The association projects additional payouts for disability benefits to total $1.4 trillion. Researchers also predicted that VA employees would need to receive an additional $100 billion in funding to meet the rising demand for care for veterans.
The organisation has previously conducted evaluations that pegged the number of veterans who participated in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at around 3 million, whether in direct combat or support capacities. Currently, the group’s median age is just under 37.
The release of the new report coincides with the US’s entire withdrawal from Afghanistan and the 20th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks, which launched the global war on terrorism.
The research claims that a whole generation of veterans and their families will be unable to do so as the U.S. attempts to end this chapter in its military history.
For the ensuing 50 years, the blood, sweat, and cash spent in these battles will be felt.
In This Article...
How many American soldiers have died in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Of those slain, 60 deaths in support of OEF Horn of Africa, OEF Philippines, OEF Trans Sahara, and the detention of detainees in Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay were proven to have occurred in Africa, Southeast Asia, or Cuba. Five people died as a result of hostile activity. [12] Thus, a total of 2,401 American service members lost their lives fighting in Afghanistan. [1]
Psychological issues that developed while they were in the military have led to several veterans taking their own lives.
[15]
How many American troops died in Vietnam?
Records of 58,220 U.S. military fatal losses during the Vietnam War can be found in the Defense Casualty Analysis System (DCAS) Extract Files.
How many American soldiers fought in Iraq?
The Iraq War’s first phase was the 2003 invasion of Iraq[a]. A joint force of forces from the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Poland invaded Iraq during the invasion phase, which lasted slightly over one month[28] and included 26 days of heavy combat actions. The invasion phase started on March 19 (air) and March 20 (ground), respectively. The capital city of Baghdad was taken by Coalition forces on 9 April 2003, 22 days after the invasion’s opening day, following a six-day Battle of Baghdad. The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) was established as the first of several succeeding transitional governments leading up to the first Iraqi parliamentary elections in January 2005. This early phase of the war officially ended on 1 May 2003 when U.S. President George W. Bush declared the “end of major combat operations” in his Mission Accomplished speech. Later, American military personnel stayed in Iraq until their departure in 2011. [30]
During the initial invasion phase, which lasted from 19 March to 1 May 2003, the coalition led by the United States committed 160,000 troops into Iraq. 130,000 men, or around 73 percent, were Americans, while 45,000 British soldiers (25 percent), 2,000 Australian soldiers (1 percent), and 194 Polish soldiers also served (0.1 percent ). The aftermath of it involved 36 additional nations. By February 18, 100,000 American forces had gathered in Kuwait in readiness for the invasion. [31] The Peshmerga in Iraqi Kurdistan also provided assistance to the coalition forces.
The coalition, according to British Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President George W. Bush, sought to “disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people,” despite the fact that a UN inspection team had just before the invasion said it had found no evidence at all of the presence of WMDs.
[32]
[33] Others place a lot more focus on the effects of the September 11 attacks, how they affected American strategic thinking, and how the freedom agenda has grown. [34] [35] The failure of Iraq to utilize a “last opportunity” to rid itself of what U.S. and British officials described as an immediate and intolerable threat to international peace, according to Blair, was the catalyst. [36]
According to a CBS poll conducted in January 2003, 64% of Americans supported military action against Iraq; however, 63 % preferred that Bush pursue diplomatic means of resolving the situation rather than war, and 62 % thought that war would increase the threat of terrorism against the United States.
Some steadfast U.S. allies, such as the governments of France, Canada, Germany, and New Zealand, fiercely opposed the invasion of Iraq.
[38]
[39]
[40] Their leaders contended that the UNMOVIC assessment from February 12, 2003 did not support an invasion of Iraq since there was no proof of the presence of WMD there. During the Iraq War, about 5,000 chemical warheads, shells, or aviation bombs were found, but these had already been developed and abandoned prior to the Gulf War in 1991, under Saddam Hussein’s administration. The government’s justification for the invasion was refuted by the discovery of these chemical weapons. [41] [42]
A month before the invasion, on February 15, 2003, there were anti-war demonstrations all across the world, including a three million-person event in Rome that the Guinness Book of Records deemed to be the biggest anti-war gathering ever.
[43] Between 3 January and 12 April 2003, 36 million people worldwide participated in over 3,000 anti-Iraq war marches, according to French professor Dominique Reyni. [44]
An airstrike on the Presidential Palace in Baghdad on March 20, 2003, was the precursor to the invasion. The following day, coalition soldiers massed near to the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border and started an invasion into Basra Province. The main invading army marched into southern Iraq, occupied the area, and took part in the Battle of Nasiriyah on March 23, while special forces launched an amphibious assault from the Persian Gulf to seize Basra and the nearby oil resources. Massive airstrikes against Iraqi command and control centers and targets across the nation paralyzed the defending army and precluded an effective defense. The 173rd Airborne Brigade was airdropped close to Kirkuk on March 26 in order to control the northern region of the country. There, they teamed up with Kurdish insurgents and engaged in combat with the Iraqi Army on many occasions.
