 Georgian
1.11 German
1.12 Hungarian
1.13 Italian
1.14 Jordanian
1.15 New Zealand
1.16 Norwegian
1.17 Polish
1.18 Romanian
1.19 Swedish
1.20 Spanish
1.21 South Korean
1.22 Turkish
2 Out-of-country deaths related to the war
3 See also
4 Notes
5 External links

Details regarding the fatalities
United States
Main article: United States Forces casualties in the war in Afghanistan

Of the United States deaths, more than 1,580 have died in hostile action. Included in these numbers are 12 CIA operatives that were killed in Afghanistan: seven in a suicide bomb attack on a military base, two in an ambush, one in a shooting attack at the U.S. embassy in Kabul, one in a prison uprising in November 2001, and one in an accident.[3] The independent website iCasualties has put the number of U.S. deaths at 1,939.[11] This number is by six higher than the Department of Defense's tally which is 1,933, when including the intelligence operatives.[12]

As of July 2, 2012, 16,854 United States soldiers have been wounded in action in Afghanistan.[12] Also, one U.S. soldier is currently being held as a prisoner of war since July 1, 2009.[13]

Although veterans have a high rate of suicide compared to the general population, the Department of Veterans Affairs does not classify suicides as war-related casualties but the number is very high, up to the first month of 2012 are up to 50,000 or more.[14]
Albania

There has been one recorded fatality among Albanian troops. Captain Feti Vogli was killed in Herat in February 2012.[15]

Australian

The reparation ceremony for Australian Private Gregory Michael Sher, killed in southern Afghanistan in 2009, making him the first Australian Defense Force soldier to be killed by indirect fire since 1992.
Main article: Operation Slipper

The Australian forces in Afghanistan have suffered 33 fatalities. 228 soldiers have been wounded.[16]

British

Main article: British Forces casualties in Afghanistan since 2001

As of August 18, 2012, the British forces have suffered 425 fatalities and 1,875 wounded in action, another 3,759 have suffered from disease or non-battle injuries. Of these, 385 soldiers were killed as a result of hostile action, while 40 are known to have died either as a result of illness, non-combat injuries or accidents, or have not yet officially been assigned a cause of death pending the outcome of an investigation.[17][18] The vast majority of fatalities have taken place since the redeployment of British forces to the Taliban stronghold of Helmand province in 2006, as only five men died between April 2002 and early March 2006.

Canadian

Main article: Canadian Forces casualties in Afghanistan

Canada's role in Afghanistan, consisting of operations against the Taliban and other insurgents in southern Afghanistan (Kandahar Province), has resulted in the largest number of fatal casualties for any single Canadian military mission since the Korean War. A total of 157* members of the Canadian Forces have died in Afghanistan between February 2002 and October 29, 2011. Of these, 132 were due to enemy actions, including 97 due to IEDs or landmines, 22 due to RPG, small arms or mortar fire, and 13 due to suicide bomb attacks. Another six Canadian soldiers died due to friendly fire while conducting combat operations. An additional 19 Canadian soldiers have died in Afghanistan as a result of accidents or non-combat circumstances; 6 in vehicle accidents, 3 unspecified non-combat-related deaths, 3 suicide deaths, 2 in a helicopter crash, 2 from accidental falls, 2 from accidental gunshots and 1 death from an illness.[19][20] 635 soldiers had been wounded in action and 1,412 received non-battle injuries since April 2002, up to their withdrawal in December 2011.[21]

In addition to these troop deaths in Afghanistan, 1 Canadian soldier was found dead of non-combat-related causes at Camp Mirage, a forward logistics base in the United Arab Emirates near Dubai.

Danish

Denmark, a NATO member, has about 750 troops in Afghanistan, mostly stationed in Helmand province as part of NATO's International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF).

Denmark is the country in ISAF that has had the largest number of casualties compared to the country's population. Out of all the countries, Denmark is also the nation which has the largest percentage of its soldiers who have died. Also, Denmark is also among the nations with most troops deployed relative to size.[22]

Denmark's first three deaths were the result of an accident during the disposal of a Soviet-era anti-aircraft missile in 2002. With a new mandate issued by the Danish parliament in 2006, Danish military operations transformed from relatively safe non-combat operations in the centre of the country to combat operations alongside the British contingent in the violent southern Helmand province. 36 soldiers have been killed in various hostile engagements or as a result of friendly fire, and 6 have been killed in non-combat related incidents, bringing the number of Danish fatalities to 42.[23][24] More than 100 soldiers have been wounded in action.[25]

Dutch

A total of 25 Dutch servicemen were killed in Afghanistan.[26] The first two Dutch fatalities were soldiers killed in an accidental helicopter crash in 2006. Since then, one pilot died in a non-hostile F-16 crash, and one soldier committed suicide at Kamp Holland. In 2007, one soldier was accidentally killed when a Patria armoured vehicle overturned at a river crossing near Tarin Kowt in Uruzgan. After that 19 soldiers were killed in action between 2007 and 2010. Finally, the last soldier to die was from an illness a month before the contingent withdrew from the country in December 2010. 140 soldiers were wounded in action.[27]

Estonian

Nine Estonian soldiers have died in Afghanistan: eight have been killed in action and one in an accident. Over 60 soldiers have been wounded in action.[28]

French
Main article: French forces in Afghanistan

A total of 88 French soldiers have died thus far.[29] 70 soldiers have been killed in action, of the 18 others: seven have died in vehicle accidents, one in a helicopter crash, two committed suicide, two have drowned, one was killed by a lightning strike, two died from a non-hostile gunshot wound, one died by friendly fire, one died in an accidental explosion, and one died of unknown causes.

Main article: Uzbin Valley ambush

The largest number of soldiers killed was when French troops were ambushed in the area of Sirobi, some 50 km (31 mi) east of Kabul, in August 2008. Ten French troops were killed and a further 21 wounded in the attack - the heaviest loss of troops France has suffered since deploying to Afghanistan in 2001.

Georgian

The U.S. President Barack Obama visits the wounded Georgian LTC Alex Tugushi at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in March 2012

Georgia has thus far suffered 16 deaths and 38 injured.[30][31] The first Georgian fatality occurred on September 5, 2010, when 28 years old colonel Mukhran Shukvani was killed in an IED attack. Corporal Alexandre Gitolendia was also seriously wounded in the attack, bringing Georgian casualties to 1 KIA and 1 WIA.[32] Four more Georgian soldiers were killed by a landmine during combat operations on October 1, 2010, in Helmland.[33] On February 21, 2011 Georgia lost another soldier, George Avaliani, while two others were wounded.[34] On March 14, 2011, one of the two injured died in a hospital in Germany and on May 27, 2011 another soldier died. On June 21 a ninth Georgian soldier died of injuries sustained during an attack.[35][36][37] On August 31, 2011, junior sergeant Rezo Beridze was killed by sniper fire during a patrol mission,[38] Corporal Besik Naniashvili died on December 30, 2011,[39] January 6, 2012 Corporal Shalva Pailodze got killed,[40] on February 22, 2012 Georgian Ministry of Defence announced death of Corporals - Beraia Valiko, Meladze Ruslan and Kacharava Paata, their combat vehicle exploded following an insurgent attack.[41] Sergeant Valerian Khujadze exploded on an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) and died from the injuries.[42] Corporal Givi Pantsuala, wounded in January 2012 succumbed to his wounds at a hospital in Gori, Georgia on July 28, 2012, bringing the total number of the Georgian military death toll t0 17.[43]

German

Main article: German Armed Forces casualties in Afghanistan

A total of 53 German soldiers and 3 police officers were killed. 245 service personnel have been wounded in action.[44]
Hungarian

Seven Hungarians died in Afghanistan. Two EOD members were killed by IEDs. Two were killed in a convoy attack by the Taliban. Two died in a vehicle accident during a convoy-escort task. One died because of heart attack. Also, 14 Hungarian soldiers have been wounded in action.
Italian

A total of 50 Italians have died in Afghanistan: 32 killed in action, nine died in vehicle accidents, two of heart attacks, one due to an accidental weapon discharge, four of illness, one in an accidental airplane crash and one committed suicide. Of the 32 who died in combat, one had died from injuries sustained a week before. The soldier had been captured and was injured in the raid to rescue him. One other Italian soldier was captured but he was rescued safely.[45][46]

Jordanian

A member of the Jordanian spy agency Dairat al-Mukhabarat al-Ammah, was killed in the Forward Operating Base Chapman attack. Also, a Jordanian soldier was killed and three were wounded while escorting a humanitarian convoy in Logar province on May 22, 2011.[47]

New Zealand

Five New Zealand soldiers have been killed in Bamyan Province. Lieutenant Timothy O'Donnell was killed after his convoy was ambushed on a notorious stretch of road in the province. And Private Kirifi Mila when the Humvee he was in rolled down a 30-metre cliff. A member of the New Zealand SAS was killed in Kabul on August 18, 2011.[48] Another member of the New Zealand SAS was killed on 27 September 2011 in Wardak province.[citation needed] On the 3rd April Corporal Doug Hughes died in Bamiyan Province. On Sunday Aug 5 2012, Lance Corporals Rory Malone and Pralli Durrer, both 26 were killed in Bamyan Province in a fierce fight fire with insurgents. [49]

Norwegian

10 Norwegian soldiers have been killed in action in Afghanistan.[50] 830 soldiers have been wounded in action or injured in accidents, of which, 26 were considered as trauma cases.[51]

Polish

34 Polish soldiers (including a military civilian medic) have been killed in action, one died in a vehicle accident and two died due to a non-combat cause.[52][53] At least 100 soldiers have been wounded in action.[54]

Romanian

20 Romanian soldiers have been killed in action in Afghanistan, seven of them in Zabul province.[55][56][57] More than 55 soldiers have been wounded in action.[58]

Swedish

Five Swedish soldiers have been killed in action since 2005. Three in two separate IED incidents and two in a ambush by a ANP uniform wearing insurgent. Several local translators working with the Swedish PRT have been killed.

