4 ms·
We've been at war for over a decade. That's 3X the length of WWII.
by hindsightbias 14y ago
We've been at war for over a decade. That's 3X the length of WWII.
- michaelt 14y ago3x the length, but only 0.03% the number of coalition troops lost. More allied troops died on an average day in WWII than coalition troops died in the entire Iraq conflict.
- afterburner 14y agoIt's a matter of how much the civilian population is focused on the effort. WWII was a total war, everyone back home was involved in some way, usually through rationing, working a war-effort job, buying a war bond, paying increased taxes, and/or worrying about loved ones serving in the military (often though the draft). Things like Iraq and Afghanistan are basically peacetime military actions. It's a war over there... but back home, not so much. That affects what kind of talent, attention, priority, etc. goes into it.
- 001sky 14y agoYou're comparing apples and hamburgers. Consider a single day in WWI. More casualties in <24 hours> than the <decade> you reference. The opening day of the battle saw the British Army suffer the worst day in its history, sustaining nearly 60,000 casualties. There would go on to be in excess of <1 million> casualties related to just this single battle, at Somme, western front.[1,2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualti... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme
- cmdkeen 14y agoDepends which start date you take for WWII - The European one of 1939, the Russian 1941 (don't ask about 39 and 40!), or the American one of late 41. Or the Chinese view that it started in 1937.