Little opposition was encountered as the main coalition force continued its advance into the heart of Iraq. The majority of the Iraqi troops was rapidly routed, and on April 9, the coalition took Baghdad. Other operations against the Iraqi Army’s strongholds took place, such as the seizure and occupation of Kirkuk on April 10 and the assault on and seizure of Tikrit on April 15. As the coalition forces finished the occupation of the nation, Saddam Hussein and the central leadership of Iraq fled the scene. President George W. Bush halted heavy combat operations on May 1; this put an end to the invasion phase and ushered in the military occupation.
How many US soldiers were stationed in Iraq?
President Barack Obama planned to send 1,600 troops to Iraq as “advisers” to the Iraqi Army and Kurdish forces at the end of September after the United States began to send troops there in June 2014 to protect American interests and assets and advise the Iraqi forces (see section U.S. surveillance and military advising in Iraq). In addition to protecting soldiers, Marines, and property, 800 of them would also educate and advise Iraqi and Kurdish forces on how to combat ISIL. [146] Obama increased the number of American forces in Iraq to 3,100 in November. [147] [148] The United States had sent 4,500 troops as of February 2015. The U.S. deployed 450 more troops to Iraq in June 2015, bringing the total number of American forces there to at least 4,850. [52]
On September 4, 2014, Canadian Prime Minister Harper declared that his country would send “approximately 100” military advisers to Baghdad to support the Iraqi military in its fight against ISIL. Although their mission is not anticipated to involve direct combat, these individuals are special operations troops who will collaborate closely with American special forces to “offer assistance that will help the government of Iraq and its security forces be more effective against ISIL.” According to CBC News, roughly 100 Canadians will be sent to support Kurdish forces. [149]
Portugal has cooperated with Spain, a neighbor, to train the Iraqi Army south of Baghdad.
[150]
What has been the bloodiest war in human history?
Like most battles, the majority of casualties in the deadliest conflicts in history have been innocent civilians. Since the beginning of time, wars have been in human history. The earliest evidence of human combat points to the first fight occurring near the boundary between Egypt and Sudan some 13,000 years ago. This battle is thought to have started because of rivalry for resources, in this case, water. The majority of conflicts in human history have occurred for a variety of causes, including poverty, weak governmental leadership, civil unrest, religion, territorial disputes, lack of resources, and a host of other issues. After that, let’s take a look at the historically bloodiest wars.
Top 12 Most Deadliest Wars in History
Congo’s second war
One of the bloodiest conflicts in history and the deadliest in contemporary African history was the Second Congo War (19982003). Over the course of this five-year war, around 5.4 million people perished. Even while the genocides caused a significant portion of the deaths, the war’s effects on diseases and famine also contributed.
Revolutionary War
The French Empire and its allies fought a coalition of European states in the Napoleonic Wars (18031815). The French Empire and the coalitions that battled it engaged in a string of battles known as the Napoleonic Wars, including the War of the Third Coalition, the Fourth, the Fifth, the Sixth, and the Seventh and Final Coalition. An estimated 3.56 million people died during this time due to the war, either directly or indirectly.
War in the Thirty Years
The Thirty Years’ War, as its name suggests, took place between Catholic and Protestant governments in Central Europe from 1618 to 1648. The battles finally attracted the major European powers, leading to one of the bloodiest, deadliest, and longest wars in European history. According to estimates, 8 million peopleboth military personnel and civiliansdied as a result of the war.
The Civil War in China
Between the Kuomintang, which was supported by the government, and the Communist Party of China, the Chinese Civil War broke out in August of 1927. By 1950, more than 8 million people had died as a result of the murders and other atrocities committed by both sides.
The Civil War in Russia
More than 9 million people died in the Russian Civil War, 8 million of whom were civilians. The conflict, which was fought between the Red Army and the White Army, lasted from 1917 to 1922, immediately following the 1917 Russian Revolutions.
The Dungan Uprising
The Dungan Revolt was a conflict that took place in 19th-century China’s Qing Dynasty between the Hans, an East Asian-born Chinese ethnic group, and the Huis, a group of Chinese Muslims. 20 million people died as a result of the war, mainly due to famine and migration brought on by the conflict.
An Lushan Uprising
Between the years 755 and 763, there was a revolt in China called the An Lushan Rebellion. Although the death toll is difficult to estimate, census data from the years after the war suggests that about 36 million peopleroughly two-thirds of the empire’s populationwere lost.
One World War
The Central Powers and the Allies fought each other in the First World War. Despite only lasting 4 years, from 1914 to 1918, the war killed 18 million people worldwide. About 11 million of the 18 million fatalities were caused by military people, and about 7 million were civilians.
Taiping Uprising
The Taiping Rebellion, which took place from 1850 and 1864, was yet another major conflict in China. The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom’s Christian millenarian movement and the Qing Dynasty engaged in combat. Although there isn’t a precise figure, most estimates place the death toll from the Taiping Rebellion between 20 and 30 million.