Spanish

Of the Spanish deaths, 17 died in August 2005 when the Eurocopter Cougar helicopter they were travelling in crashed, 12 were killed in separate attacks by insurgents, two died from natural causes, and two died in vehicle accidents. Another 62 died in a Yak-42 plane crash in Turkey on their way back to Spain from Afghanistan.[59]

South Korean

A South Korean officer was shot by a fellow officer for not following an order to speak quietly on the telephone.[60] Another South Korean soldier, Sergeant Yoon Jang-ho, was killed in a suicide bomb attack at Bagram Air Base.[61]

Turkish

The Turkish Army suffered its first deaths on July 14, 2009, when two soldiers were killed in a road traffic accident in Faryab province, between Mazar-i Sharif and Kabul. One of the two killed was the commander of the Turkish contingent of ISAF troops in Afghanistan.[62] On March 16, 2012, 12 Turkish soldiers were killed when their helicopter crashed into an house in Kabul.[63]

Out-of-country deaths related to the war

Coalition deaths in other countries as the result of the war

Spain: 62
USA: 33
Canada: 1

TOTAL: 96

In addition to the 1,939 American deaths in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Uzbekistan, another 33 U.S. soldiers died in: Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Germany, Turkey, the Arabian sea, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, while supporting operations in Afghanistan. Among them are also a Marine, a civilian DoD employee and two military airmen who were killed in action while supporting Operation Enduring Freedom.[1][12][64][65][66]

A Canadian soldier was found dead of non-combat-related causes at a forward logistics base in the United Arab Emirates near Dubai.

62 Spanish soldiers died in a Yak-42 plane crash in Turkey on their way back to Spain from Afghanistan.[59]

Civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The decade-long War in Afghanistan (2001–present) has caused the deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians directly from insurgent and foreign military action, as well as the deaths of possibly tens of thousands of Afghan civilians indirectly as a consequence of displacement, starvation, disease, exposure, lack of medical treatment, crime and lawlessness resulting from the war. The war, launched by the United States as "Operation Enduring Freedom" in 2001, began with an initial air campaign that almost immediately prompted concerns over the number of Afghan civilians being killed[1] as well as international protests. With civilian deaths from airstrikes rising again in recent years,[2] the number of Afghan civilians being killed by foreign military operations has led to mounting tension between the foreign countries and the government of Afghanistan. In May 2007, President Hamid Karzai summoned foreign military commanders to warn them of the consequences of further Afghan civilian deaths.[3] The civilian losses are a continuation of the extremely high civilian losses experienced during the Soviet Afghan war in the 1980s, and the three periods of civil war following it: 1989-1992, 1992-1996, and 1996-2001.

Estimates

There is no single official figure for the overall number of civilians killed by the war since 2001, but estimates for specific years or periods have been published by a number of independent organizations and are presented here.

Most, if not all, of the sources state that their estimates are likely to be underestimates.

Aggregation of estimates

Year Civilians killed as a result of insurgent actions Civilians killed as a result of U.S-led military actions Civilians killed as a result of the war
2001 n/a

The Project on Defense Alternatives estimated that in a 3-month period between October 7, 2001 and January 1, 2002, at least 1,000-1,300 civilians were directly killed by the U.S.-led aerial bombing campaign,[4] and that by mid-January 2002, at least 3,200 more Afghans had died of "starvation, exposure, associated illnesses, or injury sustained while in flight from war zones", as a result of the U.S. war and airstrikes.[5]

The Los Angeles Times found that in a 5-month period from October 7, 2001 to February 28, 2002, there were between 1,067 and 1,201 civilian deaths from the bombing campaign reported in U.S., British, and Pakistani newspapers and international wire services.[6]

A 2002 analysis by The Guardian estimated that as many as 20,000 Afghans died in 2001 as an indirect result of the initial U.S. airstrikes and ground invasion.[7]
Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated that in the 20-month period between October 7, 2001 and June 3, 2003, at least 3,100 to 3,600 civilians were directly killed by U.S.-led forces.[8]

2002 n/a
2003 n/a
2004 n/a n/a n/a
2005 n/a

Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated at least 408-478 Afghan civilians were directly killed by U.S./NATO actions.[9]

direct civilian deaths: at least 408 to 478
indirect civilian deaths: n/a

2006

Human Rights Watch estimated at least 699 Afghan civilians were killed by various insurgent forces in 2006.[10]

Human Rights Watch estimated at least 230 Afghan civilians were killed by US or NATO attacks in 2006: 116 by airstrikes and 114 by ground fire.[11]

Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated at least 653-769 Afghan civilians were directly killed by U.S./NATO actions.[9]

Human Rights Watch estimated at least 929 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict in 2006.[10] In all, they estimated more than 4,400 Afghans (civilians and militants) were killed in conflict-related violence in 2006, twice as many as in 2005.[12]

An Associated Press tally based on reports from NATO, coalition, and Afghan officials, estimated 4,000 Afghans (civilians and militants) were killed in 2006.[12]

Indirect civilian deaths: n/a

2007

The UN Assistance Mission Afghanistan (UNAMA) estimated that 700 Afghan civilians were killed by anti-government elements in 2007, accounting for 46% of the civilian casualties.[13][14]

Human Rights Watch estimated that at least 950 Afghan civilians were killed by various insurgent forces in 2007.[10]

Human Rights Watch estimated at least 434 Afghan civilians were killed by US or NATO attacks in 2007: 321 by airstrikes and 113 by ground fire. Another 57 civilians were killed in crossfire, and 192 died under unclear circumstances.[11]

The UN Assistance Mission Afghanistan (UNAMA) estimated that 629 Afghan civilians were killed by international and Afghan forces in 2007, accounting for 41% of the civilian casualties.[13][14]

Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated at least 1,010-1,297 Afghan civilians were directly killed by U.S./NATO actions.[9]

The UN Assistance Mission Afghanistan (UNAMA) estimated that 1,523 Afghan civilians died as a direct result of armed conflict in 2007.[13][15]

Human Rights Watch estimated at least 1,633 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict in 2007.[10]

Indirect civilian deaths: n/a

2008

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) estimated that around 1,000 civilians were killed by militant groups in 2008.[16]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported that 1,160 Afghan civilians were killed by anti-government forces in 2008, accounting for 55% of the civilian deaths.[17][18]

The Afghanistan Rights Monitor(ARM) estimated that over 2,300 civilians were killed by insurgents in 2008, including 930 in suicide bombings.[16][19]

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) estimated that around 800 civilians were killed by U.S.-led military forces in 2008.[16]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported that 828 Afghan civilians had been killed by international-led military forces in 2008, accounting for 39% of the civilian deaths. Air-strikes accounted for the largest proportion of this number, 64%, with 552 civilians killed as a result of U.S./NATO airstrikes.[17][18]

According to Afghanistan's ambassador to Australia, Amanullah Jayhoon, 1,000 Afghan civilians were killed by coalition forces in 2008.[20]

The Afghanistan Rights Monitor(ARM) estimated that over 1,620 civilians were killed by U.S.-led military forces in 2008, including 680 killed in airstrikes. ARM also estimated that military operations by US-led NATO and coalition forces caused at least 2,800 injuries and displaced 80,000 people from their homes.[16][19]

Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated at least 864-1,017 Afghan civilians were directly killed by U.S./NATO foreign forces in 2008.[21]

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) estimated that around 1,800 civilians were killed as a result of the armed hostilities in 2008.[16]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported that 2,118 Afghan civilians wered killed as a direct result of armed conflict in 2008, the highest number since the end of the initial 2001 invasion.[15][17][18][22]

The Afghanistan Rights Monitor (ARM) estimated that in 2008 around 3,917 civilians were killed, over 6,800 were wounded, and around 120,000 were forced out of their homes.[16][19]

Indirect civilian deaths: n/a

2009

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) attributed 1,630 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements in 2009, representing two-thirds of the 2,412 Afghan civilian deaths it recorded in the American-led war in 2009.[23][24]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) attributed 596 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by international-led military forces in 2009, representing about a quarter of the 2,412 Afghan civilian deaths it recorded as having been caused by the war in 2009.[23][24]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) recorded 2,412 Afghan civilian deaths in the American-led war in 2009, representing a jump of 14% over the number killed in 2008. In 186 (8%) of the deaths, UNAMA was unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side.[23][24]

Indirect civilian deaths: n/a

2010

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) attributed 2,080 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements in 2010, up 28% from 2009 and representing 74.9% of the 2,777 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the American-led war in 2010.[25][26]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) attributed 440 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by U.S.-led military forces in 2010, down 26% from 2009 and representing 15.9% of the 2,777 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the American-led war in 2010.[25][26]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) recorded 2,777 Afghan civilian deaths in the American-led war in 2010, a jump of 15% over the number killed in 2009. In 9% of the deaths, UNAMA and AIHRC were unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side.[25][26]

2011

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) attributed 1,167 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements in the first six months of 2011, up 28% from the same period in 2010 and representing 79.8% of the total 1,462 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the conflict during this period.[27]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) attributed 207 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by U.S.-led military forces in the first six months of 2011, down 9% from the same period in 2010 and representing 14.2% of the 1,462 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the conflict during this period.[27]

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) recorded 1,462 Afghan civilian deaths in the American-led war in the first six months of 2011, a jump of 15% over the number killed in the same period in 2010. In 6% of the deaths, UNAMA and AIHRC were unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side.[27]

*Note: In UNAMA/AIHRC methodology, whenever it remains uncertain whether a victim is a civilian after they have assessed the facts available to them, UNAMA/AIHRC does not count that victim as a possible civilian casualty. The number of such victims is not provided.[26]

Civilian casualties (2001-2003)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2001–2006)
Sketch showing the Afghan Taxi driver Dilawar who was tortured and killed while In U.S. custody in 2002.

