Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
In the opening post I stated:

Note the cited source was written In August 2009 as we reached:

Comparisons are also made:

Quote:
...a lower death rate than the conflict in Northern Ireland between 1969 and 1977, and obviously at a much lower rate than in the Falklands war where 250 British servicemen died in three months. (We tend to forget that the IRA killed 146 members of British security forces in 1972 alone..
Link:http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/al...s-of-war.thtml

Perhaps here in the Uk care has dramatically changed, in hospitals and outside. As Scots say "I'ave me doubts".
but those comparisons seem like apples and oranges to me. IRA snipers were in a good position to kill with precision whereas Taliban IEDs are in a good position to bring about loss of limb and sight and to cause brain damage via their shock waves. And I would assume that the length of the ISAF engagement has resulted in improvement of infrastructure and routinization conducive to a level of response not possible over the much shorter course of the Falklands War.

It would be interesting to see a well-designed study investigating some of these issues. Does anyone know if there has been such an effort?