Conquest of the Ming Dynasty by the Qing Dynasty
It was everything but smooth when the Qing Dynasty gave way to the Ming Dynasty. From 1618 to 1683, the uprising lasted more than 60 years and claimed the lives of 25 million people. One of the worst conflicts in China’s history as well as one of the deadliest wars in history began as a relatively modest uprising in northeastern China.
China and Japan’s Second World War
Between 1937 and 1945, the National Revolutionary Army of the Republic of China and the Imperial Japanese Army fought in the Second Sino-Japanese War. It is generally accepted that the Marco Polo Bridge Incident served as the catalyst for the war, which later erupted into a full-scale conflict that claimed the lives of nearly 4 million Chinese and Japanese soldiers as well as 25 million civilians.
II World War
From 1939 through 1945, there was a global conflict known as World War II. Over 70 million people died in the conflict, which pitted the Allies and the Axis powers in the worst conflict in history. The war, which is notorious for its genocide against the Jewish people, also resulted in the deaths of more than 50 million civilians.
An End to War
War must be ended before mankind is destroyed by it, as John F. Kennedy memorably declared. The deadliest conflicts in history are all evidence of that. It has a recurring pattern and extremely expensive outcomes. Nearly 70 million people died as a result of the last major conflict, World War II.
With modern society’s ever-evolving technology and a growing population, the next battle will surely result in an unparalleled number of fatalities. Let history serve as a guide so that we can avoid making the same errors and permanently put an end to conflict.
The US’s defeat in Afghanistan: why
There is little doubt that the United States lost the Afghan War, but the exact reason is still up for debate. Many people think it’s because America’s military capability has diminished and its superpower position has significantly diminished. Some say the lack of tenacity caused it to lose, while others blame the fabled fighting prowess of the apparently unbeatable Afghans. As is typical in such situations, the truth has been difficult to ascertain.
US journalist and author Craig Whitlock has researched the subject with unwavering tenacity after witnessing the Afghan War firsthand. A book that aims to look above the obvious, cliches, and Washingtonian rhetoric that have dominated conversations on the Afghan War is the result.
Whitlock thinks that Washington’s unclear goals when it invaded Afghanistan in late 2001 in reaction to the 9/11 attacks on American soil were the root of the issue. Military strategists are instructed to never start a war without a strategy for putting an end to it. The author notes that despite this, neither [President George] Bush nor any other member of his administration publicly stated how, when, or under what circumstances they wanted to stop military operations in Afghanistan.
General David Richards, a British general who oversaw US and NATO forces from 2006 to 2007, claimed that we lacked a cogent long-term strategy.
When we were looking for a single comprehensive long-term plan, we really received a lot of techniques.
The most important component of any military operation’s strategy is undoubtedly the desired end game; without it, there can be no evaluation of success or resolution. The article seems to imply that President Bush’s limited objectives for the Afghan War were ambiguous and did not include a timeline. President Bush only stated two goals: “to assault the military capability of the Taliban administration and to disrupt al-use Qaeda’s of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations.
President Bush responded to a question about the potential length of the conflict by saying: “This battlefront will endure as long as it takes to bring al-Qaeda to justice. We will succeed even if it takes a year or two, a day from now, or a month from now.
The US military’s actions in Afghanistan were incredibly successful at first. With the help of the tenacious fighters of the Northern Alliance, the Taliban were swiftly driven out of Afghanistan, al-Qaeda was dismantled, Osama bin Laden was captured, and Kabul was liberated from Taliban rule. However, it became obvious that the battle was not coming to an end after a few years. The lengthy narrative of everything that went wrong in Whitlock’s book.
The author claims Donald Rumsfeld, who was the US Secretary of Defense at the time, as saying, “I have no vision into who the evil people are in Afghanistan. The main issue was that despite the defeat of al-Qaeda and the Taliban’s ouster, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan showed no signs of coming to a stop. Many areas of the nation were still seeing constant warfare, especially in the areas close to the Pakistani border.
It was soon obvious that nothing was turning out the way Washington had intended. Rumsfeld is quoted by the author as saying: “We are never going to be able to get the US troops out of Afghanistan unless we take care to ensure that there is something going on that will offer the stability that will be necessary for us to depart.
It became became clear that the Taliban’s return would be made easier by the withdrawal of US and NATO forces. In actuality, it is what ultimately occurred.
Washington’s planners devised a number of schemes, including a lofty one to create a vibrant democracy in Afghanistan’s political wasteland characterized by tribal, ethnic, and sectarian identities, to prevent that kind of outcome. It never succeeded.
The author is correct when he states: “On a broader level, the United States had entered the war without a clear understanding of whom it was fighting – a fundamental error from which it would never recover.
Many, however, would disagree with the author’s later claim that the Taliban were not the true adversary and should not have been combatted: “The Bush administration made another major mistake by equating the Taliban with al-Qaeda…
Al-Qaeda was predominantly an Arab network, not an Afghan one.
The Taliban, on the other hand, were exclusively local in their concerns.
However, a rising number of US strategists now contend that rather than supporting the Taliban, Washington made its largest error by failing to acknowledge or address Pakistan’s ongoing involvement in the conflict. But that is a different tale. That is not what Whitlock’s book is about.