According to Marc W. Herold's extensive database, Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing, between 3,100 and 3,600 civilians were directly killed by U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom bombing and Special Forces attacks between October 7, 2001 and June 3, 2003. This estimate counts only "impact deaths" – deaths that occurred in the immediate aftermath of an explosion or shooting – and does not count deaths that occurred later as a result of injuries sustained, or deaths that occurred as an indirect consequence of the U.S. airstrikes and invasion.

In an opinion article published in August 2002 in the neoconservative magazine The Weekly Standard, Joshua Muravchik of the American Enterprise Institute, a self-described neoconservative,[28] questioned Professor Herold's study entirely on the basis of one single incident that involved 25-93 deaths. He did not provide any estimate his own.[29]

In a pair of January 2002 studies, Carl Conetta of the Project on Defense Alternatives estimates that, at least 4,200-4,500 civilians were killed by mid-January 2002 as a result of the U.S. war and airstrikes, both directly as casualties of the aerial bombing campaign, and indirectly in the humanitarian crisis that the war and airstrikes contributed to.

His first study, "Operation Enduring Freedom: Why a Higher Rate of Civilian Bombing Casualties?", released January 18, 2002, estimates that, at the low end, at least 1,000-1,300 civilians were directly killed in the aerial bombing campaign in just the 3 months between October 7, 2001 to January 1, 2002. The author found it impossible to provide an upper-end estimate to direct civilian casualties from the Operation Enduring Freedom bombing campaign that he noted as having an increased use of cluster bombs.[30] In this lower-end estimate, only Western press sources were used for hard numbers, while heavy "reduction factors" were applied to Afghan government reports so that their estimates were reduced by as much as 75%.[31]

In his companion study, "Strange Victory: A critical appraisal of Operation Enduring Freedom and the Afghanistan war", released January 30, 2002, Conetta estimates that at least 3,200 more Afghans died by mid-January 2002, of "starvation, exposure, associated illnesses, or injury sustained while in flight from war zones", as a result of the U.S. war and airstrikes.

In similar numbers, a Los Angeles Times review of U.S., British, and Pakistani newspapers and international wire services found that between 1,067 and 1,201 direct civilian deaths were reported by those news organizations during the five months from October 7, 2001 to February 28, 2002. This review excluded all civilian deaths in Afghanistan that did not get reported by U.S., British, or Pakistani news, excluded 497 deaths that did get reported in U.S., British, and Pakistani news but that were not specifically identified as civilian or military, and excluded 754 civilian deaths that were reported by the Taliban but not independently confirmed.[32]

According to Jonathan Steele of The Guardian, up to 20,000 Afghans may have died as a consequence of the first four months of U.S. airstrikes on Afghanistan.[33]

Civilian and overall casualties (2005)

An estimated 1,700 people were killed in 2005 according to an Associated Press count, including civilians, insurgents and security forces members.[34][35] Some 600 policemen were killed between Hamid Karzai's election as president of Afghanistan in early December 2004 and mid-May 2005.[36]
Civilian and overall casualties (2006)

A report by Human Rights Watch said that 4,400 Afghans had been killed in 2006, more than 1,000 of them civilians. Some 2,077 militants were killed in Coalition operations between September 1 and December 13.[37]

An Associated Press tally based on reports from Afghan, NATO and coalition officials puts the overall death toll slightly lower, at about 4,000, most of them militants.[38]

More than 1,900 people were killed in the first eight months of the year by the end of August.[39]
Civilian and overall casualties (2007)

More than 7,700 people were killed in 2007, including: 1,019 Afghan policemen;[40] 4,478 militants;[41] 1,980 civilians[42] and 232 foreign soldiers.[43]

With by far the most comprehensive research into Afghan civilian casualties,[44] Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire estimated in September 2007 that between 5,700 and 6,500 Afghan civilians had been killed so far in the war by American and NATO military forces.[45] He stressed that this was an "absolute minimum" and probably "a vast underestimate" because the figures do not include:

the dead among the tens of thousands of Afghans displaced during the initial military operation in 2001-2002, who ended up in refugee camps or elsewhere with little or no supplies for long periods;

civilian victims of U.S./NATO bombing in mountainous areas, which have few or no communications links or which the U.S./NATO forces "cordon off as part of news management";

and civilians that did not die immediately at the scene but died later of their injuries.

Civilian and overall casualties (2008)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2008)

The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported that 2,118 civilians were killed as a result of armed conflict in Afghanistan in 2008, the highest civilian death toll since the end of the initial 2001 invasion. This represents an increase of about 40 percent over UNAMA's figure of 1,523 civilians killed in 2007.[15][17][18][22]

On the other hand, according to NATO forces only about 1,000 civilians were killed during the whole year.[46][47]

Going into further detail, UNAMA reported that out of 2,118 civilian deaths in 2008, 1,160 non-combatants were killed by anti-government forces, accounting for 55% of the 2008 total, while 828 were killed by international-led military forces, accounting for 39% of the 2008 total. The remaining 6% – 130 deaths – could not be attributed to any of the parties since some of them died as a result of crossfire or were killed by unexploded ordnance, for example. Of the civilians killed by anti-government elements, 85% died as a result of suicide or improvised explosive devices. Of the civilians killed by pro-government forces, 64% were killed by U.S./NATO airstrikes.[17][18] (Note: UNAMA's report includes in its count of civilian/non-combatant deaths any "members of the military who are not being utilized in counter insurgency operations, including when they are off-duty.")[17]

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) estimated the number of civilians killed as a result of the armed hostilities in 2008 at around 1,800, with about 1,000 killed by militant groups and about 800 killed by U.S.-led military forces.[16]

The Afghanistan Rights Monitor(ARM), a Kabul-based rights watchdog, estimated that in 2008 about 3,917 civilians were killed, over 6,800 were wounded, and around 120,000 were forced out of their homes. ARM estimated that insurgents killed over 2,300 civilians, including 930 in suicide bombings, and that U.S.-led military forces killed over 1,620 civilians, with 1,100 civilians killed by U.S.-led NATO and coalition forces and 520 civilians killed by Afghan military forces. Out of these, 680 Afghan civilians killed in air strikes by the US-led forces, with U.S. combat aircraft conducting at least 15,000 close air support missions over the year. Another 2,800 civilians were injured and 80,000 displaced from their homes by the U.S.-led NATO and coalition military operations.[16][19]

According to Afghanistan's ambassador to Australia, Amanullah Jayhoon, 1,000 Afghan civilians were killed by coalition forces in 2008.[20]

Meanwhile, NATO's International Security Assistance Force has said that only just over 200 civilians were mistakenly killed by foreign troops last year.[19]

According to NATO spokesman James Appathurai, 97 civilian deaths were caused by ISAF in 2008, while 987 civilian deaths were caused by militant groups. The number of civilian deaths caused by US-led military forces operating outside of ISAF was not mentioned in that statement.[47][48]

In October 2008, Professor Marc W. Herold of the University of New Hampshire reported that the number of civilians killed in direct action by U.S. and other NATO forces from 2005 up that point in 2008 was at least between 2,699 and 3,273. These figures represent underestimates of the number of Afghan civilians killed because civilians are sometimes labelled militants by the military and because these figures only include civilians that died immediately at the scene and not civilians that died later of their injuries.[44][49]

In 2008, 38 aid workers, almost all from NGO's, were killed, double the number from 2007, and 147 were abducted.[17][18]

According to the Afghanistan Rights Monitor(ARM) more than 1,100 Afghan police and 530 Afghan soldiers lost their lives in 2008.[19]

According to NATO forces, 5,000 militants were killed in 2008.[46]
Civilian and overall casualties (2009)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2009)
Victims of the Narang night raid that killed at least 10 Afghan civilians, including eight schoolchildren.

2009 was again the most lethal year for Afghan civilians in the American-led war since the fall of the Taliban government in late 2001. According to the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), 2,412 civilians were killed by the war in 2009, a jump of 14% over the number that lost their lives in 2008. An additional 3,566 Afghan civilians were wounded as a result of the war in 2009.[23][24]

Of these, UNAMA attributed two-thirds, or 1,630, of the deaths to the action of anti-government forces, around a quarter, 596, of the deaths to action by American-led military forces, and was not able to clearly attribute another 186 civilian deaths to any one side. Airstrikes continued to be the main cause of civilian deaths resulting from US-led military action, with 359 Afghan civilians killed by US/NATO airstrikes in 2009.[24]

In addition to a growing number of Afghan civilians being killed, Afghan populations caught in the eight-year war have also suffered from loss of livelihood, displacement, and the destruction of their homes, property, and personal assets.[24]

In its mid-year report, the UNAMA underlined that "if the non-combatant status of one or more victim(s) remains under significant doubt, such deaths are not included in the overall number of civilian casualties. Thus, there is a significant possibility that UNAMA is under-reporting civilian casualties."[50]

In September 2009, the U.N. reported that August had been the deadliest month of 2009 to date for Afghan civilians as a result of the August 20th election. The U.N. also reported that about 1,500 people were killed from the start of the year through August. The report stated: "August (was) the deadliest month since the beginning of 2009. ... These figures reflect an increasing trend in insecurity over recent months and in elections-related violence." UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) attributed 68% of the deaths to anti-government elements and 23% of the deaths to international-led military forces – most of them in airstrikes. In 9% of the civilian deaths, UNAMA was unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side of the parties in the conflict. The number of civilians killed represented an increase of 31% over the same period in 2008, when 1,145 civilians were killed.[51]

Civilian and overall casualties (2010)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2010)

2010 was again the deadliest year for Afghan civilians in the U.S.-led war since the fall of the Taliban government in late 2001, as insecurity and volatility continued to spread to the northern, eastern, and western regions of Afghanistan.[25][26]

According to the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), 2,777 Afghan civilians were killed in the U.S.-led war in 2010, a jump of 15% over the civilian toll in 2009.[25][26]

Of these, UNAMA/AIHRC attributed 2,080 civilian deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements, up 28% from 2009 and representing 74.9% of the 2,777 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded in the war in 2010. 1,141 or 55% of these deaths were caused by suicide attacks and improvised explosive devices (IEs).[25][26]

UNAMA/AIHRC attributed 440 of the Afghan civilian deaths in 2010 as having been caused by U.S.-led military forces, a reduction of 26% from 2009 and representing 15.9% of the 2,777 Afghan civilian deaths they recorded for 2010. Airstrikes caused 171, or 39% of these deaths.[25][26]

In 9% of the civilian deaths, UNAMA/AIHRC were unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side.[25][26]

In addition to the civilian deaths, a total of 4,343 civilians were documented by UNAMA/AIHRC to have been wounded in the war in 2010, a jump of 22% from 2009.[26]

Civilian and overall casualties (2011)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2011)

In the first half of 2011, the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan again brought yet higher numbers of civilian deaths as violence intensified and security spiralled downward. According to UNAMA/AIHRC figures, 1,462 Afghan civilians were killed in the first six months of 2011, another 15% jump over the same period in 2010.[27] UNAMA/AIHRC attributed 1,167 of those deaths as having been caused by anti-government elements, up 28% from the same period in 2010 and representing 79.8% of the civilian deaths.[27] UNAMA/AIHRC attributed 207 Afghan civilian deaths as having been caused by U.S.-led military forces, down 9% from the same period in 2010 and representing 14.2% of the civilian deaths.[27] In 6% of the civilian deaths, UNAMA and AIHRC were unable to clearly attribute the cause to any one side.[27]

For the whole year of 2011, the United Nations reported that the civilian death toll numbered 3,021, a record high. In addition, 4,507 Afghans were wounded.[52] According to other sources the actual number of civilian casualties may be five (5) times as large as the number that the UN gives.[53]

The use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) increased, with an average of 23 roadside bombs a day which were detonated, discovered, or defused.[52] Suicide attacks also became more complex and sophisticated, targeted killings intensified, ground fighting increased, and civilian deaths from airstrikes, particularly by Apache attack helicopters, also increased.[27]

Civilian and overall casualties (2012)
See also: List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2012)

Afghan protestation of civilian deaths caused by international forces
Afghan President Hamid Karzai's repeated pleas to the foreign military forces

Over the past seven years, the Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly pleaded with the foreign military forces in his country to stop killing so many Afghan civilians in their operations.[54][55][56][57][58][59]

In July 2002, following an American bombing raid in which Afghan officials say 44 people were killed, including many celebrating a wedding and many children, the Afghan president protested to the U.S. military authorities, and urged them to be more careful in their targeting to prevent any more civilian deaths. U.S. President George W. Bush offered his condolences.[60][61]

"We are not happy. We don't want any more Afghan civilian casualties."

"This must not occur again."

"I have asked that from now onwards everything should be closely co-ordinated between the Americans and the central authority of Afghanistan to make sure no such mishaps happen again and I have conveyed this to the Americans."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, July 2002[62][63]

(Senior Afghan officials were furious that it took five days before President Bush telephoned Mr. Karzai to offer sympathy and that Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defense Secretary, had expressed no remorse or apology.[62][63])

In May 2005, Afghan President Hamid Karzai expressed "concern" about the occurrence of civilian deaths by the international military forces in his country, and asked them to exercise "extreme caution" while acting in civilian areas.[64] He insisted that the Afghan government be able to veto U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, promised to correct "mistakes" made by US forces, especially intrusive searches of village homes by American troops, and called for the return of hundreds of Afghan nationals being held prisoner by the U.S. in Cuba at Guantanamo Bay.[65]

In September 2005, Afghan President Hamid Karzai questioned the continued use of airstrikes by the U.S.-led military forces in his country. He also asked that the United States stop raiding Afghan houses without authorization from the Afghan government. Both the airstrikes, which have caused many civilian casualties, and the house searches by foreign military troops have grown increasingly unpopular in Afghanistan. This was not the first time the Afghan president has complained about the American military presence. In May his request for some more authority over U.S. military operations in his own country was rejected by President Bush.[66][67]

"I don’t think there is a big need for military activity in Afghanistan anymore. The use of air power is something that may not be very effective now because we have moved forward."

"Similarly, going into the Afghan homes – searching Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government – is something that should stop now."

"No coalition forces should go into Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, September 2005[67]

In May 2006, Afghan President Hamid Karzai summoned the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, to demand an explanation in the deaths of at least 16 Afghan civilians during airstrikes at Taliban militants in the south.[68]

In December 2006, a tearful President Hamid Karzai lamented that Afghan children were being maimed and killed by NATO and U.S. bombs and by the terrorism brought on by the war. In a heartfelt speech that brought audience members to tears, Karzai said the cruelty imposed on his people "is too much" and that Afghanistan cannot stop "the coalition from killing our children."[69][70]

In May 2007, after heavy aerial bombing by the American military had recently killed 40 to 60 Afghan civilians,[71] including women and children, wounded about 50 more, and destroyed some 100 houses,[72] President Hamid Karzai summoned top foreign generals and diplomats to his palace to reiterate years of complaints over blameless deaths.[55][73] At a news conference afterward, he said that Afghan lives should be valued too, and the Afghan people could no longer tolerate such casualties:[72]

"Civilian deaths and arbitrary decisions to search people’s houses have reached an unacceptable level and Afghans cannot put up with it any longer."[74]

"Five years on, it is very difficult for us to continue accepting civilian casualties. It is becoming heavy for us; it is not understandable anymore."

"We are very sorry when the international coalition force and NATO soldiers lose their lives or are injured. It pains us. But Afghans are human beings, too."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, May 2, 2007[72]

In June 2007, after the deaths of more than 90 civilians in 10 days,[75] President Hamid Karzai accused ISAF and the US-led military coalition in his country of "extreme" and "disproportionate" use of force. In his protestations, the Afghan president said that the foreign military forces in his country had to start working in accordance with his government's wishes.[76][77]

"Afghan life is not cheap and it should not be treated as such."[75]

"Several times in the last year, the Afghan government tried to prevent civilian casualties, but our innocent people are becoming victims of careless operations of NATO and international forces."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, June 23, 2007[59][78]

On October 28, 2007, in an interview on 60 Minutes, Afghan President Hamid Karzai stated that he had explicitly asked U.S. President George W. Bush to roll back the use of airstrikes – which had killed more than 270 civilians in 17 air strikes to date in 2007 alone – in his country, saying that he had delivered the message privately to Bush using "clear words" in August.

"The Afghan people understand that mistakes are made. But five years on, six years on, definitely, very clearly, they cannot comprehend as to why there is still a need for air power."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, October 28, 2007[79]

In August 2008, President Hamid Karzai ordered a review of foreign troops in Afghanistan after his administration said 96 civilians were killed in an air raid by the U.S.-led coalition in western Herat. Already more than 500 civilians had been killed during operations by foreign and Afghan forces in 2008 according to the Afghan government and some aid groups.[80][81]

In September 2008, Afghan President Hamid Karzai protested the continued killing of innocent Afghan civilians by the foreign troops in his country when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly's annual gathering of world leaders in New York, and pointed out that it threatens the credibility that the current military situation is a partnership:[82]

"The continuation of civilian casualties can seriously undermine the legitimacy of fighting terrorism and the credibility of the Afghan people's partnership with the international community."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, September 24, 2008[83]

On November 5, 2008, Afghan President Hamid Karzai pleaded U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to put an end to civilian casualties in Afghanistan as villagers said U.S. warplanes bombed a wedding party, killing 37 people, including 23 children and 10 women. Karzai again demanded an immediate end of civilian-killing air strikes by U.S. warplanes, saying:[84]

"Our demand is that there will be no civilian casualties in Afghanistan. We cannot win the fight against terrorism with airstrikes."

"This is my first demand of the new president of the United States – to put an end to civilian casualties."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, November 5, 2008[84]

On December 18, 2008, Afghan President Hamid Karzai again spoke of asking the United States to cooperate with his government in their military operations in his country. In a speech, he said that in the previous month he had again asked that the U.S. military in his country cooperate with his government, sending the U.S. government a list of demands about troop conduct, but did not say if he had received any response back.[85]

"Part of that list was that they shouldn't, on their own, enter the houses of our people and bombard our villages and detain our people."

— Afghan President Hamid Karzai, December 18, 2008[58]

In April 2009, after American-led military forces killed 5 civilians, including two children and a nine-month-old baby, in a U.S. night raid in Khost province, Afghan President Hamid Karzai ordered his interior and defence ministries, the intelligence service and local government to investigate and present their findings to him. Those killed were the wife, brother, son, and daughter of an Afghan army colonel, as well as the unborn nine-month-old baby of his cousin's wife. Another daughter and his cousin's wife were wounded but survived. In a statement Karzai said that he had "for several years repeatedly asked the international military forces (to) carry out their counter-terrorism operations in ways that do not cause civilian casualties." He reiterated this demand and insisted that foreign forces adhere to a directive signed months ago to fully coordinate their operations with their Afghan counterparts and base them on accurate information.[86]

In March 2011, Karzai rejected American President Obama's and Gen. David Petraeus' apologies for U.S. helicopter gunners killing 9 Afghan boys ages 7–13 who were collecting firewood. "The apology is not enough," Karzai said. "Civilian casualties produced by the military operations of coalition forces are the cause of tension in relations between Afghanistan and the United States of America. The people of Afghanistan are fed up from these brutal incidents and apologies and condemnation cannot cure their pain." In response to the deaths of the boys, Petraeus ordered all field commanders and helicopter crews to again study their rules of engagement.[87][88] One source claims more than 200 civilians killed in military operations and insurgent attacks in "recent weeks".[89]

In May 2011, Karzai Karzai issued a "final warning" as more civilians were killed in NATO airstrikes. He said the Afghan people can no longer tolerate the attacks, and that the U.S.-led coalition risks being seen as an "occupying force".[90][91]

Afghan public protests over civilian deaths

On July 4, 2002, in the first anti-American protest since the overthrow of the Taliban, about 200 Afghans marched through the streets of Kabul to express their outrage over attacks by U.S. forces which killed scores of civilians, including many children and 25 members of one family. According to Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah, 44 people were killed and 120 wounded in the U.S. attacks on about a half dozen villages in Uruzgan province, which villagers said included an attack on a pre-wedding party.[60][61]

On May 29, 2006, large-scale rioting, fueled by anti-U.S. anger, swept through Afghanistan's capital, Kabul, after a U.S. military truck crashed into a crowd of Afghan pedestrians. Afghan President Hamid Karzai's office said five people were killed in the vehicle crash. The U.S. military, in a statement issued earlier, had said at least one person was killed in the crash and six wounded, two of them critically. Afghan officials called it the worst day of rioting in Kabul since the overthrow of the Taliban regime. At least 8 people were killed and 109 wounded in the widespread anti-U.S. protests through the capital. Video from one rioting site after the crash showed a U.S. military vehicle firing in the direction of a crowd of Afghans. Dozens of protesters outside the U.S. Embassy screamed "Death to Americans!" while embassy personnel retreated to bunkers. "We want America out of this country! We hate America! They have no responsibility!" said protester Ajmal Jan.[68][92]

On April 30, 2007, thousands of Afghans staged a protest accusing USA-led coalition and Afghan troops of killing civilians in the western province of Herat. The protesters stormed a government district headquarters in Shindand, south of Herat city, where Western troops have a large base. The anti-U.S. protest came a day after an angry demonstration in eastern Nangahar province over the killing of civilians by coalition and Afghan forces there.[93]

On May 2, 2007, about 500 Afghan university students protested in the eastern province of Nangarhar alleging six civilians had been killed by US-led coalition troops a few days before. On that same day, Afghan and UN teams announced that their investigations had found that around 50 civilians were killed in days of ground fighting and bombing in a remote valley in the western province of Herat.[73]

On September 26, 2007, following a raid by foreign troops that left two religious leaders dead, about 500 Afghan protesters shut down the main highway out of Kandahar city with some chanting "Death to Canada" and "Death to foreigners" and calling on foreign troops to leave their country. The protesters accused American and Canadian soldiers of killing the two religious leaders during night raids on houses in Senjaray, a community on the outskirts of Kandahar city. Anger was also directed at Afghan President Hamid Karzai for allowing the foreign military presence in their country.[94]

On August 23, 2008, about 250 Afghan villagers gathered in angry demonstration to protest the deaths of 76 civilians, most of them children, killed in U.S.-led airstrikes near the village of Azizabad, about 120 kilometres south of Herat city in western Afghanistan.[81][95]

On September 1, 2008, hundreds of citizens in the Afghan capital Kabul rushed into the streets and burnt tires on the Kabul-Jalalabad highway protesting the killing of three members of a Kabuli family, including two children, by U.S.-led troops. Residents said the U.S.-led troops, carrying out a pre-dawn raid in Hud Kheil area in the eastern quarter of Kabul, threw hand grenades into a house, killing Noorullah and two of his sons, one of whom was eight months old. Their deaths were the latest in a string of incidents that have angered Afghans and caused a split between the Afghan government and foreign troops.[80][96]

On October 16, 2008, protests by crowds condemning British forces and the Afghan government took place in Lashkar Gah, capital city of Helmand province, after a NATO airstrike killed as many as 18 women and children.[97]

On December 26, 2008, a crowd of hundreds of Afghans protested in Maywand district in Kandahar province following overnight raids by U.S. military forces, claiming that innocent people were killed in the attack. Local villagers, angered by the military raids, blocked the main highway for three hours and burned tires.[13][98]

On March 7, 2009, hundreds of Afghan demonstrators in eastern Afghanistan blocked the path of a U.S. military convoy to condemn an early morning raid in Khost province that killed four people and wounded two. Tahir Khan Sabari, the deputy governor of the province, said the four people killed were civilians, but the American military claimed they were militants. Demonstrators in Khost city threw rocks at the American military convoy, shouted "Death to America", and burned tires, sending up dark plumes of smoke.[99]

On May 7, 2009, thousands of Afghan villagers shouting "Death to America" and "Death to the Government" protested in Farah city over American bomber air strikes on May 4 that killed 147 civilians. Clashes with police started when people from the three villages struck by US B1-bombers brought 15 newly-discovered bodies in a truck to the house of the provincial governor. Four protesters were wounded when police opened fire. Going by the account of survivors, the air raid was not a brief attack by several aircraft acting on mistaken intelligence, but a sustained bombardment in which three villages were pounded to pieces.[100] An Afghan government investigation concluded on May 16, 2009 with the Afghan Defense Ministry announcing an official death toll of 140 villagers. A copy of the government's list of the names and ages of each of the 140 dead showed that 93 of those killed were children, and only 22 were adult males.[101]

On December 9, 2009, some 5,000 Afghan villagers marched in protest over the killing of civilians in a pre-dawn attack by U.S. troops in Armul village, Laghman province in eastern Afghanistan. President Hamid Karzai's office said the attack had killed 6 civilians, including one woman, while NATO denied that any civilians had been killed in its military attack. A Reuters journalist, on the other hand, saw the bodies of a woman and 12 males, including two teenagers, and the top Laghman provincial council leader said that 13 civilians had been killed. The protesters were chanting slogans against the foreign troops in their country, as well as against Afghan president Hamid Karzai and the provincial governor, when Afghan troops opened fire on them. Four protesters were hit by bullets, two dying instantly and two were taken to a hospital, where residents said they died of their wounds.[102]

On December 30, 2009, protesters in Jalalabad set alight a US flag and an effigy of President Obama after chanting “Death to Obama” and “Death to foreign forces”. In Kabul, protesters held up banners showing photographs of dead children alongside placards demanding “Foreign troops leave Afghanistan” and “Stop killing us”. This was in response to reports that US-led forces had shot 10 villagers in their home, including 8 children, during a raid in the Ghazi Khan village in Narang district of the eastern province of Kunar.[103]

On January 21, 2010, angry Afghan villagers took to the streets in Ghazni province to protest the deaths of civilians they claimed were killed in a raid by NATO troops. NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) claimed it had killed four insurgents including a 15-year-old boy during their raid in the Qarabagh District of Ghazni province the previous night. But 50 villagers brought five coffins to the provincial capital Ghazni city, claiming that three of the dead were civilians, including two children below the age of seven. The head of the provincial hospital where the bodies were initially taken said that his doctors told him that two children were among the bodies brought to them.[104]

On January 28, 2010, angry demonstrations took place outside Camp Phoenix, a U.S. military base on the outskirts of Kabul, after NATO troops killed an Afghan religious leader who had been sitting in a parked car with his two young sons while waiting for a NATO ISAF convoy to pass by. According to witnesses, the fourth ISAF vehicle in the convoy opened fire on the parked car without provocation. At least 16 bullet holes were later counted on the car's exterior and Mullah Mohmmad Younas was killed by three bullets in his chest and one in his abdomen. ISAF confirmed the shooting of a civilian, offered sympathies, and said it was investigating.[105]

Civilian casualties by insurgent forces

While most of the Afghan protests have been over the civilian casualties caused by international military forces, on October 24, 2008, over 1,000 Afghans also took to the streets of Mihtarlam in eastern Afghanistan to protest the killing of 26 young men by Taliban militants. A Taliban spokesperson said the men who were taken off a bus were targeted because they were members or recruits of Afghan security forces, but Afghan officials said that the men were civilians on their way to Iran to find work.[106]

In considering civilian casualties caused collectively by insurgent forces, it should be noted that the armed insurgency in Afghanistan against the government and foreign military forces is composed of many diverse individuals and groups that are motivated by a range of different goals and ideologies, that do not necessarily identify as "Taliban", and that do not act under a single line of authority.[17]

A roll call opposite Downing Street
International protests, demonstrations and rallies
Main article: Protests against the invasion of Afghanistan

The deaths of thousands of Afghan civilians caused directly and indirectly by the U.S. and NATO bombing campaigns have been a major underlying focus of protests against the war in Afghanistan since it began a decade ago.

Protests around the world, starting with large-scale global demonstrations in the days leading up to the official launch of U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom's under George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld in October 2001, have taken place every year since.

See also

Azizabad airstrike
British forces casualties in Afghanistan
Bagram torture and prisoner abuse
Canadian Afghan detainee abuse scandal
Canadian Forces casualties in Afghanistan
Casualties of the Iraq War
Chenagai airstrike
Coalition casualties in Afghanistan
Criticism of the War on Terrorism
Granai Incident
International public opinion on the war in Afghanistan
Kunduz airstrike
List of civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan
Protests against the invasion of Afghanistan

References

^ US admits lethal blunders
^ Afghanistan: Civilian Deaths From Airstrikes
^ "Karzai anger over civilian deaths" BBC News, 2007-05-02. Accessed 2007-05-02.
^ "Operation Enduring Freedom: Why a Higher Rate of Civilian Bombing Casualties?"
^ "Strange Victory: A critical appraisal of Operation Enduring Freedom and the Afghanistan war"
^ 'The Americans . . . They Just Drop Their Bombs and Leave'
^ Forgotten victims
^ Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing
^ a b c The Matrix of Death: (Im)Precision of U.S Bombing and the (Under)Valuation of an Afghan Life
^ a b c d Human Rights Watch - Airstrikes and Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan
^ a b Human Rights Watch - US and NATO Bombing and Civilian Deaths
^ a b More than 1,000 Afghan civilians killed in 2006
^ a b c d Canadian soldier killed in Afghan blast
^ a b Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, 2008 p. 13 graph 2.
^ a b c 2,100 civilians killed in Afghanistan in 2008: UN – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
^ a b c d e f g h AFGHANISTAN: UNAMA raps new report by rights watchdog
^ a b c d e f g h Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, 2008
^ a b c d e f Number of Afghan civilian deaths in 2008 highest since Taliban ouster, says UN
^ a b c d e f Afghan unrest killed 4,000 civilians in 2008: report
^ a b Nicholson, Brendan (February 14, 2009). "Australian troops kill 5 Afghan children". Melbourne: The Age. Retrieved 2010-09-27.
^ What do Obama’s First 100 Days Mean to Common Afghans?
^ a b Afghan Civilian Casualties May Surge as Well
^ a b c d ’09 Deadliest Year for Afghans, U.N. Says
^ a b c d e f UNAMA - Afghanistan, Annual report on protection of civilians in armed conflict, 2009
^ a b c d e f g h U.N.: 2010 deadliest year for Afghan civilians
^ a b c d e f g h i j Afghanistan Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, 2010
^ a b c d e f g h Afghanistan Midyear Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, 2011
^ The FP Memo: Operation Comeback – By Joshua Muravchik | Foreign Policy
^ The Prof Who Can't Count Straight | The Weekly Standard
^ Operation Enduring Freedom: Why a Higher Rate of Civilian Bombing Casualties – Project on Defense Alternatives
^ Operation Enduring Freedom: Why a Higher Rate of Civilian Bombing Casualties – Project on Defense Alternatives
^ Los Angeles Times: 'The Americans . . . They Just Drop Their Bombs and Leave'
^ Forgotten victims | World news | The Guardian
^ America's War on Afghanistan
^ Afghanistan News February 7, 2006
^ Afghanistan's new jihad targets poppy production | csmonitor.com
^ "2,000 killed in Afghanistan since Sept. – Boston.com".[dead link]
^ Rise in Afghan deaths reported – Afghanistan – MSNBC.com
^ People's Daily Online – 1 NATO soldier killed, 7 wounded in Afghanistan
^ AFGHANISTAN: Families of killed police lack support
^ U.S. casualties in Afghanistan hit record – Army Times
^ Afghanistan Conflict Monitor:
^ iCasualties | Operation Enduring Freedom
^ a b Civilian dead are a trade-off in Nato's war of barbarity
^ Counting the casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan
^ a b Afghanistan expects bloody 2009
^ a b Over 1,000 civilians killed in Afghan fighting last year: NATO
^ 1000 civilians killed in Afghanistan[dead link]
^ 3,200 Afghan civilians killed by NATO, US action since 2005: study
^ July 31, 2009 UNAMA Human Rights – Afghanistan – Mid-Year Bulletin on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, 2009
^ August deadliest month of 2009 for Afghan civilians, UN says
^ a b Damien Pearse (4 February 2012). "Afghan civilian death toll reaches record high". The Guardian.
^ Bosgra, Sietse (11/12-02-2012). "Opine & Debat: De VN geven veel te lage cijfers over het aantal doden in Afghanistan" (in Dutch). NRC weekend: p. 8.
^ U.S. general says system for avoiding civilian casualties in Afghanistan is 'good' and 'working'
^ a b Civilian killings threaten Afghanistan's future[dead link]
^ Afghanistan: Five Years Later
^ Afghanistan spiralling back to days of Taliban, say charities
^ a b Afghan leader sends demands to U.S. on troop conduct
^ a b Losing Afghanistan, One Civilian at a Time
^ a b Few clues at Afghan bombsite – Villagers showed investigators shrapnel and wounds
^ a b Unprecedented Afghan Protest Denounces U.S. Killing of Civilians
^ a b Karzai faces major challenge after death of bridge builder
^ a b Heavy Pressures On a Fragile Peace
^ President Karzai Concerned About Civilian Casualties In Operations by Coalition Forces[dead link]
^ Karzai Warns Heavy-handed US Troops as Riots Spread
^ Attack Source of Militancy, Karzai Urges U.S. Coalition
^ a b Karzai Asks U.S.-Led Coalition To Change Strategy Against Terrorism
^ a b U.S. Troops Fire on Crowd in Kabul After Crash, Riots
^ Tearful Karzai says Afghan children are dying from terrorism and NATO bombs
^ 'Our children are dying'[dead link]
^ AFGHANISTAN: Some 1,600 displaced after US air raids[dead link]
^ a b c Afghans Say U.S. Bombing Killed 42 Civilians
^ a b Mounting civilian casualties harming coalition stand in Afghanistan
^ President Hamid Karzai Discusses Avoiding Civilian Casualties[dead link]
^ a b Karzai To NATO: "Afghan Life Not Cheap"
^ Nato confirms shooting of Afghans
^ Karzai Decries Civilian Deaths
^ US-led forces careless in killing civilians: Karzai
^ Karzai To Bush: ‘Roll Back’ The Use Of Airstrikes In Afghanistan
^ a b Afghans protest in Kabul over civilian deaths
^ a b Afghans protest after civilian death claims
^ Karzai scolds U.S., allies for killing of civilians[dead link]
^ Hamid Karzai's address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 24, 2008[dead link]
^ a b Karzai 'demands' Obama end civilian deaths after latest incident
^ Afghan president sends demands to U.S. on troop conduct
^ Anger after Afghan family killed in US raid
^ http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/06/2100966/karzai-rejects-us-apology-for.html
^ Gall, Carlotta (March 8, 2011). "Petraeus Sees Military Progress in Afghanistan". The New York Times.
^ Nissenbaum, Dion (March 7, 2011). "Karzai Calls Apology for Children's Deaths 'Not Enough'". The Wall Street Journal.
^ http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Karzai+issues+final+warning+civilians+killed+NATO+raid/4860532/story.html#ixzz1NvNZ99vC
^ "Afghanistan: Hamid Karzai warns Nato on attacks". BBC News. May 31, 2011.
^ Deaths as riots sweep Kabul[dead link]
^ Thousands stage anti-US protest in Afghan west
^ 'Death to Canada,' some Afghan protesters chant
^ Video: Afghans protest civilian deaths (ABC News)
^ Afghans protest against continuous civilian death by International troops
^ Nato airstrike blamed for deaths of 18 civilians in Afghanistan
^ Bomb kills Canadian soldier on ‘very bloody day'[dead link]
^ Karzai offers to rule months beyond his term[dead link]
^ Afghans riot over air-strike atrocity
^ U.S. strikes killed 140 villagers: Afghan probe
^ 4 anti-Nato Afghan protesters shot dead
^ Western Troops Accused of Executing 10 Afghan Civilians, Including Children
^ Afghans protest over alleged civilian deaths[dead link]
^ NATO killing of Afghan cleric stirs protest
^ More than 1,000 Afghans protest Taliban killings

Can you determine the number of deaths because of these two wars? Do you imagine them as you cry. I do.

Now you know why I am so angry. I'm also angry at President Barack Obama because he has not taken action to end the Afghanistan war sooner. The continuation into Pakistan of deaths by U.S. ground attacks and U.S. drones is unkown.

These wars must end---NOW!!!

I wonder how much higher the cost of the two wars is today? Oh, I wonder what could have been done with that money? BBB

Pentagon Crosses $1 Trillion Threshold in War on Terror Spending
By Tony Capaccio
Jun 21, 2011

The Pentagon says it has spent at least $1 trillion prosecuting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and defending the U.S. homeland, according to newly released Defense Department figures through April 30.

Spending growth on Afghanistan operations helped push the Pentagon over the $1 trillion mark, increasing to $6.2 billion per month in April from $4.3 billion in the first two months of fiscal 2011 that began Oct. 1. Afghanistan spending in fiscal 2009, as Barack Obama became president, averaged $3.9 billion per month.

The spending total includes war-related operations, transportation, special combat pay and benefits, food, medical services, maintenance, replacement of lost combat equipment and building the Iraq and Afghanistan security forces.

Still, the $1 trillion does not include about $95 billion in funds appropriated but still to put on contract or paid to personnel to cover operational costs over the rest of the fiscal year as well as procurement of replacement weapons systems and construction that take years to spend, said Amy Belasco, a Congressional Research Service budget expert.

It also does not include about $100 billion the Pentagon excludes as not ‘war-related,’ such as intelligence, Belasco said. Nor does it include long-term costs for Veterans Administration care, disability costs for wounded Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, or all reconstruction funding for the war- damaged countries.

“This figure represents how much we have actually spent on the wars up to this point,” said Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert with the non-partisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington. “What it doesn’t tell you is how much money has been appropriated by Congress, which is $1.2 trillion. The difference between these two figures is how much money is already in the pipeline waiting to be spent.”

Spending Pipeline

The Pentagon through April 30 said it has spent $691.4 billion on Iraq and $288.5 billion on Afghanistan operations. Operation Noble Eagle, aerial patrols over the continental U.S., have cost an additional $26.9 billion.

“We will likely spend another $300 billion to $500 billion on top of what is already in the pipeline,” Harrison said. “The exact amount depends on the pace at which we pull out of Afghanistan and whether or not we keep any troops in Iraq after the December 31st” withdrawal deadline, he said.

Still, “passing the trillion dollar mark stands out to people,” Harrison said.

“It draws a natural comparison to the other big budget numbers we keep hearing: a $1.6 trillion deficit this year, a proposal to raise the debt limit by $2 trillion. The cost of the wars is a hot topic given the pressure on the president to bring down troops in Afghanistan more quickly,” Harrison said.

Deployment Costs

The Office of Management and Budget estimates that the U.S. spends $10 billion annually for every 10,000 troops it has in Afghanistan.

The budget for the 2011 fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, includes $113.5 billion for Afghanistan operations and $45.8 billion for Iraq. The fiscal year 2012 request of $117.8 billion in war spending allocates $107.3 billion for Afghanistan and $10.8 billion for Iraq, where the pullout is scheduled to be completed in December.

The Afghanistan price tag is up from $56.1 billion in fiscal 2009, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen told reporters June 2 Afghanistan war costs are “right in the middle” of discussions on how quickly U.S. troops should be pulled out.

“Cost is right in the middle of the decision and has been for a significant” amount of time, he said.

Financial cost of the Iraq War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (August 2012)

It has been suggested that Cost of War be merged into this article or section. (Discuss) Proposed since December 2009.

The following is a partial accounting of financial costs of the 2003 Iraq War by the United States and the United Kingdom, the two largest non Iraqi participants of the multinational force in Iraq.
Contents

1 U.S. war costs
1.1 Direct costs
1.1.1 Appropriations
1.2 Indirect and delayed costs
1.3 Military equipment lost
1.3.1 Land equipment
1.3.2 Air equipment
2 U.K. war costs
3 References

U.S. war costs
Direct costs
A Marine Corps M1 Abrams tank patrols a Baghdad street after its fall in 2003 during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The costs of the War on Terror are often contested, as academics and critics of the component wars (including the Iraq War) have unearthed many hidden costs not represented in official estimates. The most recent major report on these costs come from Brown University in the form of the Costs of War project,[1] which said the total for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is at least $3.2-4 trillion.[2] The report disavowed previous estimates of the Iraq War's cost as being under $1 trillion, saying the Department of Defense's direct spending on Iraq totaled at least $757.8 billion, but also highlighting the complementary costs at home, such as interest paid on the funds borrowed to finance the wars and a potential nearly $1 trillion in extra spending to care for veterans returning from combat through 2050.[3]

Those figures are significantly more than typical estimates published just prior to the start of the Iraq War, many of which were based on a shorter term of involvement. For example, in a March 16, 2003 Meet the Press interview of Vice President Dick Cheney, held less than a week before the Iraq War began, host Tim Russert reported that "every analysis said this war itself would cost about $80 billion, recovery of Baghdad, perhaps of Iraq, about $10 billion per year. We should expect as American citizens that this would cost at least $100 billion for a two-year involvement.".[4]

Appropriations
See also: Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund

FY2003 Supplemental: Operation Iraqi Freedom: Passed April 2003; Total $78.5 billion, $54.4 billion Iraq War
FY2004 Supplemental: Iraq and Afghanistan Ongoing Operations/Reconstruction: Passed November 2003; Total $87.5 billion, $70.6 billion Iraq War
FY2004 DoD Budget Amendment: $25 billion Emergency Reserve Fund (Iraq Freedom Fund): Passed July 2004, Total $25 billion, $21.5 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2005 Emergency Supplemental: Operations in the War on Terror; Activities in Afghanistan; Tsunami Relief: Passed April 2005, Total $82 billion, $58 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2006 Department of Defense appropriations: Total $50 billion, $40 billion (estimated) Iraq War.
FY2006 Emergency Supplemental: Operations Global War on Terror; Activities in Iraq & Afghanistan: Passed February 2006, Total $72.4 billion, $60 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2007 Department of Defense appropriations: $70 billion(estimated) for Iraq War-related costs[5][6]
FY2007 Emergency Supplemental (proposed) $100 billion
FY2008 Bush administration has proposed around $190 billion for the Iraq War and Afghanistan[7]
FY2009 Obama administration has proposed around $130 billion in additional funding for the Iraq War and Afghanistan.[8]
FY2011 Obama administration proposes around $159.3 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.[9]

It is unclear why no breakdowns are offered on the basis of each war.
Indirect and delayed costs

According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion dollars by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money. The CBO estimated that of the $2.4 trillion long-term price tag for the war, about $1.9 trillion of that would be spent on Iraq, or $6,300 per U.S. citizen.[10][11]

Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, has stated the total costs of the Iraq War on the US economy will be three trillion dollars in a moderate scenario, and possibly more in the most recent published study, published in March 2008.[12] Stiglitz has stated: "The figure we arrive at is more than $3 trillion. Our calculations are based on conservative assumptions...Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq."[12]

The extended combat and equipment loss have placed a severe financial strain on the U.S Army, causing the elimination of non-essential expenses such as travel and civilian hiring.[13][14]
The UH-60 Black Hawk that crashed on September 21, 2004.
Military equipment lost

The U.S. has lost a number of pieces of military equipment during the war. The following statistics are from the Center for American Progress;[15] they are approximations that include vehicles lost in non-combat-related accidents as of 2009.
Land equipment

80 M1 Abrams tanks
55 M2 Bradley fighting vehicles
20 Stryker wheeled combat vehicles
20 M113 armored personnel carriers
250 Humvees
500+ Mine clearing vehicles, heavy/medium trucks, and trailers
10 Assault Amphibious Vehicles[16][17]

Air equipment
Main article: List of aviation accidents and incidents during the Iraq War

109 Helicopters
18 Fixed-Wing Aircraft

In June 2006, the Army said that the cost of replacing its depleted equipment tripled from that of 2005.[18] As of December 2006, according to government data reported by the Washington Post, the military stated that nearly 40% of the army’s total equipment has been to Iraq, with an estimated yearly refurbishment cost of $US 17 billion. The military states that the yearly refurbishment cost has increased by a factor of ten compared to that of the pre-war state. As of December 2006 approximately 500 M1 tanks, 700 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and 1000 Humvees are awaiting repair in US military depots.[19]
U.K. war costs

As of March 2006, approximately £4.5 billion had been spent by the United Kingdom in Iraq. All of this money has come from a government fund called the "Special Reserve" which has a current allocation of £7.4 billion.[20][21]

As of June 2010 UK costs exceeded £20bn for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.[22]

Afghanistan War: The Cost of War
By Joseph Lazzaro -
International Business Times
November 3, 2011 (No 2012 amount)

As most investors/readers know, next year, 2012 is a presidential election year, and the U.S. economy's health, as in many previous elections, is likely to be a determining issue for many voters.

The Iraq/Afghanistan Wars have been costly, but the United States' longer trend of spending too much on defense and not enough on public goods over two decades could end up costing the economy and the nation far more.

Another issue that may affect the 2012 vote: the Afghanistan War and related spending for it, and for the wind-down of operations in the Iraq War following a major conflict there.

Human Cost

In human terms -- always the highest cost -- the cost of the wars has been enormous. As of Wednesday, 4,476 U.S. Armed Forces personal had died in Iraq, 1,732 had died in Afghanistan. Those brave men and women paid the ultimate price to protect the United States, our democratic way of life, and our freedoms.

The original concept drawing of the RYNO motorized unicycle by Hoffmann's daughter Lauren.A Motorized Unicycle? The RYNO Motors Microcycle May Be Future Of Urban Transit

Russia Punk Rock BandPunk Rock Band 'Pussy Riot' Found Guilty Of Hooliganism And Sentenced To 2 Years, After Putin Protest

The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have also exacted a large financial cost. So far, $801.6 billion has been spent on the Iraq War, $470.9 billion on the Afghanistan War, for a stagger $1.27 trillion spent by the federal government for both military efforts.

What's more, all of that defense spending has been borrowed -- the United States has essentially fought two wars by using a credit card. Hence, add roughly 3 percent to 4 percent in annual financing costs to that $1.27 trillion total, or $37 billion to $49 billion per year in increased debt service -- just for the two wars.

U.S.: Underinvestment in Public Goods

But beyond the debt service, there is the opportunity cost of the war spending, or in this case, call it "the opportunity lost." The United States to-date has spent $1.27 trillion on two controversial wars with uncertain foreign policy outcomes. Imagine what that $1.27 trillion could have accomplished if the money was dedicated to social programs?

It could have provided seed money -- a trust fund -- for universal health insurance.

The nation also could have better-funded both secondary and higher education programs.

Concerning infrastructure, the nation could have renovated hospitals, airports, the interstate highway system and other roads and bridges, built a smart grid, provided aid to towns, counties and states to improve/expand mass transit systems, beefed-up research and development grants to speed the development of a next-generation electric car, provided funding to make broadband access available almost everywhere in the U.S., and more.

Paying for two wars with a credit card and diverting resources from critical public goods and social services is more than enough of an indictment of the previous decade's 2001-2008 foreign policy, but the bad implications of the policy mistakes unfortunately do not stop there, as scholars Nouriel Roubini, an economist, and Paul Kennedy, an historian point out.

Roubini, the New York University economist known as "Dr. Doom" for his accurate prediction three years ago of the financial crisis stemming from the bursting of the U.S. housing bubble, says the United States has underinvested in public goods. The nation, Roubini said, now must invest in human capital, skills training, and a social safety net to increase productivity and enable workers to compete, be flexible, and thrive in a globalized economyd.

U.S.: Imperial Overreach

Kennedy is even more sobering in his model, outlined in "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers." (Random House: 1987)

In it, Kennedy argues that empires have a tendency to extend themselves militarily beyond their economy's ability to support it, leading to imperial decline. As military expenses grow, these countries reduce investments in economic growth, which eventually "leads to the downward spiral of slower growth, heavier taxes, deepening domestic splits over spending priorities, and weakening capacity to bear the burdens of defense." He called it imperial overreach. Examples of defense spending-induced imperial decline would include Britain, and the former Soviet Union.

And does the thesis sound like one other country you may know? It sounds like the United States in 2011, after the Bush war years, 2001-2008, in which high military spending (and a 2001 income tax cut) both over-consumed resources that should have been allocated to public goods (infrastructure) and social programs (education, health care); the Bush era policies also changed the nation's fiscal trajectory from surplus to massive deficit.

The United States as 2012 Approaches

Where is the U.S. today, from a great power standpoint? Kennedy argues, the broad trend of decline is under way, and that public officials must manage this power erosion so that it occurs slowly and smoothly.

Public Policy/ Economic Analysis: Is the United State declining? Clearly, the 2001-2008 period marked a decade of descent, and the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns read like a case study from Kennedy's Great Powers book. Hence, some power decline relative to China and Russia is obvious.

But does the U.S.'s decade of descent, a decade of policy errors, mean the American Empire is over? The calculation forwarded here is that it is not, if the nation can end the Afghanistan War, in addition to its announced withdrawal from Iraq, cut defense spending to tolerable levels, and redirect those resources to public goods, social services, and research.

In other words, the United States is at a critical moment in its history: it has already spent about $5 trillion too much on defense programs in the past 20 years, since the end of the Cold War in 1991, with the Iraq/Afghanistan campaigns adding the double-miscue by being entirely from borrowed funds. The signs of underinvestment in public goods are obvious. Further, the U.S.'s sluggish economic growth, again, reads like a clause from Kennedy's decline thesis. Is the decline reversible? Again, in my interpretation, if the U.S. can cut military spending and re-emphasize public goods -- end its imperial overreach -- the nation will start arcing higher.

New Zealand announces earlier exit from Afghanistan; PM says not prompted by recent deaths
By Associated Press
August 19, 2012

WELLINGTON, New Zealand — New Zealand Prime Minister John Key announced Monday that the country will withdraw its troops from Afghanistan earlier in 2013 than planned. He said the move is not prompted by the deaths this month of five New Zealand soldiers, including three who were killed Sunday by a roadside bomb.

August’s deaths account for half of all fatalities suffered by the small contingent of New Zealanders in the nine years they have been stationed in central Bamiyan province, which was comparatively stable until a recent upswing in violence.

Key said it was “highly likely” the remaining soldiers from the contingent of 145 would be withdrawn in April 2013. He said discussions for the earlier withdrawal began before the five deaths this month. Murray McCully, New Zealand’s foreign affairs minister, had announced in May the troops would be withdrawn “in the latter part of 2013.”

Key said he wants to bring home the troops as fast as practicable within a timetable that fits in with the coalition partners.

“We’ll do it as fast as we can, and we’ll do it in the way that protects our people as best we can,” he said.

The U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan plan to end their decade-long combat mission and withdraw almost all troops by the end of 2014. The U.S. this year has been withdrawing a planned 23,000 troops, which would leave 68,000.

Key rejected calls to end New Zealand’s role in Afghanistan immediately.

“Yes we need to make it the shortest timeframe we can now logistically, but we have to do it with our partners. If we don’t, then the message we send to the rest of all of Afghanistan is that it’s time to run for the exits,” he said. “And if we do that, then the thousands of people who have lost their lives have been in vain. And I just don’t think that reflects the values and principles that underpin New Zealand.”

The move is likely to be popular among many New Zealanders, who have increasingly questioned the country’s role in the conflict. The New Zealand troops were sent there ostensibly as a reconstruction team, with the mission of helping to rebuild and protect Bamiyan province’s infrastructure and social systems. In recent months, however, that role has increasingly given way to combat operations, as violence in the region has increased.

The latest incident on Sunday also marked the first time a New Zealand woman has died in the conflict. Lance Cpl. Jacinda Baker, a 26-year-old medic, was killed in the explosion, as were Cpl. Luke Tamatea, 31, and Pvt. Richard Harris, 21.

According to defense force officials, the three were traveling in a convoy of four Humvees on Sunday to escort a soldier suffering a medical condition back from a visit to the doctor when a roadside bomb exploded, destroying the vehicle and instantly killing the occupants.

Lt. Gen. Rhys Jones, chief of the defense force, said the Taliban have taken responsibility for the attack.

Earlier this month, two New Zealand soldiers were killed and another six injured during a gunbattle with insurgents in the same region.

COUNTDOWN TO DRAWDOWN
10 Facts About US Withdrawal from Afghanistan

This is an ongoing project, and we'd like your input to help us determine how we can expand this resource. If you have any particular questions about US withdrawal from Afghanistan, or if you would like any additional points addressed, send us an email at info [at] justforeignpolicy [dot] com.

Fact 1: It is not the case that all US troops will be removed from Afghanistan by 2015.

In his drawdown announcement this past June, President Obama did not say that all US troops would leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014. What he did say was 10,000 troops would be removed by the end of this summer, with 23,000 additional troops leaving at the end of the summer of 2012.

After that, according to the President: our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support. By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.

Notice that the President did not say that our mission in Afghanistan will end by 2014, only that it will cease to be a "combat" mission and become a "support" mission. What you should be asking yourself is, "what is a support mission?", "how many troops will be required for it?", and "how long will it last?" We will get to these questions shortly. First, it's important to highlight two things:

Fact 2: There is currently no end date for the war in Afghanistan.

Nowhere in the President's speech did he mention a deadline for the full withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. No end date for the support mission has been supplied. At present, the expected duration of the war in Afghanistan is indefinite.

Fact 3: Obama's drawdown plan only removes roughly half the number of troops that he introduced into Afghanistan.

When President Obama took office, there were roughly 34,000 US troops in Afghanistan. In two "surges", Obama added to this figure over 66,000 additional troops. By reducing the US troop presence by 33,000, his drawdown plan will leave about 68,000 troops in Afghanistan next September with no timetable and no strategy for their removal.

Fact 4: Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's comments earlier this year about speeding up the transition to Afghan control do not mean that US troops are leaving Afghanistan any sooner.

The administration took a lot of flack following Panetta's February 2012 comment that the US-led mission in Afghanistan could transition control to the Afghan security forces by as early as 2013. To ease confusion over these remarks, the administration made clear that Panetta's comments did not mark any change in the US withdrawal plan as outlined by President Obama in June 2011.

Fact 5: The "support" mission will not necessarily be small, nor will it be free of combat missions.

A "support" mission sure sounds more reassuring than a combat mission, right? Sounds like only a few troops will remain behind to support the Afghan security forces?

Not if Iraq is any example. The combat mission in Iraq ended in August 2010, at which point troop levels were brought down to 50,000. In October 2011, over a year later, there were still about 45,000 troops left in Iraq. Furthermore, these supposedly non-combat troops would engage in combat missions and were described as having a "combat capacity" by administration officials, including former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in which they engage in "targeted counterterrorism operations" and work and fight alongside Iraqi security forces. In light of this, "support" seems to be nothing more than a euphemism for extended combat.

In fact, reports are indicating that the US presence in Afghanistan will consist of a "slimmed-down counterinsurgency strategy" that would help protect the Afghan population--as well as hunt down Taliban insurgents and al-Qaeda members. There may also be forces dedicated to holding territory won by the US in recent years. In any case, it seems quite clear that the continued US presence in Afghanistan will look nothing like the US presence in, say, Germany.

Per a previous agreement between the US and Iraqi governments, all US troops were supposed to leave Iraq at the end of 2011. That didn't stop the Obama administration from trying to pressure the Iraqi government to extend the deadline, allowing the US to leave up to 10,000 troops indefinitely. Fortunately, this plan has been been abandoned, and all but about 150 US troops attached to the US Embassy left on time. But a similar fight over keeping to a deadline for withdrawal may erupt in the future over Afghanistan--whenever a deadline is, in fact, established.

Fact 6: Reports indicate that the Pentagon wants to keep 25,000 US troops in Afghanistan until at least 2024.

In August 2011, it was reported that the Pentagon is trying to strike a deal with the Afghan government to leave 25,000 US troops in Afghanistan until at least 2024. Keep in mind that there were only 34,000 troops there when Obama took office. That means that the net withdrawal would be a mere 9,000 troops. Furthermore, before 2008, troop levels were at roughly 25,000 or less. So leaving 25,000 troops in Afghanistan would be to merely return to 2007 troop levels.

If this deal goes through, the US will be at war in Afghanistan for at least 13 additional years--that's three more years than we've been at war to this point. Meaning that we wouldn't even be at the half-way mark today, let alone nearing the end!

The US is still in negotiations with the Afghan government about leaving troops in the country indefinitely. While no concrete number has surfaced since last August's report, indications are that the US is still trying to leave thousands of troops after 2014.

Fact 7: Ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq could save the US roughly 400,000 jobs.

$200 billion is a conservative estimate of the savings to the federal budget from 2012-2021 of withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq this December (as previously agreed) and withdrawing all U.S. troops from Afghanistan after 2014 (as popularly understood.)

In a 2007 paper, Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier of the University of Massachusetts estimated the impact of an additional billion dollars in military spending on employment compared to other uses, using a standard input-output model of the U.S. economy.

They found that an additional billion dollars in military spending would create 8,555 jobs. In contrast, an additional billion in tax cuts for personal consumption would create 10,779 jobs. Other categories of federal spending examined - education, health, mass transit - created more jobs than tax cuts for personal consumption. [See table 1, page 6.]

Thus, the net effect of moving one billion dollars from the domestic economy to military spending would be to destroy at least 2,224 jobs; moving $200 billion from the domestic economy to military spending would destroy at least 444,800 jobs. Conversely, saving $200 billion by ending the wars as previously scheduled, rather than saving it from the federal budget by using the chained CPI and raising the Medicare retirement age, would save more than 400,000 jobs.

Fact 8: The lack of a timetable for withdrawal is a key obstacle in peace negotiations with the Taliban.

While major media outlets were recently declaring the peace process in Afghanistan lost due to the assassination of Berhanuddin Rabbani, the Chairman of the Afghan High Peace Council, they failed to point out that one of the primary barriers to peace has been in place for a long time: the refusal of the US government to establish a timetable for the withdrawal of its troops from Afghanistan. Taliban spokesmen have made it quite clear that peace requires a willingness by the US to leave; but the US military has done just the opposite through its negotiations with the Afghan government to keep 25,000 troops in the country until at least 2024.

Fact 9: There are less than 100 al Qaeda left in Afghanistan--but there are over 700,000 Afghan and international forces there to fight them.

Last year, Leon Panetta said that there were less than 100 members of al Qaeda left in Afghanistan. According to the latest Brookings Institute Afghanistan Index, there are 129,895 international troops in Afghanistan under NATO and Operation Enduring Freedom; 336,806 Afghan Security Forces; 90,000 private Defense Department contractors; and 2,000 private contractors training the Afghan Army. Additionally, there are 150,000 Pakistani troops on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. That's a grand total of 708,701 versus 100. Seems a bit overkill.

Fact 10: There is popular support for ending the war now.

A recent CBS poll indicates that nearly 2/3 of Americans support ending the war in Afghanistan within the next two years. Sixty-two percent said troop levels should be decreased immediately. 38 percent want large numbers to return from Afghanistan within a year; 24 percent said they'd be willing to have troops there for one to two more years; ten percent said they'd accept two to five more years; 18 percent said they'd be willing to have troops there "as long as it takes." Thus, 62% want US troops out in no less than two years. Only one in three Americans think that fighting in Afghanistan is the right thing for the United States